DP 506 
 
 .N63 
 
 
 Copy 1 
 
 
 
 w\ 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 # 
 
 mm- 
 
 

 SC< _<«C& <<<C 
 
 
 
 ^ai 
 
 fcgg* 
 
 <s 
 
 w*a!^<** 
 
 is.^L^<t 
 
 .««*> 
 
 
 
 
 B LIBRARY OF-CONGRESS. a 
 
 Ot £3 
 
 s^ 
 
 ^^Q 
 
 {UNITED STATUS OK AMERICA S J| 
 
 
 
 
 
 « : 
 
 «r «<^ 
 
 
 
tie - <ji 
 
 fe: 
 
 <^ VIC 
 
 
 ^1«S 
 
 
 
 
 
 <*S1_ < C.<^ 
 
 < C< C « 
 
 BKjfSVsc 
 
 jc^o c ore 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ~<<<r ^ 
 
 


RECOLLECTIONS 
 
 AND 
 
 REFLECTIONS, 
 PERSONAL AND POLITICAL. 
 
 AS CONNECTED 
 
 WITH PUBLIC AFFAIRS, 
 
 DURING 
 
 THE REIGN OF GEORGE III. 
 
 By John Nicholls, Esq. 
 
 Member of the House of Commons in the fifteenth, sixteenth, and 
 eighteenth Parliaments of Great Britain. 
 
 
 PHILADELPHIA I 
 
 PUBLISHED BY H. C. CARET AND I, LEA* 
 
 No. 126, Chesnut Street. 
 
 1823. 
 
• N ^ 
 
ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 The following Recollections and Re- 
 flections were written during a residence 
 at Toulouse, in France, between the 20th 
 of November 1819, and the 10th of April 
 
 1820. 
 
 The Author is aware that there are 
 expressions which may be unacceptable to 
 the partisans both of Mr. Pitt and of Mr. 
 Fox; but he has spoken with the integrity 
 of an historian. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 From the Accession of George the Third in Octo- 
 ber 1760, to the Dissolution of Parliament in 
 March 1784 . . . . Page 9 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 From the Meeting of Parliament in March 1784, 
 to the Commencement of the French Revolution 
 in July 1789 . • . * a Page 54 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Causes of the French Revolution . Page 62 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 On the Consequences likely to follow from the 
 French Revolution . . Page 90 
 
 CHAPEER V. 
 
 Effects produced by the French Revolution in 
 England. — Mr. Pitt's Conduct till his Death, 
 in 1806 . Page 103 
 
VI 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 On the Causes which contributed to the Extin- 
 guishment of Feudal Burthens in England 
 
 Page 138 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Reform of Parliament . . Page 142 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 On the State of Parties in England Page 156 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 On the Duration of Papal Power . Page 168 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 On the Consequences likely to result from the Es- 
 tablishment of the United States of America 
 
 Page 176 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 On the Effects likely to be produced by the French 
 Revolution on other Nations . Page 180 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 On the British Possessions in India Page 185 
 
vn 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 Impeachment of Mr. Hastings . Page 190 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 On Mr. Edmund Burke . . Page 221 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 On the Slave Trade . . Page 228 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 Will Revolution produce an increase of Happiness 
 to Mankind ? Page 236 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 On the Consequences of the Revolution in Spain 
 
 Page 239 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 On the Consequences of the Transition from an 
 Agricultural to a Commercial and Manufactur- 
 ing state »•■;--■» v ■■■*"■•.=' * Page 249 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 On the Consequences of a King of Great Britain 
 being a German Sovereign . Page 259 
 
vm 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 Characters of George II and Queen Caroline 
 
 Page 265 
 
 CHAPTER XXL 
 
 Reflections on an intended Marriage between Fre- 
 derick Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spen- 
 cer Page 275 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 On the Consequences produced by the personal 
 Character of George III - Page 282 
 
 CHAPTER XXIIL 
 
 On the three Kings of the Brnnsxvick Race 
 
 Page 300 
 
RECOLLECTIONS, 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 From the Accession of George the Third in Octo- 
 ber 1760, to the Dissolution of Parliament in 
 March 1784. 
 
 George IL died suddenly about the close of 
 October 1760. At that time I was nearly six- 
 teen years old ; so that the active part of my life 
 has all been passed during the reign of George 
 III. 
 
 My father was physician to George II. This 
 circumstance led me to see in early life, people 
 who were about the Court. I cannot say that the 
 nation much regretted the death of George II. 
 During the last three years of his reign the war 
 against France had been carried on with much 
 success; but this was attributed to the energy of 
 Mr. Secretary Pitt, who was known to be Minis- 
 ter against the wishes of the King. 
 
 The nation hailed with pleasure the accession 
 of a Prince born in the country ; they persuaded 
 
 B 
 
10 
 
 themselves that the interests of England would 
 no longer be sacrificed to the interests of Hano- 
 ver; and much advantage of this circumstance 
 was taken in the first speech of the young King 
 to Parliament. « Born and educated in this 
 country, I glory in the name of Briton :" the old 
 Earl of Hardwicke, the Ex-chancellor, censured 
 this expression, saying that it was an insult to the 
 memory of the late King ; but the nation was 
 pleased with the expression. The young King 
 (for he was at that time little more than twenty- 
 two years of age) was of a good person, sober, 
 temperate, of domestic habits, addicted to no vice, 
 swayed by no passion — what had not the nation 
 to expect from such a character? There was 
 another circumstance which much increased his 
 popularity: during the reigns of George I. and 
 George II. a considerable part of the nation had 
 been as it were proscribed, under the name of 
 Tories. The imputation against these men was, 
 that they were attached to the family of Stuart : 
 probably some of them were attached to that fa- 
 mily; but very many were included under the 
 denomination of Tories, solely because they had 
 disapproved of the corrupt and feeble Adminis- 
 trations of Sir Robert Walpole and the Pelhams. 
 It was soon remarked, that the Pelham party did 
 not possess the partiality of George III. in the 
 same manner as they had possessed that of George 
 II.; and the Tories saw with pleasure the removal 
 of that proscription by which they had been so 
 
II 
 
 long oppressed. In one word, the nation was 
 intoxicated with loyalty. But those who ap- 
 proached the court more nearly, perceived cir- 
 cumstances which filled them with apprehensions. 
 I recollect the expression used to my father 
 by Mr. Pratt, at that time Attorney General, af- 
 terwards better known by the name of Lord Cam- 
 den, within four months after the King's acces- 
 sion : u I see already, that this will be a weak 
 and an inglorious reign. " I recollect also the re- 
 lation which a friend of my father's gave to him 
 of a conversation which he had had with Charles 
 Townshend : " I said to Charles Townshend, I 
 don't want to know any state secrets, but do tell 
 me what is the character of this young man V y 
 After a pause, Charles Townshend replied, " He 
 is very obstinate." It was also observed that the 
 Princess Dowager of Wales had kept the young 
 Prince from having any confidential intimacy with 
 any person except herself and the Earl of Bute : 
 the pretence of this was the preservation of his 
 morals. In truth, they had blockaded all ap- 
 proach to him. A notion has prevailed, that the 
 Earl of Bute had suggested political opinions to 
 the Princess Dowager ; but this was certainly a 
 mistake. In understanding, the Princess Dowa- 
 ger w r as far superior to the Earl of Bute ; in what- 
 ever degree of favour he stood with her, he did 
 not suggest, but he received, her opinions and 
 her directions. The late Marquis of Bute told 
 me, that at the King's accession, his father, the 
 
12 
 
 Earl of Bute, had no connexion beyond the pale 
 of Leicester House. He added, " I never lived 
 with my father, nor did any of his children." 
 Could such a man be fit to be a minister? 
 
 The Princess Dowager of Wales was a woman 
 of a very sound understanding, and was considered 
 as such by all who had occasion to converse with 
 her. But she had been educated in the court of 
 her father, the Duke of Saxe Gotha ; here she 
 had received her ideas of sovereign power, and 
 she could never bring herself to feel the necessity, 
 that sovereign power should be exercised by a 
 King of Great Britain with different sentiments, 
 and in a manner different from that in which she 
 had seen it exercised at Saxe Gotha. 
 
 Few Englishmen have occasion to see the in- 
 terior of the Court of a petty German Prince ; it 
 may therefore be difficult to bring Englishmen to 
 comprehend the character of such a court. A 
 petty German Sovereign is not a magistrate ; he 
 is rather the proprietor of the soil, and of the in- 
 habitants. His Ministers exist by his breath; 
 they are liable to no responsibility except to their 
 master ; they fall into insignificance when his fa- 
 vour is removed : he resembles more a Polish or 
 Hungarian Noble, than a British Sovereign. He 
 has an interest that his lands should be well cul- 
 tivated, and his people not driven from his terri- 
 tory; because, if the lands remained uncultivated, 
 his revenues would be lessened; but he collects 
 all the revenue which he can, consistently with 
 
13 
 
 this attention to his interest, and spends it all in 
 vanity or personal gratifications. 
 
 When the Princess of Wales came to the Court 
 of St. James, she found the British Sovereign a 
 very different character from that which she had 
 seen at Saxe Gotha. She found him controlled 
 by his Ministers, indulged in petty gratifications, 
 but compelled to submit to their opinions on all 
 important subjects. We cannot be surprised that 
 she was disgusted at this ; and it is well known 
 that she ever impressed upon the King from his 
 early years this lesson, " George, be King." 
 And this lesson seems to have influenced the 
 King's conduct through the whole of his life. 
 Extreme apprehension that his Ministers or others 
 might encroach upon his power, an earnest wish 
 that he might exercise his power personally, or, 
 in other words, that he might be his, own Minis- 
 ter, have in a very singular manner marked his 
 conduct during the whole of his reign. 
 
 At his accession, he found the Pelham party 
 in possession of the Administration ; much 
 strengthened by its alliance with Mr. Secretary 
 Pitt, and popular from his successful conduct of 
 the war. It was perilous to attempt to change 
 such an Administration. The late Marquis of 
 Rockingham told me, that about the end of Feb- 
 ruary 1761, he received a message from the Duke 
 of Newcastle, requesting him to be at Newcastle 
 House that evening. He went there : on his en- 
 tering the room, the Duke of Newcastle ran up to 
 
 jb 2 
 
14 
 
 him and said, " We have received a message 
 from die King, of great importance ; he wishes 
 that the Earl of Holdernesse may resign the place 
 of Secretary of State for the Northern Depart- 
 ment, and receive in lieu of it the Wardenship of 
 the Cinque Ports, and that the Earl of Bute may 
 be appointed Secretary of State for the Northern 
 Department, in the place of the Earl of Holder- 
 nesse." When this subject was discussed, the 
 Earl of Hardwicke strongly recommended that 
 the King's wishes should be complied with with- 
 out opposition. He said, " that this was the first 
 instance in which the King had interfered in the 
 nomination of Ministers : and that resistance to his 
 wishes might excite an ill-will which they might 
 afterwards regret." The Marquis of Rocking- 
 ham told me, that he himself rather objected, and 
 desired them to consider, whether, H if they ad- 
 mitted, in February 1761, that the Earl of Bute 
 was fit to be a Secretary of State, they could say 
 in the following year that he was not fit to be a 
 Prime Minister ?" But the Earl of Hardwicke's 
 opinion prevailed, and the Earl of Bute was ap- 
 pointed Secretary of State. 
 
 In the autumn of 1761, Mr. Pitt was removed 
 from the office of Secretary of State, and every 
 tool of Government employed to run down his 
 character and destroy his popularity. 
 
 The old Duke of Newcastle was as much re- 
 joiced at the removal of Mr. Pitt as any man. He 
 had always felt himself fettered and oppressed by 
 
15 
 
 the superior mind of Mr. Pitt ; and on Mr. Pitt's 
 removal he was weak enough to imagine that he 
 should possess the same degree of power as lie 
 had possessed before Mr, Pitt's advancement to 
 office. But early in the spring 1762, the Duke 
 was himself removed from his situation, and the 
 Earl of Bute appointed First Lord of the Treasury 
 and Prime Minister in his room. During the 
 year 1761 there had been a negotiation for peace, 
 and M. Bussy had come to London for the pur- 
 pose of conducting the negotiation ; but the nego- 
 tiation failed, and I think, that whoever carefully 
 and impartially examines the papers that passed 
 on that occasion, will be of opinion that Mr. Se- 
 cretary Pitt did not wish for peace. But the 
 young King was anxious for it : and in the course 
 of the year 1762, the Earl of Bute opened a new 
 negotiation with the Court of France. Peace was 
 the result of this negotiation : but the terms of the 
 peace were universally abused, though I think it 
 would be difficult to show what greater advantages 
 could have been obtained ; every thing which we 
 did retain, was either injurious or of little benefit* 
 The acquisition of Canada, and the extension of 
 the limits of our American Colonies, have been 
 injurious to us ; the cession of Grenada, and of the 
 neutral West India islands, has been of little im- 
 portance ; and as it has been since decided, that 
 the Slave Trade ought to be abandoned, acquisi- 
 tions on the coast of Africa could not be of much 
 use. But the language of the nation was, " After 
 
16 
 
 a most successful war, see how little we have 
 gained. " People did not perceive, that the war 
 had been continued without a British object; sole- 
 ly to support George the Second's Ge rman inter- 
 ests, and gratify the ambition of Mr. Pitt. But 
 the peace was odious ; the pageant of a boot and 
 petticoat paraded through the streets of London, 
 frightened the Earl of Bute into a resignation ; and 
 the King appointed George Grenville his succes- 
 sor. But before I examine the Administration of 
 Mr. George Grenville, I will make a few obser- 
 vations on the transactions which took place from 
 the accession of the King to the retirement of the 
 Earl of Bute. 
 
 Mr. Edmund Burke has said, in one of his po- 
 litical works, that the plan of an interior Cabinet 
 was formed during the life of Frederic Prince of 
 Wales. I doubt the correctness of this assertion. 
 I think that it must be at least adooted with Great 
 allowances. I believe the Princess Dowager of 
 Wales had suggested to the King, from his ear- 
 liest years, to be his own Minister, and to resist 
 the control of those who were in office. She had 
 seen the manner in which the Ministers had, at 
 different times, thwarted the wishes of George II. 
 Perhaps even George II. himself had sometimes 
 felt and been indignant at this control : he was a 
 foreigner, and feared the return to power of the 
 Stuart family. But the Princess Dowager of 
 Wales wished her son to be a King, such as she 
 had been educated to believe a King ought to be ; 
 
17 
 
 viz. a King after the model of a Duke of Saxe 
 Gotha : and this was the object of that lesson 
 which she was continually inculcating to him, 
 11 George, be King." But I do not see any rea- 
 son for believing that there was any original in- 
 tention of forming an interior Cabinet. I believe 
 that the plan of the interior Cabinet grew out of 
 circumstances which afterwards arose. The first 
 wish was, that the Earl of Bute should be advan- 
 ced to be Prime Minister; and while he was 
 Minister, there was certainly no desire to form an 
 interior Cabinet. Most probably the interior Ca- 
 binet arose on his retirement from office. When 
 the Earl of Bute was made Secretary of State for 
 the Northern Department, he found in that office 
 Mr. Chares Jenkinson, a man of family, though 
 in the inferior situation of a volunteer clerk. The 
 Earl of Bute discovered this gentleman's abilities; 
 and when he was made First Lord of the Treasu- 
 ry, removed Mr. Jenkinson with him to his new 
 office, and made him Secretary of the Treasury. 
 When the Earl of Bute resigned, Mr. Jenkinson 
 was the channel through which confidential com- 
 munications were conveyed from the King to the 
 Princess Dowager and the Earl of Bute ; and 
 this was most probably the origin of the interior 
 Cabinet. 
 
 The King, at his accession, had two objects : 
 the first was to destroy the Pelham faction, the 
 second was to put an end to the war. For his 
 attempts to effect those objects, he was more abus- 
 
18 
 
 ed than for any other act of his life ; although per- 
 haps those objects were the most judicious and 
 the most meritorious of his reign. But the Pel- 
 ham faction was very powerful. Many individu- 
 als, not acting under the direction of that faction, 
 indulged themselves in gross abuse of the Princess 
 Dowager and the Earl of Bute, and even of the 
 King himself. This gave occasion to measures 
 dictated more by resentment than by judgment, 
 and ultimately produced a sort of personal contest 
 between the Princess Dowager and the King on 
 one side, and John Wilkes on the other. The ge- 
 nerous character of the English nation naturally 
 led them to take part with the individual whom 
 they thought oppressed, and the King was injur- 
 ed by the victory. I do not believe that the King 
 ever wished to reinstate the Earl of Bute. He 
 saw the Earl's want of courage : probably he saw 
 his incapacity, and his unfitness to serve his views: 
 but it is possible that the Princess Dowager of 
 Wales might still retain a wish that the Earl of 
 Bute should be replaced in the office of Prime 
 Minister. However this might be, whenever the 
 new Minister, Mr. Grenville, resisted the wishes 
 of the King and the Princess Dowager, he was 
 recalled to obedience by a negotiation being 
 opened with Mr. Pitt. This negotiation was 
 not concealed ; on the contrary, there was a wish 
 on the part of the King and the Princess Dowa- 
 ger that it should be generally known ; for their 
 object was to bring back Mr. Grenville to obe- 
 
19 
 
 dience, by showing him the danger of his being 
 removed, in case he resisted their wishes. And 
 while Mr. Grenville remained Minister, these ne- 
 gotiations happened not unlrequently. 
 
 But the great measure of Mr. Grenville's Ad- 
 ministration was the Stamp Act. This was 
 an attempt to raise taxes in the American Colo- 
 nies by the vote of a British Parliament ; all taxes 
 in the British Colonies having, down to that peri- 
 od, been ever voted by their several Colonial As- 
 semblies. This measure has produced conse- 
 quences so important, not solely to Great Britain, 
 but also to so many other states, that one cannot 
 pass over it without deep reflection. I have heard 
 it doubted, whether the measure originated with 
 Mr. George Grenville. I have heard it intimated, 
 that the measure originated with the King, that is 
 to say, with the King's secret adviser? ; and that 
 Mr. Grenville acceded to the plan with consider- 
 able reluctance. I have no means of knowing 
 whether the measure originated with Mr. Gren- 
 ville or with the King. But from the unremitted 
 obstinacy with which the King persevered in the 
 wish to impose taxes on the Colonies by a Bri- 
 tish Parliament, every man must see that it may 
 fairly be called the favourite measure of his reign. 
 I will examine the subject more fully at another 
 time. 
 
 About the beginning of the year 1765, the King 
 fell ill ; I know it has been said that his illness 
 was a mental derangement, but I do not believe it. 
 
20 
 
 On his recovery, it occurred to Mr. Grenville and 
 the other Ministers, that if the King had died, 
 there would have been considerable difficulty in 
 appointing a Regent; and as the Prince of Wales 
 was then only two years and a half old, a Regen- 
 cy, and for a long continuance, would have been 
 necessary. They therefore determined to bring 
 into Parliament a bill enabling the King to appoint 
 a Regent by his will. But Mr. Grenville did not 
 choose that the Princess Dowager of Wales 
 should be the Regent ; and he probably thought 
 that the Princess Dow T ager would be the person 
 whom the King would be most disposed to se- 
 lect : for during the Princess Dowager's life, the 
 Queen does not appear to have had much influence 
 over the King. He therefore suggested to the 
 King, that his power of appointment must be con- 
 fined to the Queen, and the descendants of George 
 II. The King resisted this, as he saw that by 
 such a limitation he should be precluded from 
 nominating the Princess Dowager. Mr. Gren- 
 ville persevered ; telling the King, that he could 
 not undertake to carry the bill through the House 
 of Commons, except his Majesty's power were 
 thus limited. The King at length yielded; and 
 as the Bill was already in the house of Lords, he 
 consented that the Earl of Halifax, Secretary of 
 State, should be sent down to the House of Lords 
 with a message to the Earl of Northington, at that 
 time Chancellor, signifying that it was the King's 
 pleasure that his power of appointment should be 
 
21 
 
 confined to the Queen, and the descendants of 
 George II. I have been told, and from good au- 
 thority, that the Earl of Northington replied, 
 " Your Lordship astonishes me; I should not 
 have given credit to such a message if it had not 
 been brought to me by one of His Majesty's Se- 
 cretaries of State." But the Bill was framed 
 agreeably to this message, and sent down in that 
 shape to the House of Commons, After the Bill 
 had thus passed the Lords, the Earl of Northing- 
 ton waited on the King to inform him what had 
 been done; adding, that in obedience to the mes- 
 sage which he had received through the Earl of 
 Halifax, his Majesty would not have the power of 
 appointing the Princess Dowager of Wales. The 
 King replied, €i Mr. Grenville tells me, that if my 
 power of apppointment had been extended to the 
 Princess Dowager, he could not have undertaken 
 to carry the Bill through the House of Commons." 
 " Would your Majesty have wished to have had 
 the power of appointing the Princess Dowager ?" 
 — iC Most certainly; provided the introduction of 
 such a power would not have provoked a debate 
 painful to the Princess Dowager herself." The 
 Earl of Northington said no more ; but on his re- 
 tirement from the King's closet, sent for Mr. John 
 Morton, member for Abingdon. To Mr. Mor- 
 ton he gave these instructions : " When the Bill 
 in your House is in a committee, jump up, and 
 move to insert the name of the Princess Dowager 
 of Wales, and in the mean time keep die design 
 
 c 
 
22 
 
 to yourself " Mr. Morton followed the Earl of 
 Northington's directions. The Opposition, not 
 expecting such an amendment, was not prepared 
 to oppose it. It would have been indecent in the 
 Ministers to oppose it, and the amendment was 
 adopted without one dissenting voice. Mr. Mor- 
 ton was an intimate friend of my father, and rela- 
 ted this anecdote to him. 
 
 It will easily be supposed, that the Princess 
 Dowager was highly indignant at the affront which 
 Mr. Grenville had attempted to put on her; and 
 the King immediately decided to dismiss him. I 
 have been told, that the King did not conceal the 
 ground of his displeasure with Mr. Grenville: 
 openly saying, * When Mr. Grenville told me, 
 that, if the Princess Dowager's name were in- 
 serted in the Bill, he could not undertake to carry 
 it through the House of Commons, either Mr. 
 Grenville did not know the disposition of the 
 House of Commons, or he practised a deception 
 on me : in either case he is not fit to be my mi- 
 nister." 
 
 On the removal of Mr. Grenville, the King ap- 
 pointed the Marquis of Rockingham Prime Mi- 
 nister. This Nobleman was a man of high ho- 
 nour and the strictest integrity; from his accession 
 to office to the day of his death, he was never ac- 
 cused of being influenced by motives of personal 
 interest : his understanding was sound, though 
 not brilliant; but he had never before held any 
 public situation, nor had he been much conversant 
 
23 
 
 in business : his friends saw, that with such habits, 
 it would be advantageous that he should always 
 have near him a man acquainted with political 
 subjects, and accustomed to laborious application. 
 They selected for this purpose Mr. Edmund 
 Burke. When William Gerard Hamilton (ge- 
 nerally known by the name of Single-speech Ha- 
 milton) went to Ireland as Secretary to the Lord 
 Lieutenant, Mr. Edmund Burke attended Mr. 
 Hamilton as his private Secretary: he was re- 
 warded for this service with a pension of 3001. a 
 year; which, as I have heard, he soon after sold 
 to relieve his immediate necessities. 
 
 At the time when Mr. Burke was selected to 
 be the private Secretary to the Marquis of Rock- 
 ingham, he was an author in the service of Mr. 
 Dodsley the bookseller; he had conducted for 
 that gentleman the Annual Register,, a work of 
 considerable reputation and merit, first established 
 in the year 1758; and I believe that it was con- 
 ducted under the direction of Mr. Burke to a very 
 late period of his life. The political knowledge 
 of Mr. Burke might be considered almost as an 
 Encyclopedia : every man who approached him 
 received instruction from his stores; and his fail- 
 ings (for failings he had) were not visible at that 
 time ; perhaps they did not then exist ; perhaps 
 they grew up in the progress of his political life. 
 When Mr. Burke entered into the service of the 
 Marquis of Rockingham he was not rich, but the 
 munificent generosity of that nobleman immedi- 
 
24 
 
 ately placed him in an affluent situation. Mr. 
 Burke purchased a beautiful villa, at Beacons- 
 field, which was paid for by the Marquis of Rock- 
 ingham. When Dr. Johnson, who, like Mr. 
 Burke, had subsisted by his labours as an author, 
 visited his friend at his new purchase, he could 
 not help exclaiming with the shepherd in Virgil's 
 Eclogue, 
 
 " Non equidem invideo, miror magis." 
 
 But the Marquis of Rockingham's liberality was 
 not confined to the person of Mr. Burke ; he pro- 
 cured for Mr. William Burke, his cousin, and 
 most confidential connexion, the employment of 
 Under Secretary of State to General Conway; and 
 he gave to Mr. Edmund Burke's brother, Richard 
 Burke, the place of Collector of the Customs at 
 Grenada. I mention these circumstances to 
 show, that Lord Rockingham was fully entitled 
 to that devoted attachment which Mr. Edmund 
 Burke ever paid him to the end of that noble 
 Lord's life. 
 
 Let me pause to reflect on the transactions of 
 that year in which Lord Rockingham was minis- 
 ter. I can discover no faults in the administra- 
 tion of public affairs during that year : the conduct 
 of Government was wise and upright: by the re- 
 peal of the Stamp Act, they put an end to a civil 
 dissension, which had been unnecessarily excited. 
 Had the measures adopted by Lord Rockingham 
 been persevered in, Great Britain, I might almost 
 
25 
 
 add, Europe, itself, would not have experienced 
 that misery, relief from which she now finds so 
 difficult. Lord Rockingham repealed the Stamp 
 Act ; and from that hour the King determined to 
 remove him. Lord Rockingham himself told me, 
 that the King never showed him such distinguish- 
 ed marks of kindness, as after he had secretly de- 
 termined to get rid of him. The Marquis of 
 Rockingham accompanied the repeal of the Stamp 
 Act with another Act, declaratory of the right. I 
 know that he has been much censured for this 
 measure. Mr. Pitt recommended that the Stamp 
 Act should be repealed by an Act declaring that 
 the claim of the British Parliament was unconsti- 
 tutional and illegal. This would most certainly 
 have been the bolder measure ; but we must re- 
 collect the situation of Lord Rockingham when 
 he proposed to Parliament the repeal of the Stamp 
 Act. In his front he had a formidable opposition : 
 in his rear the household troops, ready to declare 
 against him : it was his duty to consider what 
 measures were practicable ; I will even go one 
 step further, it was his duty not unnecessarily to 
 offend the King. The plan which he brought 
 forward, of an Act, declaratory of the right, while 
 it relinquished the exercise of that right, had been 
 formerly adopted on a dispute with Ireland, of a 
 nature somewhat similar. When the civil dis- 
 sension with America had been put an end to, who 
 could imagine that the King and the interior Ca- 
 binet would wish to renew it ? 
 
 c 2 
 
26 
 
 The Administration of Lord Rockingham last- 
 ed one year, and, I believe, a few days more. On 
 his removal, the King sent for the Ex-Secretary 
 Mr. Pitt, and requested him to form an Adminis- 
 tration. From the reports circulated at that time, 
 it seems as if Mr. Pitt had been the dupe of those 
 apparent marks of kindness which the King knew 
 so well how to practise whenever he thought 
 them necessary. Mr. Pitt thought that he pos- 
 sessed the entire confidence of the King, and 
 acted as if the selection of his colleagues depen- 
 ded wholly upon himself. This occasioned a 
 breach between him and his brother-in-law, Earl 
 Temple ; and, as Mr. Burke has remarked in a 
 pamphlet subsequently published, " When Mr. 
 Pitt had formed his Cabinet, he was no longer 
 Minister." It is much to be regretted, that 
 when the Marquis of Rockingham formed his 
 Administration, in 1765, he did not feel the ad- 
 vantage which would have been derived from Mr. 
 Pitt being in his Cabinet. Lord Rockingham 
 must at that time have fully known the King's 
 character ; he must have been sensible of the dif- 
 ficulty which every Administration would have 
 in restraining the King from pursuing his own pri- 
 vate views, in opposition to the opinion of his os- 
 tensible Ministers. The experienced mind, the 
 popularity, the venerable character of that great 
 Statesman Mr. Pitt, would have added strength 
 to his government. What a different Cabinet 
 would it have been, if, instead of that contempti. 
 
27 
 
 ble old man the Duke of Newcastle, he had made 
 Mi\ Pitt Lord Privy Seal ! But, although an ap- 
 parent union had subsisted, from 1757 to 1761, 
 between the Pelham party and Mr. Pitt, yet the 
 Pelham party had always hated Mr. Pitt ; they 
 felt themselves oppressed by the superiority of his 
 mind, and perhaps he had sometimes unnecessa- 
 rily made them sensible of their inferiority. Lord 
 Rockingham had been educated from early life in 
 this party ; and, from that circumstance, most 
 probably, felt no inclination to be united with Mr. 
 Pitt. 
 
 In forming his Cabinet, Mr. Pitt made the 
 Duke of Grafton First Lord of the Treasury. 
 His own health disqualified him from holding that 
 office, and he chose for himself the office of Lord 
 Privy Seal, with an earldom. But he admitted 
 into his Cabinet so many persons not sincerely at- 
 tached to him or to his measures, that, whenever 
 ill health compelled him to absent himself from 
 the Cabinet, measures were adopted wholly re- 
 pugnant to Mr. Pitt's views. His removal to the 
 House of Lords deprived him of a great portion 
 of his power. From this circumstances, Charles 
 Townshend remained indisputably the first speak- 
 er in the House of Commons. Mr. Burke, in 
 one of his political speeches, calls him " that pro- 
 digy Charles Townshend." I have heard the late 
 Lord Thurlow say, that Charles Townshend was 
 the most delightful speaker he ever heard. For 
 myself, I never heard him but once ; and that was 
 
28 
 
 not on an occasion in which his powers could be 
 fairly shown, for he had himself arranged that he 
 should on that day be in a minority. It was on 
 that debate, previous to the dissolution of Parlia- 
 ment in 1768, when the land-tax was reduced from 
 four shillings to three shillings : or, as it was lu- 
 dicrously said, when the country gentlemen brib- 
 ed themselves with a shilling in the pound of their 
 own land-tax. 
 
 Mr. Charles Townshend was soon taken into 
 the Duke of Grafton's Cabinet, and made Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer. I will not use so strong 
 an expression as to say that he was treacherous to 
 this iVdministration, but he certainly saw that the 
 Earl of Chatham's greatness was on the decline ; 
 and that he should most readily increase his own 
 importance by acquiescing in the wishes of the 
 King. He therefore brought forward measures 
 tending to revive the question of the right of the 
 British Parliament to tax the American Colonies; 
 but his premature death protects him from being 
 considered as the author of the American war. 
 
 The Duke of Grafton, who had been made 
 First Lord of the Treasury, was certainly a man 
 of a very feeble mind ; he had about him at that 
 time a Secretary of the name of Thomas Brad- 
 shavv ; and a mistress, formerly known by the 
 name of Nancy Parsons, at that time bearing the 
 name of Mrs. Horton, afterwards Lady Maynard. 
 Those who wished to destroy the Earl of Chat- 
 ham's Administration saw, that they should very 
 
29 
 
 much advance their designs if they could separate 
 the Duke of Grafton from the Earl of Chatham : 
 they had gained over the Duke's Secretary, Mr. 
 Bradshaw ; but they could not corrupt his mis- 
 tress. She had the sense to see that the Duke's 
 honour required him to remain firm in his connexion 
 with the Earl of Chatham. She had the sense 
 to see this, and she had the integrity to tell him 
 so. Her influence for some time prevented the 
 Duke of Grafton from deserting the Earl of Chat- 
 ham. When this was seen, those who wished 
 the destruction of that Administration changed 
 the direction of their batteries ; instead of using 
 their efforts to separate the Duke of Grafton from 
 the Earl of Chatham, they employed them to se- 
 parate him from his mistress. In this they suc- 
 ceeded, and married him to Miss Wrottesley, the 
 niece of the Duchess of Bedford. To separate 
 him from the Earl of Chatham was then an easy 
 task. Thus fell the Earl of Chatham's Adminis- 
 tration ; and, I believe, the Earl was never after in 
 any public office. 
 
 Very soon after the formation of this Cabinet, 
 the Earl of Chatham had fallen into an ill state of 
 health, and remained so for many months : his ill- 
 ness was of that nature that he was incapable of 
 any application to public business: The secret 
 junto availed themselves of this circumstance ; 
 and such was the imbecility of the Duke of Graf- 
 ton, that sometimes Lord Chatham's measures 
 were pursued, and sometimes measures directly 
 
30 
 
 the reverse of them were brought forward. When 
 the interior Cabinet had sufficiently disgraced the 
 Duke of Grafton, they frightened him into a re- 
 signation. 
 
 From the formation of Lord Chatham's Cabi- 
 net, in 1766, to the ultimate determination, in 
 1774, of forcing the Americans into rebellion, the 
 measures adopted seem to have been calculated 
 to provoke and irritate the Americans. Perhaps 
 this was not the intention of those in power, but 
 it w f as the result of the different measures at diffe- 
 rent times adopted : sometimes the Earl of Chat- 
 ham's opinion prevailed, viz. that the British Par- 
 liament had no right to tax the American Colo- 
 nies. At other times the opinion of the interior 
 Cabinet prevailed, viz. that the King was humi- 
 liated if the right of the British Parliament to tax 
 America was not asserted. 
 
 But before I consider the measures adopted 
 against the Americans in the session of 1773-1774, 
 let me make a few remarks on two measures of 
 this Parliament, viz. the expulsion of John Wilkes 
 from the House of Commons, and the Royal Fa- 
 mily Marriage Act of 1772. The expulsion of 
 John Wilkes from the House of Commons, in 
 1769, was brought forward purely to gratify the 
 resentment of the interior Cabinet against that 
 gentleman. John Wilkes had no virtues that en- 
 titled him to the esteem of his country, but he 
 was a persecuted man. The generous character 
 of Englishmen led them to take part with a man 
 
31 
 
 persecuted by power : he became popular be- 
 cause the Court had oppressed him. It may not 
 be improper to mention here a little anecdote, 
 which I received from the late Mr. Sergeant 
 Glynn, the confidential friend and law adviser of 
 John Wilkes. Earl Temple had furnished Mr. 
 Wilkes with a qualification to enable him to stand 
 for Middlesex ; but Mr. Wilkes was at that time 
 under a sentence of outlawry for a misdemeanor, 
 viz. for the libel published in the North Briton, 
 No. 45. It was a matter of uncertainty whether 
 this judgment of outlawry could be reversed by a 
 writ of error ; and, if the judgment of outlawry 
 were not reversed, the freehold estate of 600/. a 
 year, which Earl Temple had granted to Mr. 
 Wilkes, for his life, would have been forfeited. 
 Earl Temple would not expose himself to this 
 risk ; it was therefore arranged, that if Mr. Wilkes 
 should be called on at the poll to produce his 
 qualification, he should immediately decline the 
 poll; but Mr. Wilkes was not called on. I men- 
 tion this anecdote, to show how often important 
 events depend on little circumstances. If Mr. 
 Wilkes had not been elected for Middlesex, his 
 expulsion, and all the consequent questions, could 
 never have taken place. But the most important 
 consequence resulting from this persecution was, 
 that it appeared that there was no measure so hu- 
 miliating to those who supported it, but that a ma- 
 jority of the House of Commons might be brought 
 to vote for it. It was seen that this Hoise of 
 
32 
 
 Commons, elected under the auspices of the Duke 
 of Grafton, in 1768, was perfectly well suited to 
 adopt every measure proposed by the interior 
 Cabinet. 
 
 The Royal Family Marriage Act of 1772, was 
 the measure of importance next brought forward. 
 I think it is the wickedest Act in the Statute 
 Book. It was brought forward to gratify the late 
 Queen's pride, to protect her from the mortifica- 
 tion of having the Countess Dowager of Walde- 
 grave and Mrs. Horton raised to the rank of her 
 sisters-in-law. The reason assigned for bringing 
 forward this Act, was to prevent the King's chil- 
 dren from contracting improper marriages; but 
 this was only a pretence. The King's eldest son, 
 who has now succeeded to the Throne, was at 
 that time only nine years and a half old ; and as 
 far as regarded the honour of the King's children, 
 or the succession of a person from an humble 
 walk in life, the Act was wholly inadequate : it 
 was the late Queen's German pride which was to 
 be protected. I remember an intimate friend of 
 mine, then high in office, using to me this lan- 
 guage, a very short time after the Act had been 
 passed : " And now all our trouble and all our 
 danger appear to have been unnecessary, for the 
 Duke of Gloucester and the Duke of Cumberland 
 have been with the King, and told him, that they 
 were married before the Act was passed." The 
 Bill was carried through the two Houses with 
 great difficulty. In the House of Commons it 
 
as 
 
 was carried only by a majority of forty ; and in 
 the House of Lords nineteen Peers entered a pro- 
 test, declaring that the Bill, if passed into a law, 
 would be void. I think they were right in this 
 opinion. Sir Edward Coke, Sir Matthew Hale, 
 and Sir John Holt, have all laid down this doc- 
 trine in the most explicit terms, that an Act of 
 Parliament repugnant to the law of God, is void. 
 Suppose an Act of Parliament were passed, de- 
 claring that those who have been made the ob- 
 jects of this royal Family Marriage Act, viz. the 
 descendants of George II. should be dispunisha- 
 ble for murder, would such an Act be void, or 
 valid ? I think no man can hesitate to say, that 
 such an Act would be void ; because it would 
 permit men to do that with impunity which God 
 has forbidden them to do. The law of God has 
 not commanded marriage, but it has pointed it 
 out as the means by which man may continue his 
 race, and live in his posterity. What right could 
 Parliament have to say, " The children of the 
 Dukes of Gloucester and Cumberland shall die 
 without issue V I hesitate to speak of the mis- 
 chiefs which have been already produced by this 
 Act. I fear still more to point out the greater 
 mischiefs which mav hereafter flow from it. 
 What tyranny has not been practised over His 
 present Majesty ? what cruelty has not been ex- 
 ercised towards the Duke of Sussex and his chil- 
 dren ? It was well said by some persons, while 
 this Bill was depending in Parliament, that the 
 
 jo 
 
34 
 
 title of the Bill should be, " An Act to encourage 
 Fornication and Adultery in the Descendants of 
 George II." But the subject is too painful ; I 
 will say no more on it. 
 
 The Parliament closed its career with passing 
 Acts intended either to compel the Americans to 
 yield unconditional submission, or to take arms 
 immediately in defence of their rights : they chose 
 the latter ; they declared that George III. had for- 
 feited all right to their allegiance, and erected 
 themselves into a Federative Republic. This 
 Parliament was then dissolved. The American 
 war was persevered in for eight years. The in- 
 habitants of this island were deluded into the sup- 
 port of it. I recollect in one debate, Lord North 
 stated, that the inhabitants of Great Britain, con- 
 sidered collectively, paid one man with another 
 twenty-five shillings a year in taxes ; while the in- 
 habitants of our American Colonies, considered 
 collectively, paid each only sixpence a year in 
 taxes ; he added, i€ Is this equitable V 9 The 
 country gentlemen were weak enough to believe, 
 that by persevering in the contest, their taxes 
 would be diminished. The language held in the 
 House of Commons sufficiently proved that the 
 Americans were not represented in that House. 
 The war was considered as the war of the King 
 personally. Those who supported it were called 
 the King's friends ; while those who wished the 
 country to pause, and reconsider the propriety of 
 persevering in the contest, were branded as dis- 
 4 oval. 
 
35 
 
 The zealous supporters of the American war 
 have thrown blame on the War Minister, and the 
 Generals who conducted it. In this I think they 
 have acted unjustly. I believe that Lord George 
 Germaine was as able a War Minister as could 
 have been found ; and the Generals employed 
 were men of the first reputation. It always ap- 
 peared to me that the design of compelling the 
 Americans to submit to be taxed by a British Par- 
 liament, was a wild and absurd project. The loose 
 texture (if I may be allowed the expression) of 
 American population, rendered the conquest of 
 the country impracticable. Wherever our army 
 appeared the people submitted ; but whenever 
 our army moved forward, the people who had 
 submitted resumed their arms. We never at- 
 tempted more than the conquest of the eastern 
 side of America ; had we succeeded Jn that, the 
 war would still have been continued by the inha- 
 bitants of the Back Settlements ; and if the Ame- 
 ricans had ultimately been subdued, what must 
 have been the size of that army which must have 
 been maintained there for the purpose of enforcing 
 submission, and collecting revenue ? I believe 
 no man now will maintain either the justice or 
 the policy of the American contest : we are come 
 to this opinion, although only the short space of 
 thirty-six years has elapsed since the contest was 
 relinquished. A century hence, men will won- 
 der how the people of England could have been 
 deluded to engage in it. 
 
36 
 
 After the defeat and capture of General Bur- 
 goyne at Saratoga, a friend of Lord North's said 
 to him, " My Lord, you must deceive yourself 
 no longer ; you must now see that the whole 
 population of America is hostile to your designs/' 
 Lord North replied, " I see that as clearly as you 
 do ; and the King shall either consent to allow me 
 to assure the House of Commons, that some 
 means shall be found to put an end to the war, or 
 I will not continue to be his Minister." I had 
 this anecdote from the friend with whom this 
 conversation passed. Lord North was no incon- 
 siderable Statesman : he seems never to have been 
 particularly attentive to the promotion of his own 
 personal interests, and I have no doubt that he 
 would have preferred to have pursued those mea- 
 sures which he thought most beneficial to his 
 country ; but the place of Prime Minister was 
 pleasant to him, and he persevered in the war for 
 four years longer. 
 
 At the close of the year 1781, the capture of 
 Earl Cornwallis's army was announced : the slight- 
 est reflection must then have convinced every 
 man, that the continuance of the war could have 
 no other effect than that of exhausting the nation 
 still more. Many of those country Gentlemen, 
 who had till that time supported Lord North^ 
 signified to him that the war must be relinquish- 
 ed. I have been told, that at a meeting of Lord 
 North's confidential friends, three measures were 
 resolved on : first, That Lord George Germaine 
 
37 
 
 should be dismissed ; secondly, That the Earl of 
 Sandwich should retire ; thirdly, That Lord North 
 should insist, that the King should permit him to 
 assure the House of Commons that some means 
 should be found to put an end to the American 
 war ; and if the King refused to permit him to 
 give such an assurance, that Lord North should 
 resign. The Minister approved of this advice. 
 Lord George Germaine was removed. The re- 
 moval of the Earl of Sandwich was delayed. 
 During the interval occasioned by the delay, 
 Charles Fox moved an inquiry into the conduct of 
 Lord Sandwich : it would have been inconsistent 
 with the honour of the Noble Earl to have resign- 
 ed before that inquiry had been gone through ; it 
 was therefore necessary that he should be de- 
 fended : he was successfully defended, but the 
 defence weakened Lord North. Many mem- 
 bers refused to vote; others voted with reluc- 
 tance : the defence of the Earl of Sandwich evin- 
 ced that Lord North's majority was tired of the 
 American wan 
 
 The Opposition in Parliament was at that time 
 composed of two distinct corps — Rockinghams 
 and Shelburnes; they were like Hessians and 
 Hanoverians in the same camp. The probability 
 of Lord North's fall was visible ; and the import- 
 ance of a perfect union between the Rockinghams 
 and Shelburnes was equally manifest. I had at 
 that time very confidential intercourse with seve- 
 ral of the leaders of the Rockingham party : and 
 
 d 2 
 
38 
 
 I had much intimacy with Mr. Dunning, the effi- 
 cient leader of the Shelburne party in the House 
 of Commous. I availed myself of those circum- 
 stances to urge to all of them the great advantage 
 that would be derived from a sincere union be- 
 tween these parties. I found Mr. Dunning fully 
 sensible of the importance of such a union ; and 
 he assured me that it was most anxiously desired 
 by the Earl of Shelburne. When I urged the 
 subject to Mr. Burke, he treated it with con- 
 tempt : he said, < 4 The Earl of Shelburne's party 
 is of no consequence ; it does not consist of more 
 than six or eight members ;" and I remember he 
 enumerated them. But the Shelburne party was 
 more numerous at that time than Mr. Burke chose 
 to believe ; and subsequent events proved their 
 strength. When I mentioned to Mr. Dunning 
 the small number which Mr. Burke said the Shel- 
 burne party consisted of, I remember his answer : 
 " Non numeremur sed ponderemurP When I 
 talked on the subject with Admiral Keppel, the 
 answer he made me was this : Ci I see the advan- 
 tage of the union as much as you can do : for my- 
 self, I stand well with both the parties, and am 
 deeply interested that such a union should take 
 place ; but the Earl of Shelburne has that degree 
 of ill-will to Mr. Burke, that no union ever can 
 take place between the parties." I do not know 
 what ill-will the Earl of Shelburne had to Mr. 
 Burke ; but, from the conversation which I had 
 at different times with Mr. Burke, I am satisfied 
 
39 
 
 that his hatred to the Earl of Shelburne was at 
 least equal to that which the Earl of Shelburne 
 might have to him. 
 
 Sir George Savile died in the early part of the 
 year 1781: he was a very wise and a very up- 
 right man. His death was a great loss to the 
 Marquis of Rockingham ; for from that time there 
 was no man to check the ascendant which Mr. 
 Burke sometimes improperly exercised over that 
 nobleman. 
 
 At an early period after the commencement 
 of the American war, while the Rockingham party 
 formed the great mass of opposition to that war, 
 Mr. Edmund Burke was the leader of that party 
 in the liouse of Commons; and if victory had at- 
 tended their efforts, it was their intention to have 
 made him the minister: but during the latter years 
 of that Parliament, which was dissolved in 1780, 
 Mr. Burke was become unpopular with the party. 
 His unpopularity was to so great a degree, that it 
 was a matter of consideration whether he should 
 not retire from Parliament. It was ultimately re- 
 solved that he should not retire, but that Mr. 
 Charles Fox should take the command of the 
 Rockingham party in the House of Commons, 
 and be brought in member for Westminster by 
 their influence. The change was judicious ; and, 
 although the exertions of Mr. Fox, during the 
 session of 1780-81, did not appear to have much 
 effect, yet, in the session of 1781-82, he complet- 
 ed the overthrow of Lord North, and prevailed 
 
40 
 
 on the House of Commons to express their wish 
 that the contest with America should be relin- 
 quished. 
 
 This session was the glorious campaign of 
 Charles Fox: his health was entire, his troops 
 followed him with confidence, he felt that he was 
 gaining ground on every debate ; 
 
 ££ His spirit lent a fire 
 " E'en to the meanest peasant in the camp." 
 
 I still retain the remembrance of the pleasure 
 which I experienced from the events of that ses- 
 sion; and whatever mistakes Charles Fox might 
 afterwards make (and he certainly made some), 
 the service he did his country that session can 
 never be forgotten. His exertions terminated the 
 contest; had it been continued much longer, the 
 country must have sunk. Lord North had always 
 said that he would abandon the contest whenever 
 the house of Commons declared such abandon- 
 ment to be their wish. As soon as he found him- 
 self in a minority, he signified to the King that he 
 would resign. It was well known that the King 
 was very eager for the continuance of the war. It 
 was reported that the King offered Lord North to 
 dissolve the Parliament: and that Lord North re- 
 plied, " That measure will do your Majesty no 
 service," I was told by one of Lord North's 
 most intimate friends (but I do not vouch for 
 the truth of it), that, after the King had in vain 
 urged Lord North to remain Minister, his anger 
 
41 
 
 got the better of his prudence, and he said to 
 Lord North, ** You must then answer it to the 
 country for having gone on so long." When 
 Lord North had signified to the House of Com- 
 mons that he was no longer Minister, a cessation 
 of hostilities necessarily took place. The King 
 sent Lord Thurlow, the Chancellor, to the Mar- 
 quis of Rockingham, to request his assistance in 
 forming an administration. Lord Rockingham 
 replied, " that he was very willing to serve His 
 Majesty, but requested the honour of being ad- 
 mitted to a private audience before any adminis- 
 tration should be arranged." The King then sent 
 for the Earl of Shelburne, arranged the adminis- 
 tration with him, and then sent the Earl of Shel- 
 burne to the Marquis of Rockingham, to inform 
 him of the names of the gentlemen who were to 
 form the Cabinet, and of the different offices which 
 they were to fill. 
 
 No man was at that time more confidential with 
 the Marquis of Rockingham than Admiral Kep- 
 pel, who told me that Lord Rockingham himself 
 was very averse to accept the office offered him; 
 that the noble Lord thought that the King had 
 manifested such personal dislike to him, by re- 
 fusing him an audience, and arranging the Admi- 
 nistration with Lord Shelburne, that in his own 
 opinion he was not a fit person to be in the King's 
 service. Edmund Burke and Charles Fox were 
 both very solicitous that the Marquis should ac- 
 cept office. I understood that Lord Rockingham 
 
4,2 
 
 was ultimately prevailed on, by the opinion and 
 influence of the Duke of Richmond. That noble 
 Duke pledged himself for the honourable conduct 
 of the Earl of Shelburne. When Lord Rocking- 
 ham had signified his acceptance of the place of 
 First Lord of the Treasury, the King appointed 
 so distant a time for receiving him, that three en- 
 tire days elapsed before his Majesty saw his new 
 Minister. By this treatment his Majesty happily 
 expressed the sentiments he entertained for him. 
 The Cabinet was composed of eleven : five Rock- 
 inghams, five Shelburnes, the King retaining one, 
 viz. Lord Thurlow. 
 
 Every man saw that such a cabinet was form- 
 ed for contention, and that it could not long hold 
 together. From the very outset, the Rocking- 
 hams abused Lord Shelburne ; but I do not see 
 that they had much right to do so. It was owing 
 to their own folly in listening to Mr. Edmund 
 Burke, that a union had not taken place between 
 them and the Shelburnes early in that session. 
 When Lord North fell, the Rockinghams and 
 Shelburnes were distinct parties. After having 
 received Lord Rockingham's answer, through 
 Lord Thurlow, the King sent for the Earl of 
 Shelburne, and desired him to form an adminis- 
 tration. He arranged the Cabinet, and assigned 
 to Lord Rockingham the post of Prime Minister. 
 This was the justification which Lord Shelburne 
 made of his conduct; adding, " I passed my el- 
 dest to Lord Rockingham, which I had no occa- 
 
43 
 
 sion to do, for I might have been Prime Minister 
 myself." But the parties hated each other : 
 they could not conceal this hatred even on the day 
 on which they kissed hands for their several ap- 
 pointments. On that clay, they found that Mr. 
 Dunning was to be created a Peer. This had 
 not been previously notified to Lord Rockingham. 
 Mr. Burke was furious : " What," said he, 
 " shall Lord Shelburne make a Peer, and you not 
 name one ? Think of somebody, whom you 
 may recommend for a Peerage." I They at length 
 fixed on Sir Fletcher Norton, a man who had 
 never done their party any service. And when 
 Lord Rockingham went in to the King, he recom- 
 mended Sir Fletcher Norton for a Peerage. The 
 King had sufficient penetration to perceive the mo- 
 tive which induced Lord Rockingham to recom- 
 mend Sir Fletcher Norton ; he saw that it was 
 purely to enable him to appear to have equal in- 
 fluence with the Earl of Shelburne. It is report- 
 ed that the King said to Lord Rockingham, " Is 
 it your Lordship's particular wish that Sir Flet- 
 cher Norton should be made a Peer?" Lord 
 Rockingham declined answering in the affirmative; 
 but said he thought Sir Fletcher Norton ought to 
 be a Peer. He accordingly was made a Peer, 
 and voted against the Rockinghams in the ensuing 
 session. 
 
 But every day brought forth new proof of the 
 hatred of the parties to each other. The Rocking- 
 hams every where abused Lord Shelburne for 
 
44 
 
 want of good faith. The reply of the Shelburnes 
 was, that they were no ways pledged to Lord 
 Rockingham. If any man applied to Lord Rock- 
 ingham for an employment, and failed to obtain 
 it, he had but to signify this the next day to the 
 Earl of Shelburne, who immediately got the place 
 for him. On the other hand, if a man went first 
 to the Earl of Shelburne, his answer was, " You 
 should not apply to me, I am not the Minister. 
 Lord Rockingham is the Minister ; he is the man 
 to whom you should apply." I had an acquain- 
 tance who succeeded with both of them ; it was 
 Humphry Sturt, the Member for Dorsetshire. 
 He applied to Lord Rockingham for a writership, 
 in Bengal, for a younger son. Lord Rocking- 
 ham answered, " After the support which you 
 have uniformly given us, Mr. Sturt, you certainly 
 are entitled to ask for such a favour ; you shall 
 have it." A few days after, Mr. Sturt met the 
 Earl of Shelburne riding in the Park. " Why, 
 Sturt," said the Earl, '< how could you think of 
 applying to the Marquis of Rockingham for a 
 writership for your son ? I thought it would suit 
 you, and I kept a Bengal writership for you." — 
 11 My Lord, I have another younger son ; give me 
 your writership for him." Lord Shelburne 
 could not disengage himself from this voluntary 
 offer, and Humphry Sturt got both the writer- 
 ships. 
 
 After this motley Cabinet had existed about 
 three months, an epidemic disease broke out in 
 
lb 
 
 London ; they gave it the name of the influenza. 
 The Marquis of Rockingham was seized with it. 
 His bodily frame had for many years been weak. 
 From the formation of his Cabinet he had been 
 constantly agitated, partly by the conduct of Lord 
 Shelburne, more perhaps by the violence and ar- 
 rogance of Mr. Burke ; and was possibly vexed 
 with himself for having suffered others to prevail 
 on him to accept of office against his own better 
 judgment. He sunk under the disease. I will 
 not say that the Marquis of Rockingham had a 
 strong mind, but he loved his country, and all his 
 actions promoted its interests. I never received 
 any personal favours from Lord Rockingham ; 
 but approbation of his conduct has uniformly in- 
 fluenced my political life. 
 
 Within three hours after the Marquis of Rock- 
 ingham's death was known, a friend of mine call- 
 ed on Charles Fox. The question which natural- 
 ly occurred was, " Who is to succeed Lord 
 Rockingham as First Lord of the Treasury V y 
 Mr. Fox replied, cc I think it must be the Earl of 
 Shelburne ; he is first oars, and I do not see how 
 we can resist his claim. " But Mr. Burke had 
 afterwards sufficient influence with Mr. Fox, and 
 the other leaders of the Rockingham party, to 
 prevail on them to resist the appointment of the 
 Earl of Shelburne. He insisted that the Duke 
 of Portland should be sent for from Ireland, 
 where he was at that time Lord Lieutenant, and 
 appointed First Lord of the Treasury. This pro- 
 
 E 
 
46 
 
 posal was offensive, even to some of the Rocking- 
 ham party, particularly to the Duke of Richmond; 
 who said, that as the Duke of Portland was pro- 
 vided for in Ireland, he himself had a better right 
 to be considered as the head of the Rockingham 
 party. But this was not acceptable to Mr. Burke; 
 for the Duke of Richmond was not sufficiently 
 under his guidance. At a meeting held soon after 
 at Earl Fitzwilliam's, Mr. Burke used such coarse 
 language respecting the Earl of Shelburne, that in- 
 tercourse, even in appearance friendly, could no 
 longer exist between the parties. The Earl of 
 Shelburne was made First Lord of the Treasury, 
 and the Rockinghams resigned their employ- 
 ments. The Earl of Shelburne then opened a 
 negotiation for peace, and at the close of that year, 
 or the beginning of the next, the peace was sign- 
 ed. This peace was certainly made against the 
 wishes of the King ; who, though he probably had 
 no desire to remove the Earl of Shelburne, deter- 
 mined to make that Noble Earl feel his displea- 
 sure. The household troops were therefore 
 ordered to express in Parliament their disappro- 
 bation of the peace. 
 
 About this time, a coalition had taken place 
 between Lord North and his friends on one side, 
 and Mr. Fox and his party on the other. This 
 coalition was very beneficial to Lord North ; for 
 it protected him from all future examination of 
 his conduct, in having carried on the American 
 war. It was beneficial to Mr. Fox, as it gave 
 
47 
 
 him the immediate support of the partizans ot 
 Lord North ; but it disgusted the country, and 
 excited that odium against Mr. Fox which many 
 years were scarcely sufficient to extinguish. The 
 King had not intended to remove the Earl of 
 Shelburne ; but that Noble Lord would not sub- 
 mit to the affront which the King had put on him. 
 He therefore resigned ; and the King, contrary to 
 his intentions, was under the necessity of placing 
 the Administration in the hands of the Coalition. 
 
 Let me here mention a little anecdote, which I 
 think does honour to Lord North ; because it 
 shows that he was sensible to kindness. In the 
 spring 1782, when Lord North resigned, the 
 King's resentment against him was so strong, 
 that he meant to withhold the pension, usually 
 granted to a prime Minister, on his retirement 
 from office. The Chancellor, Lord Thurlow, re- 
 presented to the King, that Lord North was not 
 opulent ; that his father was still living ; and that 
 his sons had spent a great deal of money. The 
 King answered, " Lord North is no friend of 
 mine." — " That may be, Sir," replied Lord 
 Thurlow, u bnt the world thinks otherwise ; and 
 your Majesty's character requires, that Lord 
 North should have the usual pension." The pen- 
 sion was granted. 
 
 On the Coalition coming into office in 1783, 
 Lord North accepted the employment of Secreta- 
 ry of State for the Home Department. Charles 
 Fox had determined that Lord Thurlow should 
 
48 
 
 not retain the great seal, and the King was obli- 
 ed to submit. Lord North, as Secretary of State 
 for the Home Department, received orders io 
 write to Lord Thurlow, signifying his dismission 
 from the post of Chancellor. He refused to obey 
 these orders, and assigned this reason, " When I 
 retired from office in 1782, Lord Thurlow was 
 the man who prevented my retreat from being in- 
 convenient to me ; shall the first act of my return 
 to office be to give Lord Thurlow pain? I will 
 not do it." Lord North's refusal was sufficiently 
 amusing to the King, who had a right to say, 
 " While I keep Secretaries I am not bound to 
 write my own letters." Lord North persevered; 
 and after a delay of several days, Charles Fox, 
 though it was not in his department, was obliged 
 to write the letter. 
 
 The Coalition ultimately proved beneficial to 
 the King himself ; for the abuse of that power 
 which the Coalitionists had acquired, produced 
 an oblivion of the miseries which the King had 
 brought on the country by the American war. 
 
 The feeble mind of the Duke of Portland, the 
 indolence of Lord North, and the yielding tem- 
 per of Charles Fox, accustomed to rely on Mr. 
 Burke on political subjects, all concurred to give 
 to Mr. Burke the direction of public affairs. The 
 peace had been made, but nothing was done for 
 the relief of the people. Almost at the outset of 
 this Administration, in the business of Powell and 
 Bembridge, Mr. Burke had very nearly run the 
 
49 
 
 Coalition Ministers aground. Charles Fox saw the 
 necessity of stopping him, and the embarrassment 
 was removed. But India was the great object 
 of Mr. Burke's attention. It was in India that 
 he looked for power to his party, and opulence 
 for himself and his family. Having used this ex- 
 pression, his family, I think it necessary to men- 
 tion an anecdote, which I know only from the re- 
 lation of others, but which I believe to be true. 
 
 Soon after Mr. Edmund Burke became a poli- 
 tical character, he, and his cousin William Burke, 
 embarked in a speculation in Indiar stock. They 
 prevailed on many of their friends to join them, 
 among others, on Earl Verney, who fell a victim 
 to this connexion. They used much solicitation 
 with Sir Joshua Reynolds to join them, but he was 
 dissuaded from it by Anthony Chamier, for which 
 Anthony Chamier, as he told me himself, was 
 never forgiven by the Burkes. This speculation 
 was at first extremely successful, but at last it 
 failed. William Burke, and Lord Verney, were 
 announced as the defaulters; and Edmund Burke's 
 name was concealed. William Burke was sent to 
 India, and a situation at the Court of the Rajah of 
 Tanjore obtained for him. Other advantages in 
 India were also obtained for this gentleman. 
 
 When the Coalition came into power, Mr. 
 Burke saw that much strength might be acquired 
 for his party, by the seizure of India patronage. 
 With this view Charles Fox was employed to 
 
 e 2 
 
so 
 
 bring in the India Bill, generally known by the 
 the name of Fox's India Bill. But I am firmlv 
 persuaded that Mr. Fox had nothing to do with the 
 formation of this Bill. It was prepared by Mr. 
 Edmund Burke, whose only assistant in it was 
 Mr. Pigot, afterwards Sir Arthur Pigot. Mr. 
 Lee, at that time Attorney General, and Sir James 
 Mansfield, at tha£.time Solicitor General, both as- 
 sured me, that they never saw the Bill, until it 
 was printed for the use of the House of Com- 
 mons. They doubted whether Charles Fox him- 
 self had seen the Bill, before the essential parts of 
 it had been completely arranged by Mr. Burke. 
 Lord North certainly did not see it until the Bill 
 was completed ; and when it was shown him, he 
 said with his usual pleasantry and sagacity, "that 
 he thought it a good receipt to knock up an Ad- 
 ministration." But he supported it in the House 
 of Commons. 
 
 The great object of this Bill was to vest, for 
 a certain number of years, the patronage of the 
 India Company in fifteen directors, to be nomi- 
 nated by Parliament ; in other words, to be nomi- 
 nated by those gentlemen who were at that time 
 the King's Ministers. Had the bill passed, those 
 who were then Ministers would have been almost 
 irremoveable ; for who would have ventured to 
 become the King's Ministers, when those who 
 retired from office, would have carried with them 
 the patronage of India? I know not how it hap- 
 pened, but this circumstance, which was really 
 
51 
 
 the great objection to the Bill, was very little ar- 
 gued in the House of Commons. The language 
 chiefly used was, that it was a confiscation of pro- 
 perty, and a violation of the India Company's 
 chartered rights. But the political objections I 
 have alluded to, operated with those who reflected 
 more deeply. The King had the sagacity to see, 
 that the existence of his power depended on the 
 rejection of the Bill. The household troops were 
 brought forward, and the Bill was rejected in the 
 House of Lords. I feel myself bound to acknow- 
 ledge, that while this Bill was depending in the 
 House of Commons, I did not feel the effects which 
 it would have produced, if passed into an Act. I 
 voted for the Bill. Gratitude to those who had 
 terminated the American war, perhaps an opinion 
 that the King's character required that he should 
 be controlled by a strong Administration, led me 
 to listen to no objections. But I rejoice that the 
 Bill did not pass. Royalty might have been re- 
 duced to an insignificance highly injurious to the 
 people. 
 
 On the removal of the Coalition, the King ap- 
 pointed Mr. Pitt First Lord of the Treasury. His 
 acceptance of office was a very bold measure, for 
 he had against him a most formidable opposition 
 in the House of Commons, conducted by leaders, 
 whom he could not expect to find over- scrupulous 
 in the means they would employ. And although 
 the coalition of Mr. Fox with Lord North had 
 much diminished the popularity of the former, yet 
 
52 
 
 it was not certain that the people would declare 
 for the King, against the Whig party. There 
 certainly were moments, in which it was doubted, 
 whether it would not be most advisable that Mr. 
 Pitt should resign. In one of these moments, 
 Mr. Grosvenor, member for Chester, called to- 
 gether the leaders of the two parties, at the St. 
 Alban's Tavern. The Duke of Portland had 
 objected, that he could not meet Mr. Pitt, while 
 he continued Minister; because the House of 
 Commons had resolved, that Mr. Pitt had come 
 into office under such circumstances as precluded 
 them from placing confidence in him. To obvi- 
 ate this objection, it was arranged that the King 
 should write a letter to the Duke of Portland, re- 
 questing him to meet Mr. Pitt for the purpose of 
 forming an Administration; and the Duke con- 
 sented to consider such a letter as tantamount to 
 a declaration, that Mr. Pitt was no longer Minis- 
 ter. In consequence of this, Mr. Pitt wrote a 
 letter to the Duke of Portland, in which he said, 
 he was ready to meet His Grace to arrange an 
 Administration on fair and equal terms. 
 
 The morning on which this letter was to be 
 considered, Mr. Fox could not be brought from 
 St. Anne's HilL From this circumstance Mr. 
 Edmund Burke had alone the direction of the 
 Duke of Portland, and he prevailed on the Duke 
 to write an answer to Mr. Pitt, requesting an ex- 
 planation of the expression, '•' Fair and equal 
 terms/' This occasioned delay; the courage of 
 
53 
 
 Mr. Pitt and his friends revived, and they broke 
 oft* the negotiation. Mr. Pitt afterwards said in 
 the House of Commons, that when he was called 
 on to explain what he meant by the expression, 
 11 Fair and equal terms," he took it for granted, 
 that the Duke of Portland and his friends intend- 
 ed that the arrangements should not be made on 
 fair and equal terms. I mention this anecdote, 
 as another instance how often little circumstances 
 influence important events. Had Mr. Fox been 
 present, his good sense would have pointed out to 
 bim the advantage of closing with Mr. Pitt, al- 
 most on any terms. He must have been sensible 
 that he could not long continue in the position 
 which he then held. He must « have seen that 
 Lord North's partisans were every day deserting 
 him ; and that those who remained, were not ac- 
 customed to bear the privations of an opposition 
 camp. A coalition with Mr. Pitt and the King's 
 friends, would have jumbled all parties together. 
 It would have relieved Mr. Fox from the odium 
 which he had incurred by his union with Lord 
 North; perhaps it might even in some degree 
 have conciliated the King, who was very uneasy 
 at the continuance of the contest. All these ad- 
 vantages were lost by Mr. Fox not choosing to 
 come to town from St. Anne's Hill. 
 
 In the month of March 1784, Mr. Pitt dissolv- 
 ed the Parliament. The elections were every- 
 where favourable to him; and in the new Parlia- 
 ment Mr. Pitt had a decided majority. 
 
54 
 
 I will here close my chronological recollections. 
 Whatever other remarks I may make, they shall 
 be on subjects as they happen to recur to me, 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 From the Meeting of Parliament in March 1784, 
 to the Commencement of the French Revolution 
 inJuhj 1789, 
 
 In 1786, Mr. Pitt established the Sinking 
 Fund. While this measure was coupled with the 
 pacific system, it was extremely beneficial to the 
 country. It raised the funds ; it increased the va- 
 lue of land, and of every thing else; in one word, 
 it gave to every man the prosperity of a rising 
 market. But when the pacific system was aban- 
 doned, the measure became injurious, because it 
 enabled the Minister to increase the national debt 
 with more rapidity. 
 
 Another measure which Mr. Pitt brought for- 
 ward soon after, was a commercial treaty with 
 France. This measure was also highly benefi- 
 cial. I have always considered the Methuen 
 Treaty with Portugal as injudicious. At the time 
 when it was made, viz. 1703, there were circum- 
 stances which might perhaps have rendered it ad- 
 visable* but the perseverance in it has been un- 
 
55 
 
 wise. To form a correct opinion on this subject, 
 it is necessary to look back to the commercial 
 state of Europe in the seventeenth century. At 
 the commencement of that century, Holland pos- 
 sessed the East India Trade, the fisheries, and 
 the carrying tracte of Europe. France was the 
 principal manufacturing country. England had 
 neither fisheries, nor the carrying trade, nor the 
 East India trade, nor the West India trade, nor 
 any colonies of importance; she had hardly any 
 manufacture for exportation, except that of wool. 
 She had neither the silk manufacture, nor the 
 linen, nor the cotton, nor the hardware. Until 
 after the great rebellion in 1641, England could 
 scarcely be considered as a commercial State. 
 Oliver Cromwell destroyed the freight trade of 
 Holland, by the Navigation Act. The fisheries of 
 Holland were ruined by other circumstances; 
 first, from a considerable part of Europe having 
 become Protestant, and relinquished the observe 
 ance of fast- days; secondly, from the improve- 
 ments in agriculture, which furnished men with 
 other animal food than fish during the winter sea- 
 son ; thirdly, from the establishment of the cod 
 fishery on the banks of Newfoundland. The cod 
 being a large fish, retains the quality of animal 
 food, though it has been a long while salted; 
 while the small size of the herring renders it in 
 a short time a mere lump of salt. These circum- 
 stances have ruined the Dutch fishery. When 
 we read in Sir William Temple's works, that the 
 
$6 
 
 Dutch employed three thousand vessels in the 
 herring fishery, we hardly credit it ; but other au- 
 thors of that period give the same account. 
 
 The French were at this time the principal ma- 
 nufacturers of Europe. In Sir William Temple's 
 account of what passed between himself and the 
 Dutch Ministers, while he was negotiating the 
 Commercial Treaty with Holland in 1668, he tells 
 us, that one of the Dutch Commissioners propo- 
 sed, that England and Holland should confede- 
 rate, not to consume the manufactures of France ; 
 and then, added the Dutch Commissioner, France 
 will soon die of a consumption. But the Grand 
 Pensionary, De Witt, would not listen to the sug- 
 gestion. Perhaps he had little reliance either on 
 the steadiness or good faith of Charles II. And 
 he recollected the assistance which France had 
 given to Holland, during the early struggles of 
 that republic. It is a little curious that Buona- 
 parte should have thought of the same means for 
 destroying our opulence as had occurred to the 
 Dutch Statesman in 1668. When we relinquish- 
 ed the consumption of French wines, and took in 
 exchange the wine of Portugal, we exchanged 
 commerce with twenty millions of industrious, 
 opulent, and therefore much consuming people, 
 for commerce with two millions of idle, poor, and 
 consequently but little consuming people. As 
 we have ourselves no growth of wine, we confer 
 a considerable benefit on that nation from which 
 we take our wine ; and it must be our object that 
 
57 
 
 the wine which we consume should be paid foi 
 in our manufactures. I doubt whether Portugal 
 takes manufactures from us to the value of the 
 wine which we take from her. I consider the 
 Brazil trade as distinct from the trade with 
 Portugal. 
 
 When the Methuen Treaty was made, it was 
 our object to excite every nation in Europe against 
 the Bourbons. But I doubt the w r isdom of per- 
 severing in this measure. If we took our wines 
 and brandies from France, she would be under 
 the necessty of taking large quantities of our 
 manufactures in return. But there is another cir- 
 cumstance which deserves consideration : if we 
 took wines and brandies from France, it would be 
 extremely inconvenient to France to be at war 
 with England : a large proportion of her popula- 
 tion would be distressed by such a war ; for wine 
 and brandy are not only a manufacture in France, 
 the growth of wine affects a great part of her agri- 
 culture. The principle of the commercial treaty 
 with France was judicious. I regret that it could 
 not have been extended further; but perhaps the 
 jealousy of the mercantile interest in England ren- 
 dered such an extension impracticable. 
 
 The great political measure of 1787 was the 
 invasion of Holland by a Prussian army, with the 
 concurrence of the British Government. The 
 measure was attended with success : the expense 
 to England amounted to no more thon 550,000/. 
 and it was applauded by the Opposition, which 
 
 F 
 
58 
 
 had at that time as its leader a member of the 
 Bentinck family. But I doubt the wisdom of 
 this measure ; it was extremely perilous ; and if 
 the influence which Austria at that time possessed 
 in the French cabinet had not induced that go- 
 vernment to neglect its obvious interests, it must 
 have been followed by a general war, the burden 
 of which would have fallen upon England. 
 
 During the latter part of the contest with Ame- 
 rica, those who were eager for continuing the war 
 had chosen to commence hostilities against Hol- 
 land : perhaps they had resolved on this from a 
 reliance on their influence over the Stadtholder. 
 In this reliance they were not disappointed : he 
 betrayed his masters, and kept their fleets unem- 
 ployed. On the re-establishment of peace, the 
 Dutch felt strong resentment against the Stadt- 
 holder, and put some affronts upon him ; it would 
 have been wise in him to have submitted for a 
 time to those humiliations ; the displeasure of the 
 Dutch nation would have gradually subsided : 
 but this did not suit the proud imperious mind of 
 the Stadtholder's wife. She was sister to the 
 King of Prussia, and had been educated in senti- 
 ments ill suited to a republic. Under the direc- 
 tion of Lord Malmsbury, the British minister at 
 the Hague, a Prussian army invaded Holland. It 
 is true they succeeded, but their robberies and 
 plunder have never been forgotten by the Dutch; 
 the remembrance of them destroyed all affection 
 of the Dutch people to the family of the Stadt- 
 
59 
 
 holder. The invasion of the Prussian army pro- 
 duced another bad consequence : it showed how 
 easily Holland might be over-run ; it destroyed 
 her strength by destroying her reputation for 
 strength. 
 
 In the autumn 1788, King George III. was, 
 for the first time, afflicted with that malady which 
 became constant during the last ten years of his 
 life. I shall speak on this subject with much re- 
 luctance, because I am aware that my opinions 
 are not the same with those of the generality of 
 my countrymen. I love the magistracy of roy- 
 alty, because I think it highly beneficial to the 
 people : it protects them from the usurpation of 
 oligarchs, a government, of all others, the most 
 oppressive. Oligarchy is also the government 
 which Englishmen have the most reason to fear, 
 for the proprietors and patrons of boroughs have 
 already usurped a power which the law has for- 
 bid them to possess ; if they are allowed to extend 
 that power a little further, royalty, a house of 
 lords, and a house of commons, may remain as 
 splendid pageants, but the real efficient power 
 w ill be in that usurping oligarchy, the patrons and 
 proprietors of boroughs. I love royalty as a ma- 
 gistracy, not as a property. With these senti- 
 ments, I acknowledge that I thought that after 
 the King's first seizure he should never have been 
 allowed to exercise the powers of royalty. Let me 
 suppose that a chief justice of the King's Bench 
 were afflicted with the same disease, and for the 
 
60 
 
 same period ; would any man think that he ought 
 to be replaced in the exercise of his office ? Yet 
 surely the judicious exercise of the magistracy of 
 royalty is of more importance to the country than 
 the judicious exercise of the powers of a chief jus- 
 tice. But these sentiments are no longer fashion- 
 able ; German principles have now brought us to 
 consider royalty as property. 
 
 I think the interregnum which took place du- 
 ring the King's illness was highly injurious to the 
 country. I think the same of Mr. Pitt's proposal 
 to establish regency in the Prince of Wales with 
 curtailed prerogatives. I regret that the minds of 
 Englishmen have been accustomed to the idea ; 
 I fear that mischief may hereafter follow from it. 
 But I will have done with reflections which I know 
 will be odious : I will now speak of the matter 
 historically. 
 
 Mr. Fox was out of England when the King 
 was taken ill : Lord Thurlow, the Chancellor, 
 availed himself of this circumstance; he studious- 
 ly sought intercourse with the Prince of Wales, 
 that he might have an opportunity of conveying 
 to him his sentiments on His Royal Highnesses 
 situation. He recommended to him to lie upon 
 his oars, to show no impatience to assume the 
 powers of royalty. He pointed out to him, that, if the 
 King's illness were of any considerable duration, 
 the regency must necessarily devolve on him. I 
 believe Lord Thurlow and Mr. Pitt were not at 
 that time on the best terms : Mr. Pitt's conduct 
 
61 
 
 in the prosecution of Mr. Hastings had been dis- 
 approved of by Lord Thurlow, and this disappro- 
 bation ultimately produced an ill humour which 
 occasioned a separation ; but this ill humour had 
 not at that time risen to such a height, as to pre- 
 vent amicable intercourse between them ; and I 
 have very little doubt but that if the Prince of 
 Wales had listened to Lord Thurlow, the mea- 
 sures recommended by Mr. Pitt and the Chan- 
 cellor would have been the same. But Mr. Fox 
 returned from abroad ; the Prince gave himself 
 up to his guidance : the injudicious advice of Lord 
 Loughborough, the incautious language of Charles 
 Fox, and the folly and arrogance of Mr. Burke 
 and others, brought Mr. Pitt to declare, that aL 
 though the regency should be vested in the Prince 
 of Wales, it should be vested in him with dimi 
 nished powers. 
 
 1 know the Chancellor, Lord Thurlow, has 
 been much abused for his conduct on this occa- 
 sion ; some members of the Opposition have gone 
 so far as to say that he would have acted against 
 the opinion of Mr. Pitt, if the Opposition would 
 have engaged to continue him in the office of 
 Chancellor : but I do not believe this assertion to 
 be true. Trimming was not congenial to the 
 character of Lord Thurlow. If such a negotia- 
 tion had ever taken place between Lord Thurlow 
 and the Opposition, Mr: Fox must have been 
 privy to it : I never heard it intimated by him, 
 and I think I should have heard it intimated if 
 
 f 2 
 
62 
 
 such a negotiation ever had existed ; for, after my 
 return to the House of Commons in 1796, 1 had, 
 at different times, much confidential intercourse 
 with Charles Fox, and the subject of the regency 
 was frequently mentioned. I believe that Lord 
 Thurlow acted with great integrity : he once told 
 me that if it had been ultimately necessary to pass 
 the Regency Bill framed by Mr. Pitt, he should 
 have acceded to it with great reluctance. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Causes of the French Revolution. 
 
 The French Revolution took place in the 
 month of July 1789. I date its commencement 
 from the day on which the Etats Generaux voted 
 themselves to be the National Assembly, and 
 Louis XVI. accepted royalty under the form of 
 government then voted. The causes which led 
 to the French Revolution were many and va- 
 rious ; they have been differently stated, accord- 
 ing to the passions and interests of the different 
 parties ; but people are now beginning to view 
 them calmly, and, when the passions of those who 
 have been involved in the contest have a little 
 more subsided, we shall be able to see them 
 distinctly. 
 
63 
 
 I have said that the causes which gradually 
 operated to produce the French Revolution were 
 many ; I will endeavour to enumerate them as 
 succinctly as I can : I shall distinguish them as 
 principal and as secondary. I consider those 
 causes as principal which must, at some time or 
 other, have necessarily produced a revolution ; 
 while I shall call those causes secondary which 
 only accelerated it. Among the principal causes, 
 I shall give the first place to the distinction of 
 noblesse and bourgeoisie. How or when this dis- 
 tinction arose, it is difficult to say : Did the Franks 
 bring it with them when they took possession of 
 lands in France ? or was it introduced at a later 
 period in French history ? It does not seem to 
 have been a necessary consequence of the feudal 
 tenure. Tacitus, in his most valuable treatise, 
 De Moribus Germanorum, has this expres- 
 sion, lieges ex Nobilitate sutnant. If the Ger- 
 mans elected their kings from among the nobles, 
 the distinction of noble, and ignoble, must have 
 existed before the Franks quitted their native soil. 
 Bui the question carries us back to such remote 
 ages, that I will not pretend to form an opinion on 
 the subject. If this supposition is well founded, 
 it is probable that the nobles among the German 
 tribes were few in number, that they were not 
 numerous originally in France, and that they did 
 not possess those privileges and preferences which 
 rendered the distinction so disgusting at the pe- 
 riod immediately preceding the Revolution. The 
 
64 
 
 French lawyers do not recognise more than two 
 or three hundred families as being of this ancient 
 nobility, and they distinguish these families by 
 the name of Les Families Historiques ; the rest 
 of the French nobles obtained the distinction at 
 different periods, either by grant or by purchase ; 
 but by what ever means they obtained this dis- 
 tinction of noblesse, they were permitted to enjoy 
 the same preferences as had been allowed to the 
 more ancient nobles. At what time the kings of 
 France first assumed the right of granting no- 
 blesse, I cannot say. But from granting, they 
 deviated into the practice of selling it ; and from 
 thence gradually established, that noblesse should 
 always accompany certain employments which 
 they conferred. It is probable, that at first the 
 sale of noblesse was not very frequent. It became 
 more frequent in the reign of Louis XIV. ; and 
 the practice had been so much increased during 
 the reign of Louis XV. that, a few years before 
 the Revolution, it was computed that there were 
 four thousand employments purchasable, every 
 one of which gave noblesse. These nobles by 
 purchase enjoyed all the privileges of the ancient 
 noblesse ; they were exempt from taille, corvees, 
 &c. &c. These exemptions from taxes increased 
 the burdens on those who were not noble : for 
 example, if a hundred thousand francs were to be 
 raised by taille on a district, and half the lands 
 in that district belonged to nobles, the nobles were 
 exempt, but the king was not to lose his revenue ; 
 
the whole sum, therefore, was to be raised on 
 those proprietors who were not noble. I do not 
 know whether the same rule extended to corvees 
 and the other taxes from which the nobles were 
 exempt. 
 
 But there was another circumstance still more 
 offensive to the bourgeoisie. The nobles had al- 
 ways claimed a preference for advancement in the 
 army, the navy, the church, and the parliaments. 
 About the middle of the reign of Louis XV. the 
 Minister of War represented to the King, that 
 the nobles were become so numerous, that if com- 
 missions in the army and the navy were not kept 
 exclusively for them, they must starve, as their 
 rank prevented them from entering into com- 
 merce, or from becoming advocates or physicians. 
 On this representation a rule was adopted, that 
 no man should receive a commission in the army, 
 except he could produce proofs of noblesse ; and 
 I believe that although this rule might sometimes 
 be relaxed as to lieutenants, it was always observ- 
 ed in respect to those who were raised to the rank 
 of captains. I have also heard that this rule was 
 not observed in the ten regiments of artillery : in 
 the artillery they began as cadets, and the educa- 
 tion was so severe, that the nobles were unwilling 
 to enter into that service. I believe the same rule 
 was soon after adopted respecting admissions into 
 their parliaments: probably the same rule existed 
 as to advancement to elevated stations in the 
 church: for I recollect, that, diniog one day at a 
 
66 
 
 French nobleman's, in company with an ecclesias- 
 tic, whom I saw to be of some consequence; after 
 he had retired I asked the nobleman if that ecclesi- 
 astic were noble : " Certainly," said he, " did I not 
 tell you that he was abbot of such an abbey?" 
 On which I said, " why, are all abbots noble V f 
 He replied, " I do not know that there is any law 
 which prevents men who are not noble from be- 
 coming abbots; but it never happens that abbeys 
 are conferred on those who are not noble." These 
 circumstances contributed much to render the dis- 
 tinction of noblesse more odious to the rest of the 
 nation; such exclusive preference must at all times 
 have been offensive ; but the disgust was increased 
 as the nobles became more numerous, and the 
 bourgeoisie more opulent and intelligent : in fact, 
 this distinction divided the nation into two parts. 
 The bourgeoisie felt themselves a degraded class. 
 Observing men perceived the increase of this dis- 
 gust. About the time of the commercial treaty 
 between England and France, Mons. de Ver- 
 gennes, then Minister of France, remarked to a 
 French friend of mine, that France was become 
 
 i commercial. Mons. de Vergennes probably 
 wished to keep France in the same state in which 
 it had been during the reigns of Louis XIV. and 
 Louis XV.; and saw that the increasing opulence 
 of France, in consequence of its commerce, would 
 render the distinction of noblesse intolerable. 
 
 I have no hesitation in Assigning to this dis- 
 tinction of nob ind bourgeoisie the first place 
 
among the principal causes of the French Revo- 
 lution. 
 
 I rank feudal burdens as the second principal 
 cause. France, like most of the other European 
 governments, was originally a feudal state. 
 
 In feudal govern mens, the burdens imposed on 
 the military vassals were so heavy, that there was 
 little room for further taxation. My knowledge 
 of feudal governments is chiefly drawn from the 
 English law. In England, I believe, few taxes 
 were imposed on those who held by military ser- 
 vice, before the reign of Henry II. That mo- 
 narch made a great change in the feudal govern- 
 ment, by substituting, under the name of escuage, 
 a money payment in lieu of military service. Per- 
 haps this change was at first convenient to the 
 military tenant; but the demand of this escuage 
 was so frequently renewed, that the payment in 
 time became oppressive, and the vassals of the 
 Crown compelled the King to consent, that the 
 sum to be paid under the name of escuage, should 
 be fixed by Parliament. Sir Edward Coke says, 
 that those who held by knight's service were ex- 
 empt from tallium, or taille ; but those who held 
 by other services seem to have been always liable 
 to money payments, under the name of tallages. 
 It was gradually established, that all money pay- 
 ments demanded from the people should be fixed 
 by Parliament. The clergy were exempt from 
 this rule : they voted their taxes in convocation. 
 Perhaps the claim of the House of Commons, that 
 
68 
 
 all taxes should originate with them, arose from 
 this circumstance, that the principal grants of mo- 
 ney were tallages, from which the military tenants 
 were exempt. It was therefore reasonable that 
 the Commons should fix what they were able to 
 pay, and the military tenants retain only the right 
 of dissenting. 
 
 As Edward I. was the first of our monarchs 
 who preserved our records, all conjectures in res- 
 pect to taxation, after the Conquest until the reign 
 of Edward I. must be very hazardous. The 
 Parliaments, under our early Norman Kings, con- 
 sisted, most probably, only of bishops, mitred 
 abbots, priors, and the great military vassals. In 
 the time of Henry III. a considerable change 
 seems to have been made in the nature of Parlia- 
 ments. Bodies of the commonalty were autho- 
 rized by the King's writ to send representatives to 
 that assembly : it is doubtful whether the Earl of 
 Leicester or the King first introduced this practice. 
 The idea that bodies of the commonalty should 
 send representatives to Parliament was probably 
 adopted from the right which had been allowed 
 to the mitred abbots and priors: these men sat in 
 Parliament as representatives of aggregate bodies 
 ofe sties: if the representative of an aggre- 
 
 gate body of ecclesiastic i might with propriety bit 
 in Parliament, there was no reason why the r pre- 
 sentative of an bodj of the commonalty 
 
 Ju not sit there. But whoever first introdu d 
 the practice, king! soon saw the advantage they 
 
69 
 
 could derive from it; they saw that these repre- 
 sentatives of bodies of the commonalty would 
 support them against their powerful vassals, and 
 they selected for the exercise of this right those 
 boroughs which were most dependent on them- 
 selves. It is on this ground that I account for so 
 many members of the House of Commons being 
 sent by Cornish boroughs. During the reign of 
 Henry III. his brother Richard, king of the Ro- 
 mans, was Earl of Cornwall ; on the death of Ri- 
 chard, his only son Edmund became Earl of 
 Cornwall, and he dying without issue in the 28th 
 of Edward I. that earldom escheated to the 
 crown. The earldom of Cornwall has therefore 
 belonged to the royal family from the earliest 
 period at which representatives from bodies of the 
 commonalty have been sent to Parliament. My 
 opinion on this subject is confirmed, from observ- 
 ing how many other towns, out of the county, 
 but within the earldom of Cornwall, or, as it is 
 now called, the duchy, have been summoned to 
 send representatives to Parliament. I will enu- 
 merate them : Plymouth, Plympton, Dartmouth, 
 Totness, Oakhampton, Berealston, Tavistock, 
 Ashburton; to which may be added Newton Bu- 
 shel, which formerly sent members: all these bo- 
 roughs, though out of the county, were within 
 the domains of the Earls of Cornwall. 
 
 I know it has been said, that these towns in 
 Cornwall and Devon might formerly have been 
 places of great trade ; but whoever is acquainted 
 
70 
 
 With the county of Cornwall must see that this 
 supposition is ill founded. Why did the borough 
 of Tregony send members to Parliament as early 
 as the reign of Edward I. while the city of West- 
 minster sent no members till the reign of Edward 
 VI. ? The reason is obvious : Tregony was a 
 small town dependent on the Earls of Cornwall ; 
 while the city of Westminster, until the Reforma- 
 tion, was under the influence of the great Abbot 
 of Westminster. I think this opinion is strength- 
 ened by another fact mentioned in English his- 
 tory. The first occasion on which the represen- 
 tatives of the Commons appear to have been 
 brought forward was in support of the King's pow- 
 er. Henry III. had confiscated the estates of the 
 Bishop of Winchester by Act of Parliament. 
 The Pope wrote a letter to the King and Parlia- 
 ment, signifying that he would excommunicate 
 them if they did not restore to the Bishop his pro- 
 perty. The King and the Lords answered this 
 letter with great humility : they said that they 
 were very willing to comply with His Holiness's 
 wishes, but that the representatives of the Com- 
 mons refused to concur. If the histories of other 
 European nations arc examined, I believe the 
 same cause will have been found every where to 
 have operated to occasion representatives from 
 bodies of the commonalty to be sent to the states 
 of those countries, viz. to support the Kingagainst 
 the power of his great vassals. 
 
 I have deviated to this short view of the Eng- 
 
71 
 
 lish Government, because I think that, in those 
 distant times, the principles of government in 
 England and in France were very nearly the 
 same. Until the reign of Charles VII. King of 
 France, I believe taxes were always imposed in 
 France by the Etats Generaux. On the acces- 
 sion of that Prince, he found the English and the 
 Burgundians in possession of the greater part of 
 his dominions : it was, therefore, out of his power 
 to assemble the Etats Generaux ; yet money was 
 necessary. He imposed taxes by his sole autho- 
 rity ; and those who were attached to him sub- 
 mitted to the innovation, because they saw that 
 the situation of the King required them to acqui- 
 esce. As it was necessary that the$e taxes should 
 be made known to the people, he registered them 
 in his principal Court of Justice, the Parliament 
 of Paris : thence the usage in France, that taxes 
 should be imposed by the King's sole authority, 
 and registered in his Parliament. Charles VII. 
 introduced also another innovation : he raised a 
 regular army, which he kept constantly on foot. 
 Before that time, the armies of France, like those 
 of other feudal nations, had been composed of 
 military vassals, or of soldiers furnished by con- 
 tract ; but these were found unequal to the task 
 of expelling the English and Burgundians. From 
 the reign of Charles VII. we must date these two 
 great alterations, viz. taxes imposed by the King's 
 sole authority, and a standing army. Both usages 
 were uniformly persevered in till the time of the 
 Revolution. 
 
72 
 
 I rank the continuance of feudal burdens on 
 lands, and the power usurped by their Kings of 
 imposing taxes by their own sole authority, as 
 the second and third principal causes of the French 
 Revolution. Were I called on to say which of 
 the principal causes operated the most, I should 
 certainly say, hatred to the privileges and to the 
 distinctions of the Noblesse : I should give the 
 second place to the aversion to feudal burdens,. 
 F think the power which the King had usurped 
 of imposing taxes by his sole authority, had not 
 excited so much aversion as those circumstances 
 which I have above enumerated. The power 
 which the King had assumed of imposing taxes 
 by his own sole authority, w T as much checked by 
 the power which the Parliament claimed of refus- 
 ing to register those taxes ; and if the Parliament 
 of Paris had exercised with integrity the right 
 which they had acquired of registering edicts for 
 taxes, perhaps the disuse of taxation by the Etats 
 Generaux might have been tolerated. But the 
 Parliament exercised this power dishonestly ; they 
 employed it for no other purpose than that of pro- 
 tecting the Nobles from the payment of taxes, 
 thereby throwing most intolerable burdens on 
 those who were not of the order of Noblesse. 
 The exemptions might have been tolerable while 
 there were only two hundred families who claim- 
 ed them ; but when by sale, or improvident grants, 
 these families were augmented to thirty thousand, 
 the distinction could no longer be endured : the 
 abolition of privileges became necessary. 
 
73 
 
 I consider the fourth principal cause to have 
 been the general wish which prevailed to destroy 
 the power and wealth of the Church. Perhaps 
 the Reformation took place at an earlier period in 
 England than in France, in consequence of the 
 opulence of the Clergy having been so much 
 greater in the one country than in the other. There 
 had been some little diminution of Church 
 property in England by the confiscation of the 
 property of the alien priories in the time of Henry 
 V. ; but the wealth of the Church remained so 
 great, that when the Reformation took place in 
 the reign of Henry VIII, the people saw the con- 
 fiscation of Church property with pleasure. 
 
 I cannot, in compliance with the opinions of 
 French Royalists, rank the writings of the philo- 
 sophers as a principal cause • but' I will so far ac- 
 quiesce in their opinions as to admit that these 
 writings may have accelerated the Revolution, 
 and I will therefore place them among the secon- 
 dary causes : for what were these writings ? In 
 fact, they were only efforts to bring the people 
 to feel, that the finest country in Europe was 
 kept in a degraded state, in consequence of the 
 existence of these abuses. I have said, the finest 
 country in Europe. I will ask any man, who is 
 well acquainted with France, whether in point of 
 soil, of climate, variety of valuable productions, 
 and the advantage of local situation, there is any 
 country in Europe superior to it? If France, 
 therefore, at the time of the Revolution, was in- 
 
 c2 
 
ferior to any other country in Europe, it must 
 have been owing to faults existing in her govern- 
 ment. In one word, the unimproved state of 
 France was the consequence of that feudalism 
 which had been suffered to remain after the 
 causes which had given birth to it had ceased to 
 exist. 
 
 Perhaps other causes, which led to the Revolu- 
 tion, might be considered as principal ; but for the 
 present I will content myself with those which I 
 have enumerated. I will now mention some other 
 secondary causes. I consider the policy of Louis 
 XIV. in bringing all the French Nobility to at- 
 tend his Court, as having contributed to the Re- 
 volution. The feudal lord is the oppressor of his 
 vassals ; but he sometimes confers kindnesses on 
 them. When he was removed from the country 
 to the court, he was known to his vassals only 
 through his agents : oppressions were continued, 
 and kindnesses withdrawn. The heavy taxes, 
 imposed in consequence of the unnecessary wars 
 of Louis XIV. had rendered France more sensi- 
 ble of her grievances, and more disposed to inno- 
 vation. 
 
 Before the French Revolution, half the land in 
 France was either occupied by Ma itres- valets or 
 Metayers. If by the first, the land must be con- 
 sidered as in the occupation of the proprietor him- 
 self ; if occupied by Metayers, they paid their 
 rent in a moiety of the produce. In either case, 
 the residence of the Lord at Versailles must ne- 
 
75 
 
 cessarily have diminished the produce. It is ad- 
 mitted, even by zealous ultra-royalists, that the 
 lands in France at this time produce one third 
 more than they did before the Revolution ; and 
 that this is the consequence of the lands being 
 either cultivated by the proprietor himself, or un- 
 der his immediate inspection. 
 
 Among the secondary causes which led to the 
 French Revolution, I place the treaty of alilance 
 between France and Austria, about the beginning 
 of the year 1756. The Duke de Choiseuil was 
 the adviser of this treaty : he was a native of Lor- 
 raine, and as such was by birth a subject of the 
 new House of Lorraine-i\ustria. This treaty was 
 very beneficial to Austria ; for it not only secured 
 to her the quiet possession of the Netherlands, 
 but left her at full liberty to. pursue all her projects 
 of aggrandizement in Germany. But it was high- 
 ly injurious to France ; for it placed out of reach 
 the only power against which her army could 
 with propriety be employed. The diminution of 
 the army seemed a necessary consequence. Per- 
 haps a still more important consequence followed 
 it : perhaps from that time the army became less 
 the object of attention with the Crown. I am 
 aware that the reverse of this was the immediate 
 consequence ; that France sent an army into Ger- 
 many to support the views of Austria during the 
 seven years' war ; but when that war was termi- 
 nated, I believe that the consequences which I 
 have above stated actually took place. 
 
7G 
 
 If the French Ministers wished to preserve 
 France in the state in which she had existed dur- 
 ing the reigns of Louis XIV. and Louis XV. the 
 alliance with Austria was an unwise measure. I 
 will pause for a moment to consider the seven 
 years' war. 
 
 In this war France and England both acted 
 against their natural interests. The object of 
 Austria was the diminution of the power of Prus- 
 sia ; but it was the interest of France to support 
 the petty Princes of Germany, as the means of 
 preventing the aggrandizement of Austria. On 
 the other hand, it was the interest of England that 
 Austria should extinguish those petty Princes. 
 By possessing the sovereignty of the whole of 
 Germany, Austria would have been more able to 
 keep down the power of France ; and England 
 had herself nothing to fear from the power of Aus- 
 tria : but the Elector of Hanover had an interest 
 directly opposite to that of the King of Great Bri- 
 tain. As Elector of Hanover, it was his interest 
 to check the power of Austria, and to prevent her 
 from making new acquisitions in Germany. 
 France sacrificed her interest to her alliance with 
 Austria ; and England sacrificed to the views and 
 wishes of the Elector of Hanover. Bi.it this 
 treaty with Austria was afterwards followed by a 
 matrimonial alliance, which was productive of far 
 greater mischiefs to France than those which I 
 have now enumerated. 
 
 About 1768 Russia, the ally of Austria, attack- 
 
77 
 
 ed the Turks. Good policy would have indu 
 ced France to support the Turks, and to prevent 
 Russia from making new acquisitions on that side. 
 But the alliance with Austria restrained France 
 from acting agreeably to her obvious interests, 
 About 1772 Austria, Russia, and Prussia, form- 
 ed the plan of dismembering Poland. It was the 
 interest of France to prevent it ; and she had the 
 means of preventing it. If her armies had enter- 
 ed the Austrian Netherlands, the plan would have 
 been abandoned. In the beginning of the year 
 1778, Austria attempted to get possession of the 
 Electorate of Bavaria. Prussia and other Ger- 
 man Princes resisted this attempt. The interests 
 of France required her to assist those German 
 Princes ; instead of which, she paid no attention 
 to the German contest, but without any provoca- 
 tion commenced an unnecessary war with Eng- 
 land. As a principal in the treaty of Utrecht, 
 France may fairly be considered a guarantee that 
 the arrangements of that treaty should be observ- 
 ed. But she suffered the Emperor Joseph to vio- 
 late the rights secured to Holland by that treaty. 
 
 I place the Treaty of Alliance between France 
 and Austria in 1756, as one of those circumstan- 
 ces which accelerated the French Revolution. 
 The part which France took in the war between 
 England and her Colonies, I consider as another 
 cause. That contest necessarily produced, through 
 the whole of Europe, a discussion as to the rights 
 of governors and governed ; a discussion which 
 
78 
 
 governors ought to wish to avoid. France took 
 part with the governed. Her conduct encourag- 
 ed their claims ; and on the return of the French 
 army from America, both officers and soldiers were 
 actuated by a knowledge and love of liberty un- 
 known before that time in France. The discus- 
 sions produced by the American war, and the sen- 
 timents with which the French army returned 
 from America, had, I believe, more influence in 
 accelerating the Revolution, than all the publica- 
 tions of French philosophers antecedent to the 
 commencement of the American contest. I use 
 the expression accelerating, because the French 
 Revolution was the result of natural causes. 
 These I call principal ; while I consider those 
 which only accelerated as secondary causes. I 
 place the vacillating, unsteady mind of Louis XVI. 
 and the haughty imperious character of Marie 
 Antoinette, among the other secondary causes. 
 When Louis XVI. in July 1789, acknowledged 
 the Etats Generaux to be the National Assembly, 
 and consented to be King according to the Con- 
 stitution then established, he virtually relinquish- 
 ed those powers which had been exercised by 
 Louis XIV. and Louis XV. ; but the restless am- 
 bitious mind of Marie Antoinette, educated from 
 early years in the love of arbitrary power, and ab- 
 horrence of the principles of liberty, could never 
 abandon the wish of re establishing the ancien re- 
 gime. She influenced her husband to endeavour 
 to restore it ; and his struggles to effectuate her 
 
wishes, were a violation of that faith which he 
 had pledged when he accepted royalty under the 
 new constitution. 
 
 The ultra-royalists all consider the late Duke 
 of Orleans as having contributed in a very high 
 degree to the Revolution. I am not quite certain 
 that this opinion is well founded. He had un- 
 doubtedly strong resentments against the Queen, 
 who had done him great personal injuries; but I 
 cannot easily bring myself to believe that he wish- 
 ed to overturn that dynasty of which he was him- 
 self a member. It is said that he spent large 
 sums of money in exciting the people to insurrec- 
 tion, but there is no proof of this. He was an 
 avaricious man, and as such not likely to waste 
 his own money. I believe his property consisted 
 chiefly in land, and not in money. It must have 
 been difficult to convert this land into money, or 
 even to borrow a large sum upon it. There is no 
 proof that any sum of money was ever so raised s 
 if raised to a large amount, it must have been 
 known, and a small sum could have produced no 
 important effects. 
 
 I have heard the sensuality and crapulous life 
 of Louis XV. mentioned as having hastened the 
 French Revolution; but I doubt whether this 
 supposition is to any great degree well founded. 
 I travelled through a considerable part of France 
 in 1772, and I could no where discover that the 
 King was odious : on the contrary, it seemed to 
 me as if every Frenchman considered his own 
 
80 
 
 personal importance as connected with the glory 
 of Louis XV. The weight of taxes certainly 
 had an effect in bringing forward the revolution, 
 and these taxes had been in a great degree in- 
 creased by the wastefulness of the French court; 
 but when we consider the extent of France, her 
 productiveness in various valuable articles, her 
 local situation in the centre of Europe, the activity 
 and ingenuity of her inhabitants, and all her other 
 various advantages, we must acknowledge that 
 at the death of Louis XV. ample provision might 
 have been found for the payment of her taxes 
 without destroying the comfort of the people. 
 
 The Parliaments, at the death of Louis XV. 
 consisted wholly of Nobles. This was certainly 
 the case in respect of the Parliament of Paris, and 
 I believe was equally so with the other Parlia- 
 ments of France. At the commencement of the 
 French Revolution, the financial embarrassments 
 of France were certainly greater than they were at 
 the death of Louis XV. But even at that period 
 they might very easily have been removed, if the 
 Parliament of Paris would have acted with inte- 
 grity. Mons. de Calonne represented to the Par- 
 liament, that it was impossible to go on any long- 
 er with the practice of imposing taxes in such a 
 manner as that the Nobles should not be affected 
 by them. But the Parliament of Paris refused to 
 diminish in any degree that exemption from taxes 
 which the Nobles had been accustomed to enjoy. 
 They even had the folly as well as the injustice to 
 
81 
 
 vote an abstract resolution, that France was by its 
 nature taillable and corveable ; by which they in- 
 decently declared, that the taxes from which the 
 Nobles were exempt should be those by which a 
 large proportion of the public revenue should at 
 all times be raised. 
 
 Few people in England have taken the trouble 
 to inform themselves accurately of the construc- 
 tion and character of the Parliament of Paris. I 
 believe that assembly acted with integrity in de- 
 ciding causes between man and man. I have 
 formed this opinion from this circumstance, that 
 the French government could not corrupt the 
 Parliament of Paris ; and if the Government could 
 not corrupt it, it was not likely that an individual 
 would be able to corrupt it. But though the Par- 
 liament of Paris was honest in deciding causes 
 between man and man, it was very dishonest when- 
 ever the exemptions and privileges of the Noblesse 
 came in question. Its members were all of the 
 order of Noblesse. For the most part they pur- 
 chased their situations ; but they purchased gra- 
 dually, beginning with the lower situations; as 
 officers of the Guards do in England. I believe 
 it was as impracticable for a man to begin by 
 buying a high station in the French Parliament, 
 as it would be for an Englishman not in the army 
 to begin by purchasing a company in the Guards. 
 They made but a very moderate interest for the 
 money they employed in purchasing their situa- 
 tions : I have been told very rarely more than sitf 
 
 H 
 
82 
 
 per cent. Yet they devoted themselves to ac- 
 quire that knowledge which was necessary to en- 
 able them to discharge their functions. They 
 were paid for their trouble by the rank, power, 
 and consideration which their situations gave 
 them. I know that the Noblesse de FEpee af- 
 fected to look down on the Noblesse de la Robe ; 
 but the latter always preserved that consequence 
 which is the natural result of education and supe- 
 rior knowledge. When M. de Calonne found 
 that he could not prevail on the Parliament of 
 Paris to consent to a more equitable distribution 
 of the public burdens, he assembled the Notables; 
 but this assembly also was entirely composed of 
 Nobles, and M. de Calonne had no better suc- 
 cess with this assembly than he had had with the 
 Parliament of Paris : he was then under the neces- 
 sity of assembling the Etats Generaux. 
 
 I place the conduct of the Parliament of Paris 
 among the causes which most materially operated 
 to accelerate the Revolution. I rank among the 
 same causes the imbecility of M. Necker, both as 
 a financier and as a statesman. Perhaps I am 
 influenced in my opinion of M. Necker as a finan- 
 cier, from a little circumstance which happened 
 in the House of Commons. In one of the debates 
 which took place during the American war, Mr. 
 Burke insulted Lord North by remarking the dif- 
 ference of talents between M. Necker and him- 
 self: " M. Necker carries on the war without 
 imposing the usual war-taxes; while the Noble 
 
S3 
 
 Lord is every year coming to this House ibr new 
 burdens on the people of England." I remem- 
 ber Lord North's answer : " Yes, Sir, it is very 
 true M. Necker does carry on the war without 
 imposing those taxes which are usually imposed 
 in France during war; and the time will come 
 when France will bitterly regret what M. Necker 
 is now doing. He is creating an unfunded debt, 
 which must ultimately ruin the public credit of 
 France." It turned out as Lord North foretold. 
 The Parliament of Paris would not assist M. de 
 Calonne to provide for this unfunded debt; he 
 was forced to assemble the Etats Generaux; and 
 Revolution was the consequence. I know the 
 friends of M. Necker have said, that if he had 
 continued Minister till the conclusion of the war, 
 he would have funded this debt, and provided 
 for the payment of the interest. It is possible 
 that he might have been able to have done this; 
 but he did not remain Minister, and the mischie- 
 vous consequence took place. M. Necker would, 
 I believe, have been a very able premier Commis 
 for a great speculating bank ; but this is a situation 
 widely different from that of the financier of a great 
 nation. In this latter character, Lord North was 
 infinitely his superior. 
 
 I have said that M. Necker was also deficient 
 as a statesman. I think I am right. The idea 
 that his popularity would enable him to stand as 
 mediator between the National Assembly on one 
 side, and the Bourbons and the Noblesse on the 
 
84 
 
 other, was a notion which could never have enter- 
 ed into the head of any but the vainest and the 
 weakest of men. The National Assembly was 
 carried forward by the torrent of popular opinion. 
 If a Minister had been able to corrupt the majo- 
 rity of that assembly, yet he could not have stop- 
 ped the torrent. The Bourbons and the Noblesse 
 must ultimately have given way. 
 
 From the joy which the people of Paris ex- 
 pressed on the destruction of the Bastile, it might 
 be supposed that lettres de cachet were extreme- 
 ly odious : but I doubt the correctness of this 
 opinion. Lettres de cachet chiefly affected the 
 Noblesse and Bourgeois of the higher orders. 
 
 It is possible that many causes besides those 
 which I have enumerated contributed to the Re- 
 volution ; but I believe that the odious distinction 
 of Noblesse and Bourgeoisie, and the privileges 
 of the former, the oppressive feudal burdens, and 
 the hatred and contempt in which the Clergy 
 were justly held by the great body of the people, 
 were the circumstances which most contributed 
 to it. 
 
 When the National Assembly had once held 
 out to the people the hope of relief, the wavering 
 irresolute conduct of the King, the known impe- 
 rious character of the Queen, and the persuasion 
 that the Courtiers and the Noblesse would never 
 relinquish the intrigues by which they hoped to 
 disappoint the reform of abuses, kept the people 
 in constant agitation. The apprehension that they 
 
85 
 
 should again be subjected to those abuses, drove 
 a large portion of the nation mad ; for, during the 
 reign of terror, the people seemed to be divided 
 into two classes, viz. men actuated by madness, 
 and men subdued by fear. 
 
 The high price of corn in 1789 certainly kept 
 the people in a state of great agitation. In the 
 existing state of the country it had considerable 
 effect ; and I must consider this among the acce- 
 lerating causes of the Revolution. 
 
 I have said, that the privileges of the Noblesse 
 and feudal services were among the principal 
 causes of the French Revolution : I believe that 
 I am right in this opinion, although I do not pre- 
 tend to know how the distinction of Noblesse and 
 Bourgeoisie first became established. It is mani- 
 fest that France has been conquered at different 
 periods by successive swarms from the great 
 northern hive. The original language of the con- 
 quered nation remains in every part of France, 
 under the name of Patois. In different parts of 
 the country this Patois is, I believe, a different 
 language ; but a language distinct from the French 
 is found every where. In the south and the west 
 of France, as far north as the Loire, this Patois 
 seems to consist of corrupt dialects of the Pro- 
 vengat. The Provencal was the language into 
 which the Latin first passed when it became cor- 
 rupted ; it was the language in which that race of 
 poets called Troubadours, celebrated the achieve- 
 ments of the heroes of the Crusades ; and from 
 
 H 2 
 
86 
 
 this language have been formed Italian, Catalan, 
 the language of other provinces of Spain, the Pa- 
 tois of a large portion of France, and a great part 
 of what is called the French language. 
 
 Where the conquered people are extirpated, or 
 exterminated, the original language is lost with 
 them ; but where the conquered people remain, 
 much of the original language remains : in our 
 island, the Saxons extirpated, or exterminated, 
 the Britons ; few or no British words therefore are 
 found in our language. The Normans did not 
 extirpate the Saxons ; the present English lan- 
 guage is therefore a mixture of the Saxon and 
 Norman. I recapitulate these circumstances in 
 support of my assertion, that France has at differ- 
 ent periods been overrun by northern invaders. 
 Conquest naturally brings forward the distinction 
 of Noblesse, for the conquerors are Nobles. In 
 general, the conquerors gradually blend with the 
 conquered ; they become one race, and the dis- 
 tinction is lost. 
 
 There is another circumstance which may pos- 
 sibly have contributed to keep up the distinction 
 of Noblesse in France, and other states of Eu- 
 rope. After the fall of the Roman Empire, for 
 many ages the strength of armies consisted in 
 heavy-armed cavalry. But armour, and a horse 
 capable of bearing a man heavily armed, could 
 be purchased only by the opulent. This contri- 
 buted to increase the distinction between the rich 
 and the poor, the noble and the commonalty. 
 
87 
 
 After all these reflections, I am apt to think 
 that the great number of the French Noblesse was 
 occasioned by an abusive sale of the distinction. 
 But however the distinction arose, it had the ef- 
 fect of dividing the people into two classes. All 
 who were not noble felt themselves degraded ; 
 and as they became rich and intelligent, the de- 
 gradation became insupportable. I have men- 
 tioned feudal services as another principal cause 
 of the French Revolution. I do not pretend to 
 have an accurate knowledge of the feudal ser- 
 vices in France. They were various in different 
 provinces ; for France is but an assemblage of 
 different nations conquered by northern invaders 
 at different times, and united at different periods; 
 but every where feudal services seem to me to 
 have been extremely heavy, and even degrading. 
 Corvees, that is to say, labour in kind, seem to 
 have been payable to the Lord in a great part of 
 France. In many districts of France the feudal 
 Lord claimed a right to a great part of the succes- 
 sion to personal property. It has been thought 
 by many antiquarians, that the same right former- 
 ly existed in England ; and that the heriot, which 
 was in most places the best live beast of the te- 
 nant, and in some a still heavier payment, viz. 
 that of the best personal chattel, is a remnant of 
 this old feudal service, the feudal Lord having 
 gradually consented to accept this acknowledg- 
 ment of his right instead of the larger portion of 
 the moveables which he was entitled to demand. 
 
88 
 
 This payment of a portion of the moveables to the 
 feudal Lord, on the death of a tenant, seems to 
 have been prevalent in parts of France, down to 
 the period of the Revolution. 
 
 I shall hereafter mention circumstances which 
 have contributed gradually to extinguish feudal 
 services in England : I cannot find that any such 
 circumstances ever existed in France. Immedi- 
 ately before the Revolution, it was computed that 
 half the land in France was occupied by Metay- 
 ers. A great part of France is still occupied in 
 the same manner. That I am correct in my opi- 
 nion, that the distinction of Noblesse, and aversion 
 to feudal services, were the two principal causes 
 of the French Revolution, is sufficiently proved 
 by the votes which were passed in the celebrated 
 sitting of August 1789. Whoever reads the re- 
 solutions of that sitting, will see that every vote 
 had a tendency to the removal of these two 
 grievances. It is possible that some of the votes 
 of that night were not sufficiently considered ; but 
 the Assembly was driven forward by the general 
 wish of the nation. 
 
 I dwell more upon the subject of the French 
 Revolution, because every effort has been em- 
 ployed to mislead the people of England as to the 
 causes of that Revolution. The publications of 
 the French emigrants, of Mr. Burke, and the 
 great Whig families, and of the agents of Go- 
 vernment, were all sent forth with this view ; and 
 they succeeded in deluding the country. After a 
 
89 
 
 struggle of twenty-seven years we find ourselves 
 loaded with taxes which we bear with extreme 
 difficulty, while the French have obtained the 
 great objects which excited them to the Revolu- 
 tion ; viz, the abolition of the privileges of No- 
 blesse, of feudal services, of the power and wealth 
 of the Church ; and have secured all their rights 
 by the establishment of national representation. 
 It is possible that efforts may yet be made to re- 
 establish the ancien regime ; but it is impossible 
 that those efforts should succeed. They may 
 perhaps establish a military despotism, but they 
 cannot re-establish the government that existed 
 before the Revolution. How can they re-establish 
 their Parliaments ? The privileged Noblesse, of 
 which those Parliaments were composed, exist no 
 more. They cannot restore to the Church the 
 wealth of which it has been deprived ; and if they 
 cannot restore its wealth, they cannot re-establish 
 its power. The nobles drew much of their wealth 
 from their exemptions from taxes, and from the 
 receipt of feudal payments, or, as the French call 
 them, les droits seigneur eaux. These exemptions 
 from taxes, and the feudal payments, have been 
 abolished more than thirty years : can any man 
 believe that the French nation will submit to see 
 them again established ? The French have now 
 a national assembly, representative of the people, 
 guardian of their rights; they have also an 
 army very solicitous for the defence of those 
 rights. Let me suppose it possible that the Bour- 
 
^0 
 
 bons should be able to succeed in changing 
 the law of election, and the law for recruit- 
 ing the army : still the great difficulty of re-estab- 
 lishing the ancien regime would remain. A mili- 
 tary despotism might arise, but a Bourbon would 
 not be at the head of that despotism, for there is 
 not a military character among them. All at- 
 tempts made to destroy the present order of things 
 in France, would probably terminate in the ex- 
 pulsion of the Bourbons, and the destruction of 
 the Nobles. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 On the Consequences likely to follov) from the 
 French Revolution. 
 
 I shall consider this question as it regards 
 France itself, and as it regards other nations. I 
 am of opinion that a representative government is 
 permanently established in France. It is proba- 
 ble that the Nobles, who, comprehending every 
 age and both sexes, are computed to amount to 
 150,000, will endeavour to re-establish their an- 
 cient privileges ; they will be assisted in this by 
 the clergy and the fanatics. The Bourbon family 
 is suspected of wishing them success ; but the 
 united efforts of nobles and priests will fail. The 
 
91 
 
 French nation retains too strong an abhorrence of 
 the ancien regime, and too correct a sense of the 
 advantages obtained by the Revolution, ever to 
 suffer itself to be deprived of those advantages. 
 The Kings of Europe confederated to prevent the 
 French nation from establishing a representative 
 government, but their efforts have failed. 
 
 I have already remarked, that in consequence 
 of the French Revolution, their lands, in tillage, 
 now yield a produce of one third more than before 
 the Revolution. Is this owing to the abolition of 
 tithes, or to the abolition of feudal burdens ? or 
 must we attribute it to the more equal imposition 
 of taxes, and the security from oppression which 
 the subject now enjoys ? or is it owing to the di- 
 vision of great masses of landed property, former- 
 ly possessed by ecclesiastics ? or to the division of 
 the landed property of the Nobles, in consequence 
 ©f the late confiscations and the present law of 
 succession ? or shall we say that it is owing to the 
 Nobles being obliged to reside on their estates, 
 and to superintend their cultivation, in conse- 
 quence of their being no longer supported by the 
 bounty of a Court ? In what degree these, or 
 other causes unknown to me, have occasioned the 
 improvement in the produce of their land, I can- 
 not pretend to say; but I believe the assertion to 
 be true, that the land in France now yields one 
 third more than it did before the Revolution. 
 
 I have said, that France has established a re- 
 presentative government. In every district, the 
 
92 
 
 man who pays 300 francs, or 12/. 10s. a year, id 
 direct taxes, is entitled to vote. It is calculated, 
 that the man who pays this sum annually in di- 
 rect taxes, will most commonly have property to 
 the value of from 1500 to 1800 pounds sterling; 
 this is a sufficient property to create an interest 
 in the elector, that taxes should be moderate ; he 
 will therefore give his vote with this impression 
 on his mind ; and the sentiments of the elected 
 will most probably be in unison with those of the 
 electors : thus the deputies will really be the re- 
 presentatives of their constituents; they will guard 
 the people's money ; and it is the money of the 
 people which every Government is endeavouring 
 to obtain. Every measure which Government 
 brings forward in every country, has more or less 
 a reference to this end. The nobles will no longer 
 be supported by the profusion of a Court; they 
 will no longer be exclusively entitled to advance- 
 ment in the army or the church ; and their Parlia- 
 ments are abolished. Whatever large estates 
 may yet remain to individual Nobles, they will 
 gradually be divided by the existing law of suc- 
 cession : no means of acquiring affluence will re- 
 main to the Nobles, except agriculture and com- 
 merce. I know that French Nobles have hitherto 
 been accustomed to think themselves disgraced 
 by engaging in commerce, or by the practice of 
 the professions of law and physic ; but these pre- 
 judices must be got over. The Nobles will soon 
 feel themselves on a level with their fellow-sub- 
 
93 
 
 jects, and agriculture and commerce will be their 
 chief pursuits : thus France will become an agri- 
 cultural and commercial nation. It is supposed 
 that there is a wish in the Bourbon family to re- 
 serve commissions in die army for the Nobles., 
 but they will not be able to effectuate this wish. 
 While the army is recruited by conscription, 
 there will be necessarily found men of education 
 among the conscripts; and such men will not sub- 
 mit to be considered in a degraded character : they 
 will demand advancement according to their 
 merits. 
 
 The French Ministers are at this time endea= 
 vouring to obtain a change in the law of election, 
 and also a change in that law by which the army 
 is recruited. By a change in the law of electiom 
 they propose to diminish the commercial influence 
 in elections. By a change in the law of recruit- 
 ing, they wish to prevent a large proportion of 
 officers being taken from the ranks. They will 
 probably fail in both these attempts. A very large 
 proportion of those who are now officers have risen 
 from the ranks : even the Generals and Marshals 
 who are now seen at the French Court, are well 
 aware that they would soon be treated with con- 
 tempt if the ancient nobles were advanced to high 
 military rank. It has even been said, that the 
 disgust of the late Marshal Ney originated in in- 
 sults offered to his wife by emigrant Nobles, when 
 sh§, presented herself at Court. If the measure 
 
 i 
 
94 
 
 were persevered in, the Bourbons might fall vic- 
 tims to the attempt. 
 
 I have said that a representative government 
 is established in France. I do not mean by this, 
 that corrections may not be necessary. Perhaps 
 the number of the deputies ought to be doubled, 
 or at least considerably augmented. The Cham- 
 ber of Peers seems to me to be a verv unnatural 
 and a very useless part of their government. It 
 was probably introduced with a view to imitate 
 the English Constitution ; but the French Cham- 
 ber of Peers is wholly unlike the English House 
 of Lords. The French Chamber, in the course 
 of its ordinary proceedings, exercises, I believe, 
 no judicial functions (I am aware that the trial of 
 Louvel has been assigned to it) ; while the judicial 
 power exercised by the English House of Lords 
 is the last resort in all cases both of law and equi- 
 ty, and on all questions both civil and criminal. 
 This jurisdiction has existed in England from the 
 most distant times ; and perhaps no tribunal in any 
 country was ever less suspected of abusing its 
 power. Its decisions are not only acquiesced in 
 with respect, but with a confidence that they are 
 wise as well as just. 
 
 I have said, that the Parliament of Paris, though 
 honest in the decision of causes between man and 
 man, was dishonest where the interest of the pri- 
 vileged order of Noblesse was in question. The 
 English House of Lords has never been even 
 suspected of this ; and however remarkable it may 
 
95 
 
 seem, yet it is true, that in almost every case in 
 which the House of Lords has differed in opinion 
 from the Courts in Westminster Hall, after-ages 
 have generally said that the House of Lords was 
 right, and that the Courts at Westminster were 
 wrong. 
 
 There is another circumstance in which the 
 French Chamber of Peers will with difficulty be 
 made to resemble the English House of Lords. 
 In the English House of Lords the hereditary- 
 Peers are men of the largest landed estates : in 
 the French Chamber, if peerage is to be heredi- 
 tary and the existing law of succession is to be 
 persevered in, the Peers will for the most part be 
 poor. I do not quite know the nature of the ma- 
 jorats which have been instituted. If it is meant 
 that certain portions of land should be inalienably 
 annexed to each peerage, and the portions are con- 
 siderable, inconvenience will arise from the ina- 
 lienability of the land ; and if the portion annexed 
 to each peerage is inconsiderable, the institution 
 will be of no effect. 
 
 The French Chamber of Peers is a bad imita- 
 tion of the English House of Lords. If they 
 thought it advisable that every question should 
 be discussed in two assemblies, they would per- 
 haps have done better to have followed the model 
 of the United States of America. A senate and 
 a house of representatives would perhaps have an- 
 swered all the ends they could have had in view. 
 If ever the Bourbons should entertain sentiments 
 
96 
 
 in unison with those of the nation, the power 
 which is now given to the executive government 
 of France, of paying the ministers of religion, will 
 create an influence which perhaps has never yet 
 been fully estimated ; and it will be an influence 
 extremely beneficial to the nation. By withhold- 
 ing payment, the Government will at all times be 
 able to control every ecclesiastic. We hesitate 
 to grant emancipation to the Irish Catholics ; and 
 the strongest argument urged against this emanci- 
 pation is, the danger arising from the influence of 
 their priests : but this danger would be nothing if 
 :very Catholic priest were paid by the executive 
 government. The English government has been 
 in the practice of annually distributing a very mo- 
 derate sum among the Presbyterian ministers ; I 
 believe it never exceeded 20,000/. in any one year: 
 yet the influence of this sum has been found high- 
 ly beneficial to the Government. wSince the re- 
 turn of the Bourbons to France, their executive 
 government has not derived much benefit from 
 this power : the reason is manifest ; the Bourbons 
 have not wished to avail themselves of it. They 
 have not been in unison with the wishes of the 
 nation on this subject. On the contrary, their 
 object has been to re-establish the wealth and the 
 power of the Church. The Catholic church, 
 wherever it is established conformably to its poli- 
 cy, is in truth imperium in imperio. The celi- 
 bacy of the clergy was established with this view. 
 It was introduced into England by Archbishop 
 
97 
 
 Lanfranc about the year 1100 : 1 believe it had not 
 been insisted on much before, even among the con- 
 tinental clergy. The Saxon clergy made great re- 
 sistance to it; but it was of much importance to the 
 establishment of ecclesiastical power, and Lan- 
 franc, by birth an Italian, compelled the English 
 clergy to submit to it. Celibacy deprived the cler- 
 gy of domestic affections, and reduced them to 
 have but one object of solicitude, viz. the extension 
 of the power of the Church. In all Catholic coun- 
 tries the celibacy of the clergy is insisted on with 
 great strictness; I believe it is more difficult to ob- 
 tain from Rome a dispensation for a clergyman to 
 marry, than it is to obtain a dispensation for an 
 uncle to marry his niece, though the latter is pro- 
 hibited by the Levitical law. But the influence 
 which the executive government of France will 
 possess by thus holding the purse from which the 
 ministers of religion are to be paid, has not yet 
 been felt ; indeed, it has scarcely been noticed. 
 
 When the Bourbons returned in 1814, they 
 were accompanied by emigrants who had too 
 much influence over them. Had Louis XVIII. 
 acted wisely, he would have claimed the crown 
 under the title created by the acceptance of Louis 
 XVI. in 1789. Claiming as his heir under that 
 title, he would have removed all suspicion of his 
 having a wish to re-establish the ancien regime ; 
 and he ought to have seen that such re-establish- 
 ment was impossible. I do not believe that 
 Buonaparte was invited to return in 1815 by any 
 
 i2 
 
98 
 
 political party : but he certainly had received intel- 
 ligence that the conduct which the emigrants had 
 influenced the Bourbons to hold, had induced 
 every part of the nation to receive him back with 
 pleasure : the people believed that the odious dis- 
 tinction of a privileged noblesse would be re-es- 
 tablished : the Protestants thought that they should 
 be persecuted for their religious opinions : the 
 possessors of national property believed that this 
 property would be taken from them : the proprie- 
 tors and cultivators of land were apprehensive that 
 tithes and feudal burdens would be re-establish- 
 ed. I do not believe that the emissaries of Buo- 
 naparte instigated the people to these opinions ; 
 they arose from the conduct of the emigrants, 
 who every where gave out that the ancien regime 
 should be re-established. While Louis XVIII. 
 rested the constitution on his charter, the people 
 saw that their liberties were revocable: had he 
 claimed the crown as the heir of Louis XVI. and 
 under the title accepted by him in 1789, the peo- 
 ple would have been uninfluenced by these sus- 
 picions, and the return of Buonaparte could never 
 have been attended with success. 
 
 I have said that France will become agricultu- 
 ral and commercial : I am aware that this may be 
 prevented by the people being prevailed on to be- 
 come again a military nation. Although the Bour- 
 bons now in existence are not of a military cha- 
 racter, yet they will probably wish to give the na- 
 tion this turn. Kings naturally wish for standing 
 
99 
 
 armies, and the Nobles will entertain the hope of 
 being advanced in military rank. The great num- 
 ber of officers formed in the late war will render it 
 mere easy to give the nation this propensity ; and 
 should a war break out on the continent of Eu- 
 rope, the Bourbons may find the adoption of this 
 policy easy. But the pacific system can alone 
 confirm the free government of France : it will 
 render the French people happy, and contribute 
 to the happiness of the other nations of Europe. 
 
 I have been thus insensibly led to the considera- 
 tion of the effects which the French Revolution 
 will propably have on the other states of Europe : 
 but before I proceed to this consideration, I wish 
 to explain what I mean by the expression which 
 I have used, that representative government is 
 permanently fixed in France. I believe this as- 
 sertion to be true, but it is the only part of their 
 government which is permanently fixed. The 
 Chamber of Peers must either be moulded into a 
 character very different from that which it now 
 exhibits, or it will be extinguished. The Bour- 
 bons ever since their return have been suspected 
 of wishing to destroy that government of which 
 they are the supreme executive magistrates. I 
 will not inquire whether this suspicion is well or 
 ill founded ; but Caesar's wife must be free even 
 from suspicion ; the King must convince the na- 
 tion that he has no desire to possess those powers 
 which were exercised by Louis XIV. and Louis 
 XV.; that his wishes are in unison with those of 
 
100 
 
 his people ; and from that moment he starts up 
 the most powerful monarch in the world. 
 
 I do not believe that there is in France at this 
 hour much personal attachment either to a Bour- 
 bon or to Buonaparte. The attachment seems to 
 me to be to the nation : if there is any exception 
 to this sentiment, it is in the military : they re- 
 member with pride the victories which the French 
 armies obtained in the progress of the Revolution ; 
 and those who have served under Buonaparte at- 
 tribute their victories to his superior military 
 skill. I believe, however, that I say no more 
 than the truth when I assert, that the attachment 
 of the great body of the people is to the interests 
 of the nation : and they consider those interests as 
 depending on the permanent establishment of re- 
 presentative government. Should I be right in 
 this opinion, France and the United States of 
 America will both be representative governments. 
 The members of the Holy Alliance may cabal 
 and intrigue, but they will tremble. In case of a 
 war, what resistance can the despots of Germany 
 oppose to France ? Their own subjects will be 
 their most formidable enemies, for they will wish 
 to possess the same advantages as are possessed 
 by the people of France. The same sentiments 
 will prevail in Spain, Portugal, and Italy. Great 
 Britain may perhaps escape the general wreck of 
 European monarchies ; its government is still, to 
 a considerable degree, representative. Wherever 
 an individual, as proprietor or patron, has been 
 
101 
 
 permitted to usurp the nomination to a seat in 
 Parliament, to that extent the House of Commons 
 can no longer be considered as the representative 
 of the people. But the abuse has not yet extend- 
 ed so far but that it may be easily corrected. It 
 is much to be lamented that some men have been 
 so injudicious as to recommend universal suffrage. 
 This would be no remedy ; it would be no reform 
 of abuses ; it would be revolution. But men who 
 think, see the necessity of correcting abuses; and 
 revolution will be prevented by the adoption of 
 reform. 
 
 What changes in other nations will be the con- 
 sequence of the French Revolution ! We hesitate 
 to give an answer to this question : but there are 
 certain peculiar circumstances which deserve our 
 consideration. Most of the revolutions which we 
 read of in history have been the consequence of 
 conquest by invaders. Where they have not 
 been effected by conquerors, but have been pro- 
 duced by the efforts of the people, they have in 
 general been confined to the expulsion of the 
 reigning dynasty. The insurrection of the Dutch 
 against Philip II. was confined to the expulsion 
 of that tyrant ; the government was left nearly the 
 same as it had existed before. Even in the late 
 American war, the Americans did little more than 
 deprive the King and his family of the sovereign- 
 ty. Each colony was left under its antecedent 
 government, the whole being united by a federa- 
 tive union. But by- the French Revolution the 
 
102 
 
 entire government has been swept away. Will 
 the example be followed in Spain or in the Span- 
 ish colonies? Will it be followed in Germany? 
 Intelligence has gone forth. The rights and du- 
 ties of governors and governed have been every 
 where discussed* Will the Holy Alliance be able 
 to defeat the people's efforts ? England may, I 
 hope, escape the influence of this Revolution ; a 
 very little reform will bring back her House of 
 Commons to be really the representative of the 
 people. The chief opponents to this reform are 
 those great families which have usurped the no- 
 mination to seats in Parliament from those bodies 
 of the commonalty to which the Crown had origi- 
 nally granted it. An event has lately happened 
 which has rendered it more necessary for the peo- 
 ple of England to turn its immediate attention to 
 this reform; I mean the death of His Royal High- 
 ness the Duke of Kent, The late Duke of Kent, 
 from his sound health and habits of life, was con- 
 sidered as a man likely to live to old age. In 
 him the nation hoped to avoid the mischiefs aris- 
 ing from a long minority. But from the present 
 state of the dynasty, on the death of the King and 
 his two brothers, a minority must probably take 
 place. Who will have the government during 
 that minority? The answer is obvious: those 
 who nominate the members of the House of 
 Commons: and as more than one half of those 
 members are nominated by proprietors and pa- 
 trons, the people at large may find it difficult to 
 
103 
 
 protect the rights of an infant sovereign. I may 
 be told, perhaps, the three Princes to whom I 
 have alluded may live to old age. I sincerely 
 wish they may : but men will fear impending dan- 
 gers, and it is the duty of Parliament to guard the 
 country. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Effects produced by the French Revolution in 
 England. — Mr. Pitt's Conduct till his Death, 
 in 1806. 
 
 I will now consider the effects which the 
 French Revolution produced in England. 
 
 The French Revolution certainly created much 
 sensation in the people of England. They were 
 naturally led to think of the reform of abuses in 
 their own government; but I do not think that 
 this sentiment was by any means universal : they 
 were in a state of prosperity, and those who are in 
 a state of prosperity are not desirous of a change 
 of government. Mr. Pitt was at that time minis- 
 ter with uncommon power, for the Opposition 
 was sunk to nothing ; and he seemed to possess 
 the confidence of the King. One would be led 
 to think from his conduct, that he never felt how 
 
104 
 
 much the transactions in France required his vigi- 
 lant attention. In 1790 he had an unnecessary 
 dispute with Spain about a smuggling transaction 
 at Nootka Sound. In 1791, he seemed to wish 
 for a dispute with Russia about the fortress of 
 Oczakow, though it is impossible to believe that 
 he could have entertained at that time the idea of 
 a serious quarrel with Russia, In 1791 the treaty 
 of Pilnitz was negotiated : in this treaty, the inva- 
 sion of France w 7 as decided on. I believe Mr. 
 Pitt took no part in this treaty ; but the King, as 
 Elector of Hanover, approved of it. Mr. Pitt 
 acted with great wisdom in determining to take 
 no share in hostile operations against France. A 
 little reflection ought to have pointed out to every 
 Statesman, that if France were attacked by hos- 
 tile armies, she would be under the necessity of 
 becoming herself an armed nation. 
 
 It is much to be regretted that in 1792 Mr. 
 Pitt refused the application of the French govern- 
 ment to prevent by his influence the intended hos- 
 tilities : I will give Mr. Pitt credit for his wish to 
 avoid entering into a war on account of the French 
 Revolution ; but he seemed to me never to have 
 viewed the French Revolution with the eye of a 
 Statesman. He never appeared to feel the effect 
 which the agitations in France must have on the 
 other States of Europe. He seemed wholly igno- 
 rant of the causes of that Revolution. Mr. Pitt 
 was a great Parliamentary debater ; perhaps he 
 deserves the title of a good financier in times of 
 
103 
 
 tranquillity ; and from the period when he became 
 Minister in 1783, the prosperity of England had 
 revived, but he was wholly unacquainted with the 
 internal state of other nations. In one word, he 
 was a good pilot in calm weather, but not equal 
 to conduct the vessel of the State in a stormy sea- 
 son. But although 1 cannot consider Mr. Pitt 
 as a great Statesman, yet I think that his conduct 
 of public affairs for the first nine years of his Ad- 
 ministration, viz. from the end of December 
 1783, to the end of the year 1792, was highly bene- 
 ficial to his country. I think he made several 
 mistakes : those mistakes arose from his not 
 being sufficiently acquainted with the interests 
 and views of foreign nations. He became a Min- 
 ister at too early a period of his life, for he was 
 made Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1782, when 
 he was little more than twenty-three years of age ; 
 and he was made First Lord of the Treasury, and 
 Prime Minister, on the 20th of December 1783, 
 when he was only of the age of twenty-four and 
 a half. Before Mr. Pitt had attained the age of 
 twenty-five, he was as powerful a debater in Par- 
 liament as he ever was in the whole course of his 
 life. We have many instances of men who have 
 become able public speakers at an early period ; 
 but I believe that there is no instance of any man 
 who became a great Statesman at the same early 
 period. Mr. Fox obtained the summit of that elo- 
 quence which he ever attained to, at as early an age 
 as Mr. Pitt : Charles Townshend, and Lord Bo- 
 
 K 
 
106 
 
 lingbroke, were also instances of the practicabili- 
 ty of attaining Parliamentary eloquence in early life. 
 Perhaps there is no art in which men are so ra- 
 pidly improved by practice as in the knack of 
 Parliamentary debate. Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox 
 had both of them great advantages ; for at his 
 outset each was supported by a powerful party. 
 This circumstance relieved them from apprehen- 
 sions, and confidence is a necessary ingredient in 
 a Parliamentary speaker. But though a man may 
 become a Parliamentary speaker in early life, he 
 cannot become a consummate Statesman at a 
 time of life equally early. He must have read 
 much ; he must have conversed and reflected 
 deeply, before he can be qualified to direct the 
 affairs of a great nation. Mr. Pitt had never tra- 
 velled. I believe he was imperfectly acquainted 
 with the French language. Before I finish these 
 reflections, I shall probably show, in some strik- 
 ing instances, how ignorant he was of the situa- 
 tion of France. But for the present I will only 
 view him in the first nine years of his Adminis- 
 tration, and here I am ready to give him the full 
 tribute of applause. , 
 
 In November 1783, he came forward to defend 
 the King against the efforts of a confederacy ; he 
 was successful ; had he failed, the power of the 
 Crown would most probably have been placed 
 under the control of that confederacy, which was 
 denominated the Coalition. An oligarchy would 
 have been established ; and of all the forms of 
 
107 
 
 government, oligarchy is most oppressive to the 
 people. Had Mr. Fox's Bill been carried, the 
 patronage of India would have been placed in the 
 hands of the Coalition : and while they possessed 
 that patronage, it would have been very difficult 
 for the King to have removed them from the Ad- 
 ministration. It would have been difficult to pre- 
 vail on men to accept of office, while they knew 
 that they were to contend with an opposition pos- 
 sessing this patronage. We know from English 
 history the dangerous consequences which have 
 followed from an irremovable Parliament; perhaps 
 equal mischiefs might have followed from an 
 irremovable Administration. I give Mr. Pitt 
 full credit for his wise and able conduct on this 
 occasion. 
 
 In 1785 he brought forward his Irish Proposi- 
 tions. They seemed to me to be drawn with too 
 much minute detail. I never could form an opi- 
 nion as to what the result would have been if they 
 had been adopted. At the close of the discus- 
 sion, Mr. Pitt allowed such clauses to he intro- 
 duced as insured the rejection of his Propositions 
 by the Irish Parliament: it was generally believed 
 that he adopted this conduct in compliance with 
 the apprehensions of great cotton manufacturers in 
 Lancashire and Scotland. 
 
 In the following session he established the 
 Sinking Fund ; a measure highly beneficial while 
 accompanied with the pacific system. About the 
 same time be negotiated the commercial treaty 
 
108 
 
 with France. In reflecting on this treaty, I can 
 only regret that it was not negotiated with more 
 boldness, and extended to more objects. But 
 Mr. Pitt was most probably controlled by the 
 fears of commercial men. On the King's illness 
 in 1788, I think Mr. Pitt acted judiciously in re- 
 sisting the language of Lord Loughborough and 
 Mr. Fox. But I cannot say that I saw with plea- 
 sure his attempt to limit the powers of royalty 
 while exercised by the Prince Regent. The 
 King's recovery made this Bill unnecessary ; but 
 the opinions then thrown out have, perhaps, been 
 subsequently injurious. 
 
 I have thus enumerated the principal acts of Mr. 
 Pitt during these nine years, that I might declare 
 most explicitly my approbation of his conduct. 
 During these nine years, I think Mr. Pitt's Ad- 
 ministration, considered together, and as a whole, 
 eminently beneficial to this country. It would 
 have been fortunate for the glory of Mr. Pitt 
 if he had been removed from office at the 
 close of the year 1792. It would have been 
 equally fortunate for his country ; for during 
 the remaining eight years of his Adminis- 
 tration, every measure which he brought forward, 
 displayed his incapacity as a Statesman. There 
 is full proof, that down to the close of the year 
 1792, Mr. Pitt had no intention to abandon his 
 pacific system. In the summer of 1792, towards 
 the close of the session, he said in the House of 
 Commons, " England never had a fairer prospect 
 
109 
 
 of a long continuance of peace than she has at the 
 present moment. I think we may confidently 
 reckon on peace for ten years." But my opinion 
 of his perseverance in the pacific system does not 
 rest on his expressions in Parliament. Before the 
 close of the session in 1792, the three per cents 
 had risen almost to par. Mr. Pitt saw that this 
 gave him an opportunity of reducing 32,000,000 
 of four per cent, stock to three per cent. He ne- 
 gotiated with the holders of the four per cents : 
 they demanded a larger bonus than he chose to 
 give, and he closed his treaty with them, by say- 
 ing, " Then we will put off the reduction of this 
 stock to next year." Can any man believe that 
 Mr. Pitt would have used this language if he had 
 at that time intended to take part in the war ? for 
 the war was at that time actually begun by Aus- 
 tria, Prussia, and other German Princes. 
 
 In the close of the year 1792, Mr. Burke pre- 
 vailed on the great Whig families to declare for 
 war with France: it was well known that this de- 
 claration would be highly acceptable to the King. 
 Perhaps every King in Europe had been alarmed 
 by the French Revolution. Most certainly all 
 German Princes had felt this alarm in a very high 
 degree ; and a jealous apprehension of encroach- 
 ment on his power, had always been a marked 
 feature in the King's character. The great Whig 
 families were received by the King with joy. 
 Mr. Burke was rewarded with two pensions, esti- 
 mated to be worth 40,000/. ; whether he received 
 
 K 2 
 
110 
 
 any further gratification from M. de Calonne, I 
 cannot say. The language by which Mr. Burke 
 prevailed on the great Whig families to declare 
 for war was, I apprehend, the following : He 
 stated to them, that the French Revolution was 
 an insurrection of the many against the few ; of 
 the people against the constituted authorities, 
 of the commonalty against the nobility : that if 
 the principles on which the French Revolution 
 was founded were not crushed, they would spread 
 through Europe : that if noblesse were not re-es- 
 tablished in France, nobility would be abolished 
 in England : that every motive of self-preservation 
 required them to come forward and exert them- 
 selves to stop this revolution : that the sentiment 
 of enthusiasm which at that time seemed to actu- 
 ate the whole French nation, would probably soon 
 subside if restrained within the limits of France ; 
 but that, if not restrained, it would spread over 
 other nations : that the agitations in France might 
 be considered as a hurricane ; that if they could 
 oqtlive that hurricane, they would be in a state 
 of safetv. 
 
 I believe these arguments were used very open- 
 ly by Mr. Burke. I believe there were other ar- 
 guments which were used more secretlv to the 
 leaders of the Whig party. He reminded these 
 Noblemen, that their political importance depend- 
 ed on the power which they possessed in nomina- 
 ting members of the House of Commons ; that 
 this power was by many considered as a usurpa- 
 tion : that the attempt of the British House of 
 
Ill 
 
 Commons to extend the right of taxation over our 
 Colonies in America, had led people to examine 
 the manner in which members of the House of 
 Commons obtained seats in that House : that in 
 consequence of this examination, it was found that 
 there were many members who possessed their 
 seats by the nomination of proprietors and patrons 
 of boroughs ; and that it was in consequence of 
 this circumstance, and of the facility with which 
 a Minister could purchase the support of these 
 members from the respective patrons and proprie- 
 tors, that the American war had been so obsti- 
 nately persevered in, against the interest of the 
 country : that this opinion had led to a wish for a 
 reform in the House of Commons : that this sen- 
 timent had not only prevailed with great numbers 
 of the people, but that it had been publickly pro- 
 moted and recommended by individuals of the 
 first consequence. He desired them to reflect, 
 whether, if French principles were allowed to pre- 
 vail in England, reform of Parliament must not be 
 the necessary consequence ? and whether the ex- 
 tinguishment of the power of their party would 
 not be the immediate result of such a reform ? 
 
 The leaders of the Whig party were at that 
 time the Duke of Portland, Earl Fitzwilliam, and 
 Earl Spencer. I believe that the Duke of Port- 
 land was tired of having been so long in opposi- 
 tion ; and that he was desirous of reaping those 
 advantages which he could obtain by promoting 
 the King's wishes. I believe that Earl Fitzwil- 
 liam and Earl Spencer were wholly free from any 
 
112 
 
 desire to obtain office or emoluments ; but both of 
 them had been educated from early life in that 
 leading principle of the Whig party, that they 
 were to acquire power by a confederacy of great 
 families. I date the origin of that party which is 
 now denominated the party of the great Whig 
 families, from the fall of Sir Robert Walpole. 
 Sir Robert Walpole had governed the country by 
 uniting the influence of Government to the Whig 
 party. I will not stop to inquire whether Sir 
 Robert Walpole was a great minister ; but his 
 pacific system was certainly beneficial to England, 
 and secured the Brunswick family on the throne. 
 On his fall, Sir Robert had dexterously contrived 
 to destroy the power of his rival, Mr. Pulteney. 
 The Earldom of Bath, conferred on that gentle- 
 man, extinguished his importance. The Admi- 
 nistration then fell into the hands of men who had 
 been the supporters of Sir Robert Walpole. They 
 were at first called the Pelham Party. On the 
 retirement of the Duke of Newcastle, and the ad- 
 vancement of the Marquis of Rockingham to of- 
 fice, they were called the Rockingham Party. On 
 the death of the Marquis of Rockingham, and the 
 Coalition which took place at the end of the year 
 1782, they went by the name of the Coalitionists. 
 They are now distinguished by the name of the 
 Party of the great Whig Families. Their prin- 
 ciple was to possess influence by confederacy. 
 On the first formation of this party, this principle 
 was not openly avowed; but on Mr. Burke's be- 
 ing placed in the service of the Marquis of Rock- 
 
113 
 
 ingham, that gentleman saw the great advantage 
 which he should derive to himself from propagat- 
 ing that principle of confederacy. The doctrine 
 which he inculcated was, that there are certain 
 great families whose ancestors placed the Bruns- 
 wicks on the throne; that from this circumstance 
 the descendants of those families have a right to 
 be the Ministers, and to dictate the measures of 
 Government. No language could be more ac- 
 ceptable to men of high rank, large fortunes, and 
 moderate talents. I do not use this expression, 
 moderate talents, from any sentiment of disres- 
 pect ; but the education of men of high rank and 
 great wealth necessarily occasions them to stand 
 in need of the assistance of those whose inferior 
 rank and moderate fortunes have subjected them 
 to a different education. Mr. Burke felt the in- 
 fluence which this language gave him over the 
 Rockingham party; but his influence over that 
 party was not so transcendant while the Marquis 
 of Rockingham lived, as it was after his death. 
 The Marquis of Rockingham numbered among 
 his friends Sir George Savile and the Duke of 
 Richmond; these two gentlemen checked in a 
 considerable degree the assuming authority of 
 Mr. Burke : perhaps there might be others who 
 concurred with them. Most certainly Mr. Burke 
 had not the influence over the Marquis of Rock- 
 ingham which he afterwards possessed over the 
 Duke of Portland. 
 
 Let me pause to consider for a moment whe- 
 
114 
 
 iher the arguments thus used by Mr. Burke to the 
 great Whig families were such as they ought to 
 have attended to. The circumstance which had 
 most contributed to the French Revolution was 
 the distinction between Noblesse and Bourgeoisie. 
 Thirty thousand noble families were supposed to 
 comprehend one hundred and fifty thousand indi- 
 viduals; the^e claimed exemption from the most 
 burthensome taxes, and exclusive advancement 
 in the army, in the navy, in the church, and in the 
 parliaments. Could a commonalty, now become 
 opulent and intelligent, submit to this humiliating 
 distinction? I appeal to every man who has dis- 
 passionately examined the French Revolution, 
 whether this odious distinction of Noblesse and 
 Bourgeoisie must not be set down as the first and 
 principal cause of that great event? In England 
 no such distinction exists; our hereditary Nobles 
 are few, not exceeding in number two hundred 
 and fifty: they possess no exemption from the 
 payment of any tax ; nor are they entitled to ex- 
 clusive advancement in the army, the navy, the 
 church, or the law : their children are of the order 
 of the commonalty. In truth, British peers are 
 magistrates, hereditary legislators, hereditary 
 judges, and hereditary advisers of the Crown: 
 they have as little resemblance to French No- 
 blesse as they have to the order of Mandarins in 
 China. 
 
 Unfortunately the leaders of the great families 
 could not be brought to see the fallacy of Mr. 
 
115 
 
 Burke's argument; they were misled by the simi- 
 litude of names ; and they declared themselves ad- 
 vocates for embarking the country in war. Mr. 
 Pitt acceded to the proposal : he was ignorant not 
 only of the causes of the French Revolution, but 
 of the strength of France: he was so little ac- 
 quainted with the resources of that country, and 
 with the energies of which she was capable when 
 her whole force was put in motion, that he had 
 persuaded himself that France could not carry on 
 the war for six months: he held this language to 
 M. Bigot de St. Croix, who had been Minister 
 for Foreign Affairs in France, on the lOth of Au- 
 gust 1792. M. de St. Croix had emigrated to 
 England between the 10th of August and the end 
 of that year. When the resolution to declare war 
 against France was about to be taken, Mr. Pitt 
 discoursed on the subject with this gentleman: 
 he pointed out to M. de St. Croix, that it would 
 be impossible for France to continue the war for 
 more than six months, as she had no finances. 
 M. de St. Croix replied to him, 4< Sir, if you 
 knew the resources of France as well as I know 
 them, you would know that she is capable of car- 
 rying on war for a great length of time." When 
 Mr. Pitt pressed him on the circumstance of her 
 finances, M. de St. Croix answered, " Sir, France 
 is more powerful because she has not what you 
 call finances; those who are in possession of the 
 government wil) put all property in requisition." 
 I had the account of this conversation from M. 
 
116 
 
 de St. Croix himself; and he added, that from 
 that hour Mr. Pitt's door was always shut against 
 him. Mr. Pitt expressed the same sentiments 
 to another political friend of mine, and I have 
 no doubt that he used this language to many 
 others. But the matter does not rest on private 
 conversation. Mr. Pitt employed Sir Francis 
 D'Yvernois to publish a pamphlet, showing, that 
 the state of the French finances would disable 
 France from going on with the war for six months; 
 and so infatuated was Mr. Pitt with this opinion, 
 that he suffered Sir Francis D'Yvernois annually 
 to repeat the same opinion for several years. 
 
 There is another circumstance, which so strong- 
 ly marks Mr. Pitt's want of sagacity as a States- 
 man, that I cannot help taking notice of it. In- 
 fluenced by the opinion of Mr. Burke, the great 
 Whig families had declared for war; but the opi- 
 nion of Mr. Burke was clear and explicit : it was, 
 that war should be undertaken for the purpose of 
 re-establishing the ancien regime in France. I 
 use this expression, ancien regime, because it was 
 employed by the French royalists as a term of art, 
 viz. that every thing should be replaced exactly 
 as it had existed before the assembly of the Etats 
 Generaux: to undertake a war for this object 
 might be injudicious ; but the proposal was intel- 
 ligible and definite: Mr. Pitt acceded to it; but 
 engrafted his own plan on Mr. Burke's, viz. " In- 
 demnity for the past, and security for the future." 
 This language could not be misunderstood; every 
 
117 
 
 one saw that the meaning of it was, that France 
 should be dismembered ; that she should be de- 
 prived of certain provinces, and by that means be 
 rendered less formidable to the rest of Europe. 
 Mr. Pitt did not perceive that Mr. Burke's plan 
 and his own could not both be effected by the 
 same measures. Mr. Burke wished to re-esta- 
 blish France in all her former strength ; and Mr. 
 Pitt wished to re-establish the Bourbons in France, 
 mutilated and dismembered. The verv first 
 event of the war showed the two plans to be irre- 
 concileable. 
 
 In 1793, Valenciennes was taken. The arms 
 of France were removed, and the Austrian eagle 
 erected in their stead. Within forty- eight hours 
 there was written under this eagle, IC Ton aigle 
 sera an dindon" A friend of mine remonstrated 
 with the late Duke of Brunswick, that he tftight, 
 that same campaign, have taken Landau; his an- 
 swer was, " Ought I, as the King of Prussia's 
 general, to have employed his army to take Lan- 
 dau for Austria?" In the close of the same year 
 we took possession of Toulon and the French 
 fleet : we received this possession by a treaty, in 
 which it was stipulated, that every thing should 
 be preserved for the use of the French King. 
 Mr. Burke's plan required that this treaty should 
 have been faithfully observed; but Mr. Pitt's 
 wish, that the power of France should be weak- 
 ened, prevailed, and the terms of the treaty were 
 . violated. 
 
118 
 
 After these events, the designs of Mr. Pitt were 
 manifest to every one ; and all who wished that 
 France might remain entire withdrew their assis- 
 tance. The King of Prussia would naturally say, 
 ** It is with difficulty that I support myself at pre- 
 sent against Austria ; what must become of me 
 if the Austrian power is augmented V } He con- 
 tinued to receive subsidies from England ; but he 
 never after gave any assistance in carrying on the 
 war. The King of Spain, as a Bourbon, had no 
 wish to see France dismembered. The French 
 royalists could never wish to see Mr. Pitt's de- 
 signs attended withlsuccess. In a word, the views 
 with which he carried on the war reduced Eng- 
 land to one single ally, viz. Austria ; and, to en- 
 able that power to carry on her military opera- 
 tions. England supplied subsidies to an amount 
 never before recorded in history. The plans of 
 Mr. Burke and Mr. Pitt were avowedly so differ- 
 ent, that the military operations were carried on 
 by distinct Ministers. The expedition to the 
 coast of France, in 1795, with a view to give as- 
 sistance to the insurgents in La Vendee, was un- 
 der the direction of Mr. Windham, the Minister 
 of Mr. Burke's friends. It was as badly planned 
 and as badly executed as any expedition ever un- 
 dertaken by a War Minister. 
 
 Let any man dispassionately review Mr. Pitt's 
 conduct on these points, viz. his want of knowledge 
 of the causes of the French Revolution; his igno- 
 rance of the resources of France ; and his en- 
 
119 
 
 gaging in a war tor two objects inconsistent with 
 each other; and let him then say, w 7 hether he 
 thinks Mr. Pitt was a great Statesman. I ought 
 to mention that Mr. Fox refused to concur in 
 opinion with Mr. Burke on this subject : his good 
 sense led him to see the folly of engaging in a 
 war for the purpose of compelling the French na- 
 tion to submit to a form of government which they 
 abhorred ; and he had the integrity to resist every 
 allurement, both of emolument and power. He 
 remained the decided opponent of the measures 
 which were then adopted. I believe that Mr. 
 Pitt soon regretted his having engaged in the un- 
 dertaking ; but he was committed, he could not 
 go back. I think his friends must acknowledge 
 that he showed no great talents as a War Minis- 
 ter. Prussia and Spain soon abandoned him« 
 He relied on the armies of Austria ; and to give 
 give activity to those armies, he supplied Austria 
 with British money, with a boundless profusion. 
 I can discover no superior wisdom in the manner 
 in which he raised this money. The sale of the 
 land-tax, the income-tax, and that most calami- 
 ^kous measure the stoppage of the Bank, were ra- 
 ther the measures of a daring projector than of a 
 prudent financier. The. sale of the land-tax was 
 a plan adopted in imitation of the French govern- 
 ment ; for it was the putting property in requisi- 
 tion. The income-tax was a violation of faith ; 
 for those who had redeemed their land-tax had a 
 right to presume that a similar tax, under another 
 name, was not to be immediately laid on their 
 
120 
 
 land : it was also a violation of the faith pledged 
 to the public creditors. The paper- money, con- 
 sequent on the stoppage of the Bank, has produ- 
 ced calamities of which we do not yet see the 
 end. Mr. Pitt floundered on, adopting various 
 but unsuccessful projects, until the commence- 
 ment of the year 1801. He then resigned. Va- 
 rious reasons were mentioned for this resigna- 
 tion : the friends of Mr. Pitt gave out, that he had 
 resigned because the King would not consent to 
 that emancipation of the Catholics, which he had 
 recommended ; but I do not believe that this was 
 the real cause of the quarrel between the King 
 and Mr. Pitt : the same cause was assigned when 
 the King dismissed the Ministers distinguished 
 by the name of the Talents, in 1807 ; and it is 
 now well known that the emancipation of the 
 Catholics was not at that time the real ground for 
 their dismission. I have reason to believe, that 
 the displeasure which the King, in 1801, had con- 
 ceived against Mr. Pitt, arose from other causes. 
 The Austrian armies had been so repeatedly de- 
 feated by the French, that they were completely 
 disheartened ; their discouragement was so great, 
 that they could no longer be brought to face 
 French soldiers in the field. Mr. Pitt probably 
 stated this circumstance to the King, and point- 
 ed out to him, that if the war against France was 
 to be carried on by continental armies, the King 
 of Prussia was the only sovereign who could sup- 
 ply the means ; and he proposed to the King, that, 
 
121 
 
 to induce the King of Prussia to afford this assis- 
 tance, His Majesty should cede to him some part 
 of his German dominions. The King was indig- 
 nont at the proposal ; it not only induced him to 
 dismiss Mr. Pitt, but it occasioned a return of 
 that unfortunate malady with which His Majesty 
 had been visited in 1788. 
 
 I do not pretend to say that I have any certain 
 knowledge of the facts above stated ; but I have 
 some reason to believe, that the quarrel between 
 the King and Mr. Pitt had a reference to the 
 King's German dominions. There is one circum- 
 stance which tends to confirm the above suspicion, 
 and which is known to the whole world. About 
 the time that this quarrel broke out between the 
 King and Mr. Pitt, a body of Prussian troops en- 
 tered the Duchy of Lunenburgh. They were not 
 in such a number as to give reason to believe 
 that they came there to conquer ; the inference 
 therefore is, that they came there to take posses- 
 sion under a treaty. On the dismission of Mr. 
 Pitt, these Prussian troops were removed. 
 
 During the eight years that the war had been 
 thus carried on under the auspices of Mr. Pitt, it 
 seemed as if the instigators of the war had con- 
 sidered that royalty and nobility would be extin- 
 guished if the ancient Government of France were 
 not re-established. They carried on the war with 
 a violence bordering on despair. Every princi- 
 ple of the law of nations was disregarded : every 
 prudential consideration was thought of little im- 
 
 l 2 
 
122 
 
 portance. In Lord Grenville's celebrated letter 
 to the British Minister at Genoa he used this ex- 
 pression : " In a war like this no nation is to re- 
 main neutral." There were two violations of the 
 law of nations productive of so much mischief to 
 the interests of Great Britain, that I cannot refrain 
 from examining them more fully. The first was 
 the claim that British ships of war might stop neu- 
 tral ships on the high seas, and take out and im- 
 press for the King's service any British sailors 
 whom they found on board. As the Americans 
 were at that time the only neutrals who could be 
 said to carry on trade, the question peculiarly af- 
 fected them. I will not discuss at large the 
 great principle of mare liberum et mare clausum ; 
 but I take it, that by the general principles of the 
 law of nations every sea is mare liberum^ and to 
 be considered as inter communia. Every nation 
 has a right to send its ships on this open sea. 
 The ship is to be considered as part of that coun- 
 try to which it belongs ; and when it hoists its co- 
 lours, it shows by what nation it is protected. 
 This is the common law of nations ; and as there 
 is no general assembly of civilized States capable 
 of making statutes to bind the whole, there can 
 be no change in this common law, except by 
 treaties between certain particular nations, which 
 may afterwards have been adopted by other na- 
 tions. 
 
 I shall take no notice of any treaties which may 
 heretofore have been made between the maritime 
 
123 
 
 states of Italy or the Hans towns. The first treaty 
 of which I shall take notice is a treaty made be- 
 tween Sweden and England in 1654. Sweden 
 was at that time the sole manufacturer of arms in 
 Europe. Oliver Cromwell, who then governed 
 England, would not permit the Swedes to supply 
 his enemies, the Dutch, with military stores ; and 
 he had sufficient influence with the Swedish go- 
 vernnment to prevail on them to stipulate that 
 neutral ships should not carry military stores to 
 any nation with which he was at war. I will not 
 enter into the various regulations introduced into 
 that treaty, to protect the owner of a ship so visi- 
 ted from injury or insult ; but this treaty gave 
 birth to what was called contrebande de guerre. 
 It was afterwards adopted in a treaty concluded 
 between England and Holland in 1668, and was, 
 I believe, subsequently acceded to by all the ci- 
 vilized nations of Europe. The English Minis- 
 ters set up the following claim : they said, We 
 have a right to stop and enter a neutral ship to 
 search for contrebande de guerre ; when we are on 
 board that ship, if we find British sailors, we have 
 a right to impress them. If we may reason on the 
 Jaw of nations according to the maxims of the 
 common law of England, this claim was ill-found- 
 ed. By the law of England, a landlord may en- 
 ter on the premises leased to his tenant to distrain 
 for rent ; but the law says, that this right of entry 
 is a qualified power, granted for one single pur- 
 pose ; and if the landlord who distrains avails him- 
 self of his entry for any other purpose, he is con- 
 
124 
 
 sidered as having used this power of entering to 
 distrain solely as a pretence for entering to enable 
 him to commit another act : he is therefore consi- 
 dered as a wrong doer, or, according to the lan- 
 guage of the common law of England, as a tres- 
 passer ab initio. If I may be allowed to apply this 
 principle of the law of England to the claim of 
 the British Government to impress British sailors 
 found on board a neutral ship, I cannot hesitate 
 to say that the claim was ill-founded. Let me 
 examine it in another point of view. The com- 
 mander of the English ship of war who stopped 
 the American ship, and took out sailors, saying, 
 that they were British subjects, and as such he 
 had a right to impress them, was both the claim- 
 ant and the judge. From similarity of language 
 and appearance, he would of necessity be frequent- 
 ly mistaken; but the sailors would be carried 
 away, and relief most commonly precluded. 
 Would Englishmen ever have submitted to the 
 claim of such a right against themselves? And 
 if Englishmen would not themselves have sub- 
 mitted to the exercise of such a right, ought they 
 to have claimed it against others? 
 
 There was another measure of Mr. Pitt's re- 
 pugnant to the law of nations, and, in the opinion 
 of many very intelligent men, productive of great 
 injury to this country. At the commencement 
 of the French war in 1793, France was much 
 distressed for food, both at home and in her co- 
 lonies. The English Government thought it ad- 
 
125 
 
 visable to endeavour to increase this distress, and 
 with this view they stopped all neutral ships car- 
 rying provisions to France or to her West India 
 colonies. This measure was certainly a violation 
 of the law of nations ; for a neutral has a general 
 right of trade with either of two belligerents. To 
 prevent the complaints of the neutral, the British 
 Government paid the invoice price of the goods 
 with an increase of ten per cent. But they were 
 soon obliged to relinquish this measure of seizing 
 these provision ships; for the foreign merchant 
 adopted the practice of charging in the invoice so 
 high a price for his goods, that, with the addition 
 often per cent, allowed him for his supposed pro- 
 fits, he found the seizure by the British Govern- 
 ment the best market at which his Q^oods could be 
 disposed of. The provisions thus detained and 
 paid for by our Government, were, through the 
 negligence of persons employed to sell, sometimes 
 not disposed of until they were much diminished 
 in value. At the time that this measure was first 
 adopted by the British Government, I recollect 
 that a mercantile friend of mine, eminently intel- 
 ligent, remarked to me, that Mr. Pitt would be 
 fortunate if this disturbance of the provision trade 
 of Europe and the West Indies did not ultimately 
 prove injurious to ourselves. I will not pretend 
 to say how far the measure contributed to that fa- 
 mine with which we were a short time after af- 
 flicted. 
 
 I will take notice only of one great measure 
 
126 
 
 more of Mr. Pitt's administration; I mean the 
 stoppage of the Bank, and the consequent esta- 
 blishment of paper money, in February 1797. 
 The adoption of this measure afforded relief from 
 that embarrassment which the indiscretion of go- 
 vernment had occasioned. By multiplying the 
 circulating medium, he raised the price of every 
 thing. Every man felt the prosperity of a rising 
 market. Taxes could be increased without being 
 burdensome; for, when the circulating medium 
 was doubled, though the sum demanded by the 
 tax-gatherer remained nominally the same, yet 
 the pressure was to the extent only of one half. 
 All felt prosperity except those who lived on such 
 fixed incomes as could not be increased. But 
 every man of reflection foresaw the difficulty there 
 would be to get rid of this paper money; that, 
 while persevered in, the measure of the value of 
 all property would be unsettled; and that this 
 must in the end produce general confusion. Our 
 ministers are now endeavouring to free us from 
 paper money; in so doing they act wisely and ho- 
 nestly, but great immediate distress is the conse- 
 quence of the measure which they are compelled 
 to adopt; and, even if they should succeed in re- 
 turning to a metallic circulation, they will leave 
 the nation oppressed by that unnatural taxation 
 which was the progeny of a fictitious paper mo- 
 ney. 
 
 Mr. Pitt returned to office in 1804. He inju- 
 diciously prevailed on the Austrian Government 
 
127 
 
 to renew the war, for their troops were too much 
 dispirited by repeated defeats to be fit immediate- 
 ly to meet the victorious armies of France. This 
 was in vain urged to the British Minister; he per- 
 sisted; the Austrians failed in their efforts; and 
 Mr. Pitt died, most probably the victim of afflic- 
 tion. 
 
 I decline saying any thing further of his admi- 
 nistration. As I frequently expressed my disap- 
 probation of his measures while I was in Parlia- 
 ment, I may perhaps be supposed to think of him 
 with ill-will; but I am not conscious that such an 
 opinion would be well founded. Except on two 
 occasions I never had any private intercourse with 
 Mr. Pitt. On both these occasions his offers 
 were expressive of kindness ; and in the House of 
 Commons he more than once protected me when 
 others wished to injure me. I believe he began 
 his political career with sentiments of strict inte- 
 grity; but, as he himself once said, H Constituted 
 as the House of Commons then was, no Minister 
 could act honestly ;" and the personal character 
 of his Master increased the difficulty. I have al- 
 ready expressed my opinion of his conduct in 
 1784, when he protected the King and the people 
 from the meditated designs of oligarchy ; and al- 
 though the nation suffered in some instances from 
 his being unacquainted with the state of other 
 countries, yet that his administration, from De- 
 cember 1783, when he accepted office, to the 
 close of the year 1792, when he consented to 
 
1^8 
 
 begin a war with France, was on the whole be- 
 neficial. 
 
 A question is often asked, which was the abler 
 speaker in the House of Commons, Mr. Pitt or 
 Mr. Fox. Their situations were so different, that 
 it is very difficult to answer this question. Mr. 
 Pitt was supported by a well-disciplined majority, 
 and his eloquence was calculated to make his 
 measures plausible. He was a very correct gram- 
 marian ; but there was one talent in which he sur- 
 passed every speaker I ever heard. I mean the 
 talent of building a speech, and of introducing the 
 arguments of his adversaries exactly in that place 
 in which it best suited him to answer them. Mr. 
 Fox never built a speech ; he relied on his ability 
 to seize weak parts of his adversary's argument, 
 and beat them to pieces. He did this with ex- 
 traordinary skill and success. 
 
 The style of a public speaker must necessarily 
 depend on the audience which he addresses, on 
 the ends which he wishes to obtain ; perhaps, in 
 some degree, on his own personal situation. Con- 
 sidered in this point of view, Lord North was 
 certainly a very good speaker. His pleasantry 
 and good temper were well suited to turn aside 
 the impetuous attacks of his adversaries. To form 
 a true opinion of Mr. Burke's merit as a speaker, 
 he also must be viewed in the same manner. His 
 importance depended on his standing high in the 
 opinion of that party which had placed him in the 
 House : for this reason, he always introduced such 
 
129 
 
 passages as captivated admiration ; and though 
 his speeches were often injudicious, and rarely 
 had the effect of bringing others to think and to 
 act with him, except they were previously so dis- 
 posed by being of the same party, yet he never 
 made a speech in which there were not those bril- 
 liant passages which the Roman authors call 
 Purpurei Panni. When he brought forward the 
 Impeachment against Mr. Hastings, he laid on the 
 table of the House of Commons twenty-two 
 Charges. I was under the necessity of examin- 
 ing those Charges with attention. I think they 
 were a master-piece in that style of composition 
 which Mr. Burke thought himself authorised to 
 use. They were a happy mixture of assertion, of 
 evidence, of inference, and of invective, so dexter- 
 ously blended, that it was extremely difficult to 
 unravel them ; but admirably suited to influence 
 the opinions of those who read negligently. 
 
 Demosthenes is considered as the ablest speak- 
 er of antiquity. He addressed his speeches to an 
 audience highly intelligent, and actuated by an 
 opinion that the people of Athens were entitled to 
 hold the first place among the Greek Republics. 
 The same arguments, addressed to a British 
 House of Commons, would have appeared ridi- 
 culous and contemptible. 
 
 Mr. Pitt died early in the year 1806. An Ad- 
 ministration was immediately formed, composed 
 of the three parties ; the Grenvilles, the great 
 Whig families, Lord Sidmouth and his friends ; 
 
 M 
 
130 
 
 Mr. Fox was Secretary of State for Foreign Af- 
 fairs. The immediate friends of Mr. Pitt, viz. 
 Mr. Percival, Lord Castlereagh, Mr. Canning, 
 Lord Eldon, and others, took their stations in 
 Opposition. An indiscreet friend of the new Ad- 
 ministration incautiously said, that they compri- 
 sed all the talents of the country. From this 
 accident, they got the nick-name of " the Ta- 
 lents." I decline to review the measures of this 
 Administration ; for I cannot say that I see many 
 to be applauded, and I see several which I must 
 condemn. There is, however, one measure which 
 I must take notice of, because it has already pro- 
 duced much injury to my country. Its injurious 
 consequences are still existing, and perhaps may 
 never be removed. The measure I allude to, was 
 the declaration of War against the King of Prus- 
 sia. This Monarch had taken possession of Han- 
 over. His Majesty, King George III. felt the 
 strongest indignation at this circumstance ; and 
 to gratify his Majesty's resentment, Mr. Fox con- 
 sented to declare War against the King of Prus- 
 sia. In adopting this conduct, Mr. Fox forgot 
 his duties as Minister of the King of Great Bri- 
 tain ; for it was not for the interest of Great Bri- 
 tain, to weaken the force of Prussia, nor had she 
 any just ground for War against that Monarch. 
 Buonaparte had destroyed the power of Austria, 
 and compelled Russia to retire from the contest. 
 Having subdued Austria, and the Southern part 
 of Germany, it was not probable that he would 
 
131 
 
 leave Prussia Sovereign of the Northern part; and 
 the King of Prussia had given Buonaparte ample 
 grounds for complaint. It was not only visible 
 that it was the interest of Buonaparte to attack 
 Prussia, but his intentions to do it could scarcely 
 be said to be concealed ; for the report of such 
 intention was prevalent through every part of 
 France. While the Continent was in this situa- 
 tion, could it be for the interest of Great Britain 
 to diminish the strength of Prussia ? 
 
 But after the War against Prussia had been 
 declared, Mr. Fox adopted another measure 
 which has produced most iujurous consequences 
 to Great Britain. I allude to his putting the four 
 great rivers of the King of Prussia's dominions, 
 the Trave, the Elbe, the Weser, and the Ems, 
 in a state of blockade. Mr. Fox announced this 
 blockade in a letter to Mr. Monroe, the American 
 Minister in London, in April 1806. In this let- 
 ter Mr. Fox signified to the American Minister, 
 that his Majesty having thought proper to put the 
 four above mentioned rivers in a state of block- 
 ade, American ships would not be allowed to en- 
 ter them. In the course of the ensuing summer, 
 Lord Howick, now Earl Grey, who had succeeded 
 Mr. Fox in the management of foreign affairs, ex- 
 tended the blockade along the Northern Coast of 
 France ; and subsequently it was extended along 
 the Western Coast, and the Mediterranean. I 
 shall consider this measure in three points of 
 view : First, how far it was consistent with the 
 
132 
 
 law of nations ; Secondly, how far it was consis- 
 tent with our immediate interests ; Thirdly, I shall 
 take notice of the injurious consequences which 
 have since followed from it. As to the first point, 
 it appears to me to have been a direct violation 
 of the law of nations. That law allows to every 
 Neutral the right of trading with either of two 
 Belligerents. This right may be restrained by 
 treaty. The first Treaty that seems to have re- 
 strained this right, is the Treaty of Commerce be- 
 tween England and Holland in 1668 ; which 
 Treaty was subsequently adopted by France and 
 the other principal European nations, in the Trea- 
 ties of Nimeguen, Ryswich, and Utrecht. All 
 Treaties are negotiated in French. The expres- 
 sion in this Treaty is, that the Neutral shall not 
 trade avec une place assiegee, bloquee ou investie. 
 I believe the w T ord place is never used in the 
 French language to signify a country. It is gene- 
 rally employed to denote town or fortress. But 
 if I am mistaken in this opinion, I think I cannot 
 be mistaken in my next observation, viz. that as- 
 siege e and investie, the first and third of the par- 
 ticiples applied to the substantive place, are only 
 applicable to a town or fortress ; and the interme- 
 diate participle bloquee, must be considered as an- 
 alogous to the other two. I apprehend that the 
 meaning of the Article thus introduced into the 
 Treaty of 1668, was this : viz. That the Neutral 
 should abstain from trading with a town, which 
 either of two Belligerents was endeavouring to 
 
133 
 
 capture : — and it was reasonable that the Neutral 
 should be thus restrained ; for, by continuing to 
 trade with such a town, he might prolong the Siege. 
 I know it may be said, that by this construction, 
 there can be no blockade of a Sea-port, except it 
 is blockaded by land as well as by sea. My an- 
 swer is, that if blockade by land, as well as by 
 sea, is necesary to the Capture, the town which is 
 not blockaded by land, as well as by sea, is not a 
 town within the Article of the Treaty of 1668. 
 
 Buonaparte followed the example which we had 
 set him. By his Berlin Decree, he put restraints 
 on the Commerce of one Nation with another. 
 This produced new restraints from the British 
 Government. These were followed by Buona 
 parte's Decrees from Milan : and thus both Na- 
 tions concurred in restraining Commercial inter- 
 course. Was this for the interest of Great Bri- 
 tain ? This was the second point which I wish- 
 ed to consider. 
 
 I can easily perceive that this restriction of the 
 Commerce of the world, assisted the views of 
 Buonaparte. His strength did not arise from 
 Commerce, but from the Armies which he could 
 maintain ; and he maintained those Armies by the 
 pillage of the Continent. By cramping Com 
 merce, he diminished the resources of Great Bri- 
 tain. But what interest could Great Britain have, 
 in thus restraining Commerce ? She deprived 
 herself of the immediate advantage of sending out 
 her manufactures by Neutral ships. The preju- 
 
 m 2 
 
134 
 
 dice she subsequently suffered by this measure, 
 was still greater ; for it produced a War with the 
 United States of America, The Americans said, 
 " France and England concur in acts of injustice 
 against us : we cannot make war with both : 
 whichever of the two Nations first relinquishes its 
 acts of injustice, we will make War upon the 
 other, if it does not adopt a similar conduct with- 
 in four months." Buonaparte immediately re- 
 voked his Decrees, as far as they regarded the 
 Americans. We refused to revoke our Orders 
 of Council ; and War was the consequence. The 
 Earl of Liverpool had the good sense to terminate 
 this war. 
 
 But mark the consequences which have fol- 
 lowed from this unfortunate restraint on the Com- 
 merce of Nations. Germany, accustomed to be 
 supplied with our manufactures, was obliged to 
 set up manufactures within itself ; and on the re- 
 turn of Peace, has been obliged, in a great de* 
 gree, to reject the use of our manufactures, be- 
 cause the sale of them interfered with the prospe- 
 rity of her own. 
 
 Mr. Canning and Lord Castlereagh, who suc- 
 ceeded Earl Grey in the Foreign Office, both ap- 
 proved and persevered in this doctrine of block- 
 ade ; and it has been contended that Buonaparte 
 first began the restrictions ; but this has been de- 
 nied by the Dutch Commissioners. Mr. Fox's 
 letter was in April, 1806. Can any instrument of 
 an earlier date be produced, issued by Buona- 
 
135 
 
 parte ? Before the commencement of these re- 
 strictions, Great Britain possessed, almost exclu- 
 sively, the manufacture of cotton. The distress 
 in Lancashire and Glasgow, too evidently shows 
 how much we have suffered by the establish- 
 ment of the Cotton Manufacture in other parts of 
 Europe. 
 
 I am aware how much I shall offend the friends 
 of Mr. Fox by making these remarks on this mea- 
 sure of blockade ; but truth requires it. I cannot 
 censure his conduct without feeling regret ; for 
 he had qualities which conciliated both affection 
 and esteem. Perhaps few men have ever owed 
 more to nature, and less to education ; for from 
 early life, he had never been accustomed to ha- 
 bits of restraint. He owed to nature great parts, 
 and an affectionate heart. Alixs se dedere eorum 
 obsequi studiis, was prevalent with him, even to a 
 weakness ; but having never accustomed himself 
 to habits of restraint, he loved the deep stake, 
 and the rash game. This ruined his fortune in 
 private life, and was equally injurious to him in 
 his political career. He was three times the effi- 
 cient Minister of this country. During the first 
 period that he was in this situation, viz. in 1782, 
 he brought forward no great public measure ; al- 
 though, as the House of Commons had declared 
 its wish to put an end to the American War, a 
 termination of that Contest was the measure which 
 he obviously ought to have brought forward, yet 
 he does not appear to have taken any step with 
 
136 
 
 that view. He was probably rendered inactive 
 by the dissensions in the Cabinet, by the conten- 
 tions between the political parties, and the dis- 
 union among his own friends. In this year, he re- 
 mained Minister only three months. 
 
 After the death of Lord Rockingham, he came 
 to an open breach with the Earl of Shelburne and 
 the Duke of Richmond ; and resigned his situa- 
 tion in the Cabinet, in compliance with the wishes 
 of Mr. Burke. 
 
 His coalition with Lord North, at the end of 
 the year 1782, was a rash and ill-advised mea- 
 sure: I have heard Mr. Fox use this argument 
 in his justification : — " Our Party is formed on 
 the principle of Confederacy ; ought we not, then 
 to confederate with him who can give us the 
 greatest strength ? And who can give us greater 
 strength than Lord North ?" But Mr. Fox did 
 not take into his calculation the importance of 
 character. The Nation could not bear an alliance 
 between the Minister who had so injuriously car- 
 ried on the War, and the man by whose exertions 
 that Minister had been compelled to relinquish 
 the Contest. 
 
 In 1783, he was Minister for nine months ; du- 
 ring which time, he was wholly under the gui- 
 dance of Mr. Burke. The India Bill was the 
 great measure of his administration during this 
 period. In 1786, he yielded to the wishes of 
 Mr. Burke, and prevailed on the Opposition to 
 support that gentleman in the Impeachment of 
 
137 
 
 Mr. Hastings. His acquiescence in the wishes 
 of Mr. Burke on this occasion, can be attributed 
 only to the influence which Mr. Burke had over 
 him, and to his indulgence to those with whom he 
 acted : for he must have had the good sense to 
 have seen the advantage which this measure gave 
 to his rival Mr. Pitt. Mr. Burke's importance 
 depended on his not being disgraced by this Im- 
 peachment : Mr. Pitt could at any time inflict that 
 disgrace on him ; and as Mr. Burke's influence 
 over Mr. Fox guided the Opposition, that Party 
 was, from the moment that Mr. Pitt acquiesced 
 m the Impeachment, under the controul of Mr. 
 Pitt. 
 
 This Impeachment necessarily led to connexion 
 between Mr. Pitt and Mr. Burke ; and as the 
 good sense and upright heart of Mr. Fox could 
 not be prevailed on to approve of a War with 
 France, Mr. Burke openly separated himself from 
 him. 
 
 He died in September, 1806. He had re- 
 ceived from Nature great parts. He had not ac- 
 quired much political knowledge. By patient 
 reading and reflection, that political knowledge 
 which he possessed, was principally derived from 
 the business of the House of Commons. Perhaps 
 it may be said of him, as of his progenitor, Charles 
 the Second, " that Indolence was his Sultana- 
 Queen." — In contemplating his character, we can 
 scarcely avoid recollecting that expression which 
 the Roman historian applies to the Emperor Gal- 
 ba : — " Capax imperii nisi imperassetP 
 
138 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 On the Causes which contributed to the Extm- 
 guishment of Feudal Burthens in England. 
 
 I have stated Feudal Burthens, or as they are 
 called by the French, Les Droits Seigncureaux, 
 as one of the principal causes which led the peo- 
 ple of France to wish for a Revolution. A ques- 
 tion will naturally occur, how happens it that no 
 such aversion has existed in England? The an- 
 swer is obvious. Because no oppressive Feudal 
 Burthens exist in England. The payments by 
 copy-holders on alienation, or descent, are perhaps 
 politically inconvenient, because they may prevent 
 the improvement of land ; but this tenure affects 
 at present so very small a part of our land, that in 
 some places it is scarcely known, while the Feu- 
 dal payments in France were spread through the 
 whole country. 
 
 As France and England were both originally 
 Feudal Governments, how has it happened, that 
 these Feudal payments have remained so univer- 
 sally in France, while they have been nearly abo- 
 lished in England? It is difficult to answer this 
 question : but I will mention two circumstances 
 which seem to me to have contributed to their 
 abolition in England. The first was the statute 
 ^)f Quia Emptores, the 18th of Edward I. This 
 
139 
 
 statute prevented sub-infeudation. Before this 
 statute, a tenant by knightVservice could alien his 
 land, to be held of himself by knight's-service. 
 But after this statute, the alienee was to hold of 
 that lord of whom the alienor had held. 
 
 The other circumstance was the usage which 
 gradually prevailed in England of feoffment to 
 uses. 
 
 Fraud, fear, and convenience, the great springs 
 of human action, introduced this practice. 
 
 The man who was conscious that he held his 
 land by a bad title, enfeoffed a friend of his land 
 to the use of himself, that when the rightful own- 
 er of the land brought an action against him, he 
 might plead non tenet, that he was not the owner 
 of the land; and by this plea defeat the demandant's 
 action. 
 
 But fear was a more universal motive, This 
 conveyance to a friend to protect lands from for- 
 feiture for Treason, must have operated far more 
 frequently ; perhaps the practice became almost 
 universal during the long period of dispute be- 
 tween the two Houses of York and Lancaster. 
 No man could be certain of the success of that 
 party which he joined. He therefore enfeoffed a 
 friend to uses, that in case of his being unfortu- 
 nate, his family might be protected from forfeiture. 
 There was a third motive to induce men to 
 adopt this practice of feoffment io uses. By the 
 common law, a freehold interest in land could 
 not be devised by will ; but if a man had, in his 
 
140 
 
 life- time, limited his land to uses, this use could 
 be devised by his will. 
 
 From these motives, almost all the lands in 
 England had become vested in Feoffees to Uses; 
 and as by this practice, the Lords had lost the 
 Feudal profits they were entitled to from their 
 lands, either those Feudal payments were forgot- 
 ten, or were released, or fell into disuse. 
 
 Henry VIII. by the statute which he procured 
 to be passed toward the close of his reign, pre- 
 served these Feudal payments to the Crown, by 
 re-uniting the seisin, or legal estate, to the use. 
 On the restoration of Charles II. the King con- 
 sented to abolish Feudal services, and to receive 
 a compensation in lieu of them. But in the sta- 
 tute, which provides this compensation to the 
 Crown, no compensation is provided for any sub- 
 ject of whom lands were held by knight's-service. 
 The inference is, that at the Restoration, there 
 were no lands in England held by knight's-service 
 of a subject. Yet most certainly, in all Feudal 
 Governments, tenure of the alienor, and attendant 
 services, were consequent on every alienation, 
 except there was either an express or implied pro- 
 vision to the contrary. This rule was so fully es- 
 tablished by the common law of England, that 
 before the statute of Quia Emptores y if B. had 
 held lands of A. by knightVservice, and had 
 aliened those lands to C. and his heirs, without 
 expressing the services by which C. should hold, 
 the law said that C. should hold the lands of B. 
 
Hi 
 
 by knight's service, and the same payments as B. 
 paid to A. 
 
 Perhaps the great proportion of the lands in 
 England, which had been conveyed in mortmain, 
 contributed to the abolition of Feudal services ; 
 for when land was conveyed in mortmain, the 
 Feudal services were suspended ; or, to speak 
 more accurately, no Feudal services were receiv- 
 able. And when that land, by confiscation of 
 Convent property, in the time of Henry VIII. had 
 passed into the hands of a layman, from whom 
 the Feudal service might have been demanded, 
 either the Feudal services were forgotten, or the 
 demand neglected to be made. But from what- 
 ever circumstance it happened, I believe, that at 
 the restoration of Charles II. there were no lands 
 in England held of a subject by knights-service. 
 In France, down to the time of the Revolution, 
 Feudal services of different natures, and to diffe- 
 rent extents, seem to have prevailed through 
 the whole country. 
 
 N 
 
U2 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Reform of Parliament. 
 
 I will now consider that most important ques- 
 tion, the Reform of Parliament. A decision on 
 this question must, ere long, take place. The 
 general attention of the nation has been called to 
 it. The people must be subdued, or the subject 
 must be fully examined, and some Reform con- 
 sented to. Let me first state the sense in which 
 I use the words Reform and Revolution. 
 
 I consider Reform to be a correction of abuses 
 without destroying the existing Constitution. I 
 consider Revolution to be a correction of abuses, 
 accompanied with the destruction of 4 the existing 
 Constitution. 
 
 In England, in 1688, the nation removed the 
 existing dynasty, and established a new one. As 
 the dynasty is considered as the most prominent 
 part of the Constitution, this change has been de- 
 nominated a Revolution. Perhaps, according to 
 my definition, it might more properly have been 
 called a Reform ; for the two other existing parts 
 of the Constitution, viz. the House of Lords and 
 the House of Commons, were left unaltered. 
 
 In 1789, that Government which had existed 
 in France during the reigns of Louis XIV. and 
 
143 
 
 Louis XV. was swept away. A new Constitu- 
 tion was established, and when Louis XVI. ac- 
 cepted Royalty under this new Constitution, the 
 same dynasty, but under a new title, was placed 
 on the throne. I consider this proceeding in 
 1789, to have been, in the fullest sense of the 
 word, a Revolution. 
 
 In 1800, the Irish Government was abolished, 
 and the inhabitants of Ireland subjected to a new 
 Constitution. This measure also I consider as a 
 Revolution. 
 
 I have always dreaded Revolution. The crisis 
 consequent on it, is sometimes beneficial ; I be- 
 lieve it will ultimately be found to be so in 
 France ; but the paroxysms which precede the 
 crisis, are terrifying. As an Englishman, I have 
 always wished for Reform ; because I have al- 
 ways been of opinion, that if Reform did not take 
 place, Revolution would be a necessary conse- 
 quence of the existing abuses. 
 
 I will state what I consider as the abuse which 
 stands most in need of being corrected. It is 
 this — that individual Peers have, in many places, 
 usurped the nomination of Members of Parlia- 
 ment from those aggregate bodies of the com- 
 monalty to which the Crown had originally grant- 
 ed it. I have said individual Peers ; I am aware 
 that in many places, individual Commoners have 
 usurped the property in boroughs : but the usur- 
 pation is most frequently by Peers ; and if the ac- 
 quisition is first made by a Commoner, the power 
 
144 
 
 which he has thereby acquired soon occasions 
 him to be elevated to the Peerage. The mischief 
 is also greater where the usurpation is by a Peer ; 
 for after he has acquired this unconstitutional 
 power, he exercises functions inconsistent with 
 each other ; in impeachment, for example, the 
 Commons are the accusers, and the Peers the 
 Judges ; but if the Members of the House of 
 Commons, who prefer the accusation, are nomi- 
 nated by the Peers, and there is any truth in that 
 maxim of the common law, Qui facit per alium, 
 facit per se, those who are the Judges are at the 
 same time the Accusers. Will any man say that 
 this ought to be ? By the principles of our Con- 
 stitution, the Commons are to vote the taxes, and 
 the Peers have only a right to prevent the propo- 
 sed tax from being imposed, by refusing their 
 consent. This regulation was introduced to pro- 
 tect the Commons from being taxed beyond what 
 they could bear. But what becomes of this pro- 
 tection, if the Peers are allowed to name the 
 Members of the House of Commons ? Immode- 
 rate taxation is the real cause of our present dis- 
 tress ; and men call for a Reform of the House of 
 Commons, because they feel that the power of 
 taxing has been abused. 
 
 Kings firt summoned to Parliament Represen- 
 tatives from bodies of the Commonalty, that they 
 might be protected against their great vassals. 
 The great vassals saw this, and endeavoured to 
 deprive the King of this defence, by compelling 
 
145 
 
 these aggregate bodies of the Commonalty to de- 
 pute to Parliament those men whom the several 
 Peers might select. This attempt of the Peers 
 seems to have been made at a very early period 
 after Representatives of the Commons were first 
 summoned to Parliament ; for in the first Parlia- 
 ment of Edward I. he enacted provisions to res- 
 strain this conduct in the Peers, The expressions 
 in the act are these : " Forasmuch as Elections 
 ought to be free, the King forbids, on pain of se- 
 vere forfeiture, that any great man or other should, 
 by force of arms, or by menaces, or by any sub- 
 tle contrivance, disturb the freedom of Election. " 
 
 The Commons of England now stand in need 
 of this protection against the Peers, which was 
 heretofore wanted by our Kings. I know it will 
 be said, that the Peer, who nominates Members 
 of the House of Commons, and afterwards sells 
 * their votes to the Minister, pays his proportion of 
 those taxes which are imposed. This may be 
 true; but the gain of his immediate object induces 
 him to forget the more distant evil. 
 
 I decline giving instances in the present reign, 
 of the abusive exercise of power thus acquired; but 
 I will name one instance in the reign of George 
 II.; and it is so generally known, that I am confident 
 no man will dispute the correctness of the anec- 
 dote. The post of Captain of the Band of Pen- 
 sioners was vacant ; the King wished to give it to 
 a gentleman whom he desired to have about his 
 person. The Minister, Mr. Pelham, proposed 
 
 n 2 
 
146 
 
 to give it to another gentleman ; but after some 
 struggle, the Minister yielded, and the post was 
 destined for the King's friend. At this moment, 
 before the place was actually given away, Lord 
 Falmouth signified to the Minister, that he wish- 
 ed to have this employment. Mr. Pelham re- 
 monstrated with him that the place was destined 
 for a personal friend of the King : the only an- 
 swer which Lord Falmouth made, was : < c Sir, 
 we are nine." This was the only answer which 
 the Minister could obtain from him ; and because 
 Lord Falmouth named nine Members of the 
 House of commons, the King and the Minister 
 were both obliged to summit. Lord Falmouth 
 certainly paid his share of the taxes, which these 
 nine Members assisted the Minister to impose. 
 But this consideration was out- weighed by the im- 
 mediate object which he obtained. 
 
 The people of England have been gradually 
 led, to demand a Reform in the House of Com- 
 mons. I believe the late Earl of Chatham was 
 among the first who suggested the necessity. 
 He saw that the number of Members nominated 
 by Proprietors and Patrons of Boroughs was so 
 large, that the people were not protected against 
 immoderate taxation. 
 
 Towards the close of the American war, the 
 people were led to observe that they had been en- 
 gaged in that War, and subjected to heavy taxes, 
 for the purpose of enforcing a claim of the House 
 of Commons to tax their fellow-subjects in Ame- 
 
147 
 
 rica. How far the House of Commons was en- 
 titled to this right, was at least doubtful ; for the 
 usage had always been for the Colonies to tax 
 themselves in their own Provincial Assemblies ; 
 and on questions of Constitutional Rights, usage 
 has always been appealed to. The people of 
 England found themselves disappointed in that 
 hope which had been held out to them, that by 
 procuring Revenue from America, taxation on 
 the inhabitants of Great Britain would be diminish- 
 ed. They experienced the very reverse of this 
 hope which had been so held out to them. They 
 found their own burthens immoderately increas- 
 ed, and if the contest were persevered in, they 
 saw no bounds to taxes. While the Country 
 was in this situation, several eminent men point- 
 ed out to the people, that immoderate taxation was 
 the consequence of the existing state of the House 
 Commons ; that of a Reform of that House was 
 necessary ; that the people ought to be more 
 efficiently represented in it. 
 
 The Duke of Richmond was among those who 
 stood foremost in recommending a Reform of 
 Parliament. The remedy which he suggested, 
 was Election by Universal Suffrage. 
 
 If I am correct in what I have stated respect- 
 ing the manner in which aggregate bodies of the 
 Commonalty acquired the right of sending Re- 
 presentatives to Parliament — the Duke of Rich- 
 mond's plan would not have been a Reform, but a 
 Revolution. 
 
148 
 
 I will acknowledge that I have always heard 
 with regret, the suggestion of this plan. It never 
 could be a permanent Constitution. It might 
 possibly be an intermediate state, through which, 
 after much suffering, we might ultimately pass to 
 a good Constitution. 
 
 I have said, that the nomination to some seats 
 in Parliament has been usurped by Peers ; I will 
 explain what I mean by this assertion. In Bur- 
 gage-tenement Boroughs, the right of electing 
 Representatives to Parliament has been granted to 
 every owner of a freehold interest, in a tenement 
 within the Borough; and it has been decided, 
 that the site of an ancient Burgage entitles the 
 owner to a vote. A Peer purchases a majority 
 of the Burgages or ancient sites. The night 
 before the election, he sends down his dependants. 
 The noble Lord's steward then delivers a Con- 
 veyance of a Burgage to each person ; the next 
 morning they are carried up to vote, and as soon 
 as the return is made, the several Voters give 
 back their conveyances to the steward, and they 
 are heard of no more. The members thus re- 
 turned, have not been elected by proprietors of a 
 freehold in the Burgages; for the Conveyances 
 transferred no interest to the several persons to 
 whom they were made. Suppose the noble Lord 
 had made these conveyances to prevent these 
 Burgage-tenements from being taken in execution 
 by his creditors; will any man say that these Con- 
 veyances would have been valid against the credi- 
 
149 
 
 tors? I believe there is no doubt as to the an- 
 swer which must be given. The conveyances 
 were fictitious and colourable : and as against the 
 creditors they were void ; for they conveyed no 
 property. But can they be void as against credi- 
 tors, and valid as against the King? for the King- 
 has a right to have two Members returned to Par- 
 liament, elected by a majority of the owners of 
 freehold interests in the several Burgages within 
 the Borough. But if the two members returned 
 are not elected by owners of freehold interests, 
 they will sit in Parliament only by the nomination 
 of the noble Peer himself. 
 
 I believe there are about sixty Members of the 
 House of Commons, who thus sit in Parliament 
 by the nomination of proprietors of Burgage* 
 tenement Boroughs. . A more considerable num- 
 ber sit there by the nomination of Patrons of Bo- 
 roughs. In these Boroughs the Right of Election 
 is various. Sometimes in close Corporations; 
 sometimes in Freemen ; sometimes in the payers 
 of Scot and Lot; sometimes in Pot-boilers, with 
 other various qualifications. The patron's merit 
 with the Minister is, that he can supply him with 
 the nomination to these seats. 
 
 It will be asked, what mischief arises from all 
 this. The answer is obvious. The Minister 
 having thus obtained a command over a majority 
 of the House of Commons, the people are depriv- 
 ed of that protection against immoderate taxation, 
 which the principles of our Constitution had se- 
 
150 
 
 cured to them. Should it be asked, did the House 
 of Commons ever, in fact, protect the people 
 against immoderate taxes ? I answer, Yes. From 
 the accession of the Tudors, to the commence- 
 ment of the great rebellion, in the reign of Charles 
 I. the people were protected from immoderate 
 taxation by the House of Commons. Take, for 
 example, the reign of Henry VIII. in disposition 
 the most tyrannical of all our monarchs. Though 
 they yielded to every other of his wishes, they 
 would not grant him the people's money. In 
 vain did he urge them to these grants ; he told 
 them repeatedly that they cheated him; and in 
 this he told them the truth ; for, by Feoffments to 
 Uses, the profits which he was entitled to from 
 estates held of him in capite y were withheld from 
 him. It was not until the 27th year of his reign, 
 that he could prevail on them to pass the Statute 
 of Uses, by which the frauds which had been 
 practised on him were prevented ; although he 
 had been for many years urging the House of 
 Commons to pass this statute. I know it may be 
 said that the House of Commons consented to 
 let him confiscate the property of the convents; 
 but that property was not under their protection. 
 They permitted Queen Mary to re-establish the 
 Roman Catholic religion; but when she asked 
 them to consent that the confiscated property of 
 the convents should be restored, they refused it ; 
 for that property was then become the property of 
 laymen, and was under their protection, 
 
151 
 
 At the commencement of the great rebellion in 
 the time of Charles I. perhaps there was hardly 
 any nation in Europe in which taxes were more 
 moderate than in England. On one occasion 
 during that reign, an unusual number of subsidies 
 was demanded in a message from the Crown. 
 The House was startled at the novelty ; but a 
 Member reconciled them to the proposal by 
 shewing them how very small a sum he, who 
 was reputed a very rich man, should pay. Mr. 
 Hampden had an estate of 2,000/. a year; the ship- 
 money demanded from him was only twenty shil- 
 lings : he resisted it ; not on account of the 
 amount, but on account of the injustice of the de- 
 mand. 
 
 In the time of Charles I. Members were sent 
 to the House of Commons from those Counties, 
 Cities, and Boroughs, which send them now. 
 Chester and Durham, I believe, did not send 
 Members till the reign of Charles II. The al- 
 teration, however, as to the places which have a 
 right to send Members to Parliament, has been 
 very little. But the Minister had not then dis- 
 covered the means of influencing Elections. I 
 have attributed immoderate taxation to the man- 
 ner in which Members are returned to the House 
 of Commons. It is not the Members returned 
 who are alone to be corrupted, but every man 
 who contributes to the Election of the Members 
 is to be influenced ; and the present system ren- 
 ders it necessary that the Crown should have 
 
152 
 
 great patronage. Men call for retrenchment in 
 the expenditure ; but if retrenchment were car- 
 ried to a beneficial extent, the Crown would be 
 left under the power of an Oligarchy, the most 
 oppressive of all Governments. 
 
 I have thus stated the mischief. What is the 
 remedy ? My answer is, a House of Commons 
 interested to keep down taxes. And to secure 
 that the House of Commons should be interested 
 to keep kovvn taxes, the Members should not 
 only be men of property themselves, but should 
 be elected by men who have that degree of pro- 
 perty which may make them solicitous to keep 
 taxes moderate. Retrenchment must be prece- 
 ded by Reform. 
 
 While Members are returned to Parliament by 
 those Cities and Boroughs which now send them, 
 is it practicable to secure that they shall be elect- 
 ed by men of property ? I think it is. For in- 
 stance, in the Burgage-tenement Boroughs, let 
 every Elector swear, not only that he is proprie- 
 tor of the Burgage-tenement for which he claims 
 to vote, and has been so for a twelve-month pre- 
 ceding the election, but let him also swear, that 
 he has a landed estate of a moderate value, say 
 20/. a year, in that county in which the Borough 
 is situate ; and if the Electors are found to be be- 
 low a certain number, suppose 100, let a con- 
 current right of voting be given to every Free- 
 holder within the County, who is owner of 100/. 
 a-year Apply the same remedy of a landed quali- 
 
15& 
 
 fication to other Cities and Boroughs, varying the 
 circumstances according to the different Rights 
 of Election. 
 
 I think it would be also advisable that the 
 qualifications of Electors for Counties should be 
 raised from 40 shillings to 20/. a-year. This 
 would preclude the necessity of Electors being 
 carried to the Poll at the expense of the Candi- 
 dates. I know that the remedy which I suggest, 
 is the reverse of what is recommended by the Ad- 
 vocates for Universal Suffrage ; but the mischief 
 against which I wish to protect the people, is im- 
 moderate taxation. 
 
 The Members returned to the French Nation- 
 al Assembly are elected by men, each of whom 
 must have property to the value of 1800/. sterling. 
 I think this a good Right of Election ; for the 
 Electors have an interest to elect those who will 
 keep taxes moderate. I know it may be said, 
 that there are other articles which require to be 
 defended as well as the Subject's property ; such 
 as his life and liberty.* This is true ; but it is the 
 property of the Subject which the Minister wants, 
 and it is, therefore, the property which we ought 
 most solicitously to guard ; and let it be remem- 
 bered, that the Representative who has an inter- 
 est to guard my property because he is at the same 
 time guarding his own, will for the same reason, 
 be interested to guard my life and liberty. 
 
 I have heard it said, that Reform in theHouse of 
 Commons would prevent those men who have 
 
154 
 
 abilities, but are without property, from being 
 Members of that House, and that these men are 
 very useful. I am of a different opinion. I think 
 they are rather mischievous than useful. I wish 
 the House of Commons not to continue to exer- 
 cise that share in the Executive Government 
 which it has lately acquired. The Minister al- 
 ways wishes the House of Commons to vote a 
 previous approbation of that measure which he is 
 about to adopt. By this means, he is protected 
 from subsequent crimination. But the Nation is 
 deprived of one of the most important advantages 
 which it is entitled to expect from a House of 
 Commons : viz. An Assembly watchful over the 
 conduct of Ministers, and punishing them for 
 acts injurious to their Country. 
 
 I have given my opinion thus fully on the sub- 
 ject of Reform ; because I am convinced, that 
 either Reform or Revolution must soon take 
 place. I wish for Reform and deprecate Revo- 
 lution. 
 
 I have thus ventured to give my opinion on the 
 probability that a Reform of the House of Com- 
 mons will take place in Great Britain. I have 
 expressed my wish that a Reform may take place 
 as being, the only means by which Revolution 
 may be avoided. I have also expressed my opi- 
 nion as to the manner in which Reform may be 
 effected. Most certainly more regulations than 
 those which I have suggested will be necessary. 
 
 Members of the House of Commons were first 
 
155 
 
 summoned to Parliament to protect the King 
 against his great Nobles ; they are now wanted to 
 protect the People against immoderate taxation. 
 To induce them to afford this protection, they 
 must themselves be interested; and to secure that 
 they shall be interested, they must be elected by 
 men who are payers of the taxes. With this view, 
 the right of electing Members must be taken 
 from many of the small Towns, and transferred 
 to the inhabitants of large Towns. 
 
 Some men have thought, that Triennial Parlia- 
 
 lents might be of great benefit, and this is the 
 Dnly Reform which the great Whig Families 
 seem disposed to consent to. I cannot say that I 
 
 *e any great advantage in the adoption of this 
 measure,. It would render the House of Com- 
 mons less suited to share in the exercise of the 
 Executive Government. And this is the only 
 benefit which I can see in it. I admit that this 
 would be a benefit ; for while the House of Com- 
 mons continue to possess that share in the Exe- 
 cutive Government which they have been allowed 
 to usurp, they are disqualified to watch over the 
 conduct of the Executive Government, perhaps 
 the most useful duty which they have to dis- 
 charge. 
 
156 
 
 CHAPTER VIIL 
 
 On the State of Parties in England. 
 
 The present political parties in England affect 
 to rally under two names ; viz. Pittites and 
 Foxites. Has either party any great Political 
 object which it professes to wish to carry ? The 
 Pittites profess no other object that of preventing 
 changes ; the Foxites profess no definite object. 
 The people therefore, view the two parties under 
 the more intelligible names of the Ins and the 
 Outs. Admit for the moment that both Mr. Pitt 
 and Mr. Fox had great talents, and that both con- 
 ferred much benefit on their country. It does not 
 follow, that those who call themselves Pittites 
 have the same talents, or have a right to claim, as 
 heirs, the reward of his merits. The same an- 
 swer may be given to the Foxites. The names 
 are brought forward as noms de guerre, and to give 
 splendour to the several parties. 
 
 It may not be undeserving our attention, to 
 consider how these parties have arisen ; Sir Ro- 
 bert Walpole governed England by uniting the 
 influence of the Crown to the Whig Party. I use 
 the expression Whig Party, because, during that 
 period, the Whigs were not a faction but a party ; 
 
157 
 
 for they had a great political object; viz. To pre- 
 vent the return of the Stuarts and the dreaded es- 
 tablishment of Popery and despotism. 
 
 Sir Robert Walpole fell ; he was succeeded by 
 the Pelhams. Mr. Pelham was the man of the 
 best understanding in that administration ; but he 
 certainly was not a man of a superior mind. 
 George II. wished to employ Lord Carteret, af- 
 terwards Earl of Granville, as Secretary of State 
 for Foreign Affairs. He was beyond all doubt, 
 the ablest man of the day for that situation. But 
 the Pelhams feared his abilities and compelled 
 the King to remove him : the Pelhams carried on 
 the War of 1741 feebly, and they ended it without 
 wisdom ; for they left in existence the seeds of 
 future disputes. The Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle 
 must be considered as little more than a cessation 
 of Arms ; it was a Truce rather than a Peace. 
 Mr. Pelham died. His party continued in power 
 under the auspices of his brother, the Duke of 
 Newcastle. 
 
 History hardly points out to us in any country 
 or in any age, a Minister more incapable or more 
 contemptible. — The War of 1756 burst forth, the 
 Duke of Newcastle was under the necessity of 
 assigning to Mr. Pitt the employment of Secre- 
 tary of State, with the management of the War. 
 The great abilities of this gentleman enabled him 
 to carry on the War with much success; and the 
 three last years of the reign of George II. are per- 
 
 o 2 
 
158 
 
 haps the most glorious period of our History since 
 the accession of the Brunswick dynasty. 
 
 In October, 1760, George III. succeeded to 
 the Crown; he had been educated in aversion to 
 those trammels in which his grandfather had been 
 held ; and tutored from early life to wish to be his 
 own minister, within a year after his accession, he 
 removed Mr. Pitt, and in the following half year 
 swept away the whole Pelham confederacy. He 
 appointed the Earl of Bute his Prime Minister, 
 who in the year following terminated the War. 
 But the people were dissatisfied with the condi- 
 tions of the peace. Pusillanimity induced the Earl 
 of Bute to resign his situation. The King ap- 
 pointed Mr. George Grenville his successor; but 
 his Majesty soon found that this gentleman wish- 
 ed to exercise the same controul over him, as the 
 Pelhams had exercised over George II. 
 
 He removed Mr. Grenville, and placed in the 
 administration those gentlemen who had been 
 Members of the Pelham confederacy. The Mar- 
 quis of Rockingham was appointed Prime Minis- 
 ter. The new Ministers on their accession to 
 power, repealed the Stamp Act, and re-establish- 
 ed tranquillity between Great Britain and her Co- 
 lonies. Did the attempt to impose taxes on the 
 Colonies by the vote of the British Parliament 
 originate with Mr. Grenville, or with the King, 
 and his own interior Cabinet? I cannot pretend 
 to answer this question. I believe that there are 
 papers in existence which may hereafter elucidate 
 
159 
 
 the subject from the unremitted obstinacy with 
 which the King persevered in this attempt to tax 
 the Colonies; from the various artifices which he 
 employed to induce his Ministers to assist him in 
 the attempt ; from his boundless gratitude to those 
 who supported him in this measure, and from his 
 aversion to those who opposed it, we are naturally 
 led to believe that it was the measure of the King 
 himself. He removed the Rockingham adminis- 
 tration ; and by dexterously playing one faction 
 against another, he succeeded in his wish to re- 
 vive the dispute with America. War was the 
 consequence, till Peace was re-established by the 
 acknowledgment of the Independence of the 
 American Colonies. From 1766, when the Rock- 
 inghams were removed from office, to the death 
 of Lord Rockingham in 1782, the Partizans of that 
 Noble Lord are entitled to be considered, not as a 
 faction, but as a party, for they had a great public 
 object in view ; viz. To prevent the rights of the 
 British Colonists in America from being violated. 
 On the death of Lord Rockingham they ceased 
 to be a party, and became a faction ; for from that 
 hour their efforts were no longer employed for the 
 attainment of any great public object. Their ex- 
 ertions were confined to the attainment of office 
 and of emoluments for the members of their con- 
 federacy. I have recapitulated these facts to show 
 what I consider as the distinction between the 
 expressions faction and party. It is a faction 
 where the individuals who compose the confede- 
 
160 
 
 racy have no other view than to obtain office and 
 emoluments for themselves. It is a party, where 
 the exertions of the individuals are directed to 
 obtain a political object. Whenever those gen- 
 tlemen who called themselves Foxites declare the 
 public object which their efforts are directed to 
 obtain, they will then deserve the name of a party. 
 Until they declare this object they will be viewed 
 in England only as a faction. It is idle to attempt 
 to amuse the country by the name of Mr. Fox, as 
 if they were the heirs of his merits; and if they 
 mean to say that they pursue his opinions, they 
 ought to specify those opinions. The gentlemen 
 who form this faction, ought to recollect, that the 
 Pelham faction never was popular in England. 
 The Pelham administration was even less popular 
 than that of Sir Robert Walpole. For although 
 Sir Robert Walpole's administration was feeble 
 and corrupt, yet it had a public object, viz. To 
 preserve the Brunswick family on the Throne ; 
 and Sir Robert Walpole succeeded in this object. 
 His perseverance in the pacific system contributed 
 much to his success; the Pelhams had no great 
 object; the dread of the return of the Stuarts was 
 extinguished; time and the Rebellion of 1745, 
 had relieved the people from all apprehensions on 
 that head. The great political object of Sir Ro- 
 bert Walpole's administration had almost ceased 
 to affect the nation. The Brunsvncks were be- 
 lieved to be firmly established ; and the Pelham 
 confederacy from the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle 
 
161 
 
 could scarcely be considered as having a party 
 object. 
 
 I have said that from the death of the Marquis 
 df Rockingham in the summer of 1782, the lead- 
 ers of those who had composed his party scarcely 
 pretended to say that their efforts were directed 
 to the attainment of any public object. The 
 maxim inculcated was, that you were to look to 
 men, not to measures ; that when you had joined 
 a party, your exertions should be directed to the 
 support of that party, without enquiring into the 
 particular measure immediately depending. In 
 some of Mr. Burke's publications, I recollect this 
 doctrine explicitly avowed. Speaking of those 
 who sometimes voted with the Minister, and 
 sometimes against him, he adds, " I hope to God 
 the race is extinct." Even Mr. Fox incautiously 
 adopted this sentiment ; speaking of an indepen- 
 dent man, he defined him to be one whom nobody 
 could depend upon. That you should look to 
 men not to measures, might be a very good max- 
 im for a faction ; and a very advantageous doctrine 
 for Mr. Burke, who had contrived to obtain the si- 
 tuation of the Guide of a faction. But it was not a 
 doctrine calculated to induce the great body of the 
 people to exert themselves in support of those 
 who acted upon it. 
 
 Review the measures of the Foxites from the 
 death of Lord Rockingham, to the commence- 
 ment of the year 1793, when England took part 
 in the Crusade against French principles ; and let 
 
162 
 
 any man say whether there was any one measure 
 brought forward by the party likely to attract the 
 co-operation of the country. The first measure 
 which took place on the death of that lamented 
 nobleman, was the complete and avowed separa- 
 tion of his friends from those of the Earl of Shel- 
 burne ; this measure proceeded wholly from Mr. 
 Burke : it was to gratify his personal malice 
 against the Earl of Shelburne, and to promote his 
 views of governing the party under the nominal 
 direction of the Duke of Portland ; I do not know 
 that there was at that time any other man among 
 the friends of the deceased Marquis who had 
 personal ill-will to the Earl of Shelburne. I am 
 certain that Charles Fox had not. The Duke of 
 Richmond, Lord Keppel, and Genexal Conway 
 remained in office with the Earl of Shelburne. 
 
 The next measure was the coalition between 
 Mr. Fox and Lord North. So far from this mea- 
 sure having been likely to conciliate the good will 
 of the Country, a long course of years was hardly 
 sufficient to rescue Mr. Fox from the unpopulari- 
 ty which it occasioned. 
 
 The next measure was Mr. Burke's plan for 
 * seizing the patronage of India, brought forward 
 under the name of Mr. Fox's India Bill. No 
 man will say that this conciliated the country 
 when the Coalitionists were removed from office, 
 they retained, during the first three months of the 
 year 1784, a majority in the House of Commons. 
 Many of those who had been attached to the par* 
 
163 
 
 ty of the Marquis of Rockingham, were alarmed 
 at the possible consequences of this situation. 
 They were relieved from their fears by the decid- 
 ed victory obtained by Mr. Pitt, in the ensuing 
 general election, in the Spring, 1784. 
 
 The next measure was the impeachment of 
 Mr. Hastings. A measure brought forward sole- 
 ly to gratify the malevolence of Mr. Burke ; it is 
 scarcely possible but that the good sense of Mr. 
 Fox must have pointed out to him the prejudice 
 which his party would sustain from supporting 
 this impeachment. He yielded to the influence 
 of Mr. Burke. 
 
 In the Autumn, 1788, the King became de- 
 ranged. I will not enquire whether the doctrines 
 advanced by Mr. Fox were correct or otherwise ; 
 but they certainly were not popular. The King 
 recovered, and the party remained under no in- 
 considerable load of odium. 
 
 At the close of the year 1792, Mr. Burke car- 
 ried the party into the King's Camp, clamouring 
 for the Crusade. The King received them with 
 joy. Mr. Pitt, that he might retain his place sub- 
 mitted to the King's wishes ; and War was re- 
 solved on. Has the party either merited or con- 
 ciliated the affections of the Country, by the share 
 they took in driving us into this war ? Mr. Pitt 
 died early in 1806, and the party again came into 
 office, under a coalition with the Grenvilles and 
 Lord Sidmouth. Did they gain any credit during 
 the year that they were in office ? They are now 
 
164 
 
 in opposition. Mr. Fox is no more ; but they 
 endeavour to acquire popularity by assuming his 
 name. They find that it is in vain ; they feel that 
 the people are not with them. They complain, 
 but unjustly ; for they have no right to expect 
 that the people should exert themselves to place 
 one set of individuals in office, in the room of 
 another. 
 
 Would they engage their Country's support, 
 let them bring forward some great public mea- 
 sure which the Country may be interested to ob- 
 tain. All men, who give themselves the trouble 
 to reflect, see that the Reform of the House of 
 Commons is the only measure which can relieve 
 us from our difficulties. Immoderate taxation, 
 the result of the unnecessary wars of the Reign 
 of George III. is the cause of our embarrassments; 
 and that immoderate taxation has been occasion-, 
 ed by the House of Commons, being composed 
 of men not interested to protect the property of 
 the people. 
 
 It is well known, that the leaders of the Foxite 
 party are among those who are the most averse to 
 Reform ; that they rank among the usurpers of the 
 nomination to seats in Parliament, and that by 
 their coming into office all hope of Reform would 
 be at an end. How then can they expect that 
 the people should wish to see them in office ? I 
 may be told, perhaps, that Mr. Fox was himself 
 a great advocate for a Reform of the House of 
 Commons. Yes, this is true. But at the General 
 
165 
 
 Election in 1780, he accepted the situation of 
 Commander-in-Chief of the Political Forces of 
 the Rockingham Party. From that hour, he ceas- 
 ed to be the sincere advocate of Reform, He 
 could no longer sincerely endeavour to obtain Re- 
 form, without being disloyal to that party into 
 whose service he had entered. It may be said 
 that he voted for Reform subsequently to 1780. 
 I admit it ; so did Mr. Pitt, who, antecedently to 
 his being in office, had certainly been sincerely 
 desirous of a Reform of Parliament. But after 
 Mr. Pitt had accepted office, he would, by bring- 
 ing forward a Reform of Parliament, have thwart- 
 ed the views of the King, as much as Mr. Fox 
 would, by a similar measure, have thwarted the 
 views of the Rockinghams ; both, therefore, were 
 equally insincere. 
 
 Reform is the only measure which can relieve 
 the country. Retrenchment, not preceded by 
 Reform, is impracticable. Profuse expenditure is 
 wanted, not merely to feed Members of Parliament, 
 but to feed those who have a share in making 
 Members of Parliament. Deprive the Crown of 
 the means of purchasing, and your Government 
 instantly becomes an Oligarchy, composed of 
 Proprietors and Patrons of Boroughs: And it 
 cannot be too often repeated, that of all forms of 
 government, Oligarchy is the most oppressive. 
 Reform is necessary: and either Reform or 
 Revolution will take place ; Universal Suffrage 
 would be Revolution. It is possible, that a good 
 
 p 
 
160 
 
 Government might grow out of it; but the parox- 
 ysms by which we should arrive at the crisis, 
 would be dreadful. 
 
 When Earl Grey, in 1792, established the So- 
 ciety of the Friends of the People, for the avow- 
 ed purpose of bringing men together to declare 
 their opinions on the necessity of a Reform of 
 Parliament, I acknowledge that I, at that time, 
 thought that it would be practicable to Reform the 
 House of Commons, without departing much 
 from the present form of Borough representation; 
 — that we might Reform the different classes of 
 Boroughs according to the different diseases which 
 existed in them ; — that we might proceed gradu- 
 ally, little by little, en tatonnant, ever keeping in 
 mind that maxim of the wise physician, Vel pro- 
 desse, vel non obesse, as the first object of our 
 attention. I presumed to point out to that Socie- 
 ty the class of Burgage-tenement Boroughs ; an 
 Address was voted to the House of Commons, 
 stating the number of Members who sat in that 
 House by the nomination of Proprietors and Pa- 
 trons. But it was seen, that the correction of this 
 abuse would be injurious to the interests of the 
 leaders of the faction of the great Whig Fami- 
 lies ; and all further attempts at Reform of Parlia- 
 ment were abandoned. Had Parliament been re- 
 formed at that time, we might prossibly have 
 avoided the Crusade against French principles. 
 
 Reform will take place. To render it benefi- 
 cial to the Country, it must be a complete correc- 
 
167 
 
 tion of the existing abuses. 1 da not mean by 
 Universal Suffrage, but by a Reform which may 
 place the House of Commons in a situation to 
 protect the property of the people. The French 
 Revolution has given us an example of an Assem- 
 bly adequate to the discharge of this duty, viz. an 
 Assembly elected by men, payers of direct taxes 
 to such an extent, that none can be Electors, ex- 
 cept those who are so affected by the payment, 
 that they are interested that taxation should be 
 moderate. I am persuaded that such a Reform 
 will sooner or later take place ; though it is possi- 
 ble that resistance to such a Reform may occasion 
 it to be preceded by Revolution. 
 
 The Bourbons, the Nobles, and the Fanatics 
 may attempt to re-establish the ancien regime in 
 France. They will fail. The pillars on which 
 the fabric stood are reduced to powder. No art 
 can again cement them into solid masses. If a 
 representative Government should cease to exist 
 in France, it must be succeeded by a Military 
 despotism. 
 
 In Spain, though the present efforts should fail, 
 yet the Cortes will ultimately be established. 
 
 In Germany, the intelligence of the people will 
 probably prevail against all the efforts of the Holy 
 Alliance; and Representative Government will be 
 the consequence. 
 
 Can any man suppose, that with such examples 
 under its eye, England will long submit to the 
 usurped power of Proprietors and Patrons of Bo- 
 
168 
 
 roughs ? Let it be recollected, that this usurped 
 Power is odious to Royalty, insulting to Aristo- 
 cracy, and oppressive to the People. 
 
 There are among those who call themselves 
 Foxites, men who possess both wisdom and in- 
 tegrity. Let them declare that their efforts are 
 directed to obtain an object in which their Coun- 
 try is interested. Their Country will rally round 
 them, and Revolution may be averted. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 On the Duration of Papal Power. 
 
 I shall consider this not as a religious, but as 
 a political subject. The doctrines of the Catho- 
 lic Church may remain long after the power of 
 the Pope is destroyed. I shall consider the ques- 
 tion purely as it regards the duration of Papal 
 Power. It seems to me that this power cannot 
 subsist much longer, either in France or Germa- 
 ny. I doubt whether it can continue much long- 
 er in Spain and Portugal : — it will fall in Italy 
 whenever that country is formed into one king- 
 dom ; an event, perhaps, not very distant : and 
 with regard to Ireland, where three out of four of 
 the inhabitants are Catholics, the power and the 
 influence of the Pope of Rome will be at an end, 
 whenever the British Government has the good 
 
169 
 
 sense to become the pay-master of the Catholic 
 Clergy. I say it must fall in France. The 
 wealth of the Church has been sweept away ; and 
 its power has vanished with its wealth. Tythes 
 have been abolished ; and having now been dis- 
 continued for more than thirty years, can never 
 be re-established ; the lands of Bishops and Con- 
 vents have been confiscated ; and the present pos- 
 sessors will never submit to be deprived of them. 
 The officiating Ministers of the Church must 
 henceforth receive their salaries from the Execu- 
 tive Government ; and from that circumstance 
 must be dependent on that Executive Govern- 
 ment. Whenever a King of France abandons the 
 wish of re-establishing the power lately possessed 
 by the Clergy, he becomes really and substantial- 
 ly the Supreme Head of the Church ; or, to use 
 an expression applied by Roger Bacon to our 
 King Henry VIII. — " He starts up a King with 
 a Pope in his belly." 
 
 No inconsiderable part of Germany remained 
 under Ecclesiastical Sovereigns, down to the com- 
 mencement of the late Revolution in France ; I 
 believe they have been every where destroyed, 
 and their territories assigned to temporal Princes. 
 This circumstance must have greatly diminished 
 the influence of the Roman Pontiff. Princes and 
 Nobles no longer look up to the Church as a pro- 
 vision for their younger branches. Intelligence 
 must gain ground ; and though Catholic doctrines 
 in Religion may remain, Papal Power must fall 
 
 p 2 
 
170 
 
 In Spain, though the present efforts to re-establish 
 ,a Free Constitution should fail, yet it is manifest 
 that intelligence has gained such ground in that 
 Country, that the Cortes, with a Free Constitu- 
 tion, will ultimately be established. The Papal 
 Power will be inconsistent with that Free Consti- 
 tution ; it will fall, and probably will be accom- 
 panied with the confiscation of a large portion of 
 the wealth of the Church. This event will pro- 
 duce the same advantages in Spain, as have been 
 produced by similar confiscations in England and 
 in France : viz. The existence of a middle class 
 of Land-proprietors. Portugal will follow the ex- 
 ample of Spain. Most probably the Spanish Colo- 
 nies in America will do the same. 
 
 I have said, the formation of Italy into one king- 
 dom, is an event probably not very distant ; and I 
 believe that I am correct in my opinion. Italy 
 has been harassed by foreign invaders ever since 
 the close of the fifteenth century. When Charles 
 VIII. King of France, invaded Italy, about the 
 year 1490, he found the country under the power 
 of various Governments ; but every where in a 
 state of great prosperity. From that time to the 
 present, it has been desolated by Spaniards, Ger- 
 mans, and French ; every sensible Italian must 
 wish to see his country rescued from these inva- 
 ders ; but it cannot be formed into one kingdom 
 without the abolition of the power of the Pope. 
 The Papal power was originally established with 
 great political wisdom. The acquisition of land- 
 
17i 
 
 ed property, and of sovereignty, were among the 
 marked instances of its sagacity. Its power will 
 fall with the loss of landed property and sove- 
 reignty. 
 
 I have said, in a former place, that the Execu- 
 tive Government in France will, at a future period, 
 derive much influence from the Funds for the pay. 
 ment of the Clergy being entirely at its disposal. 
 That this power has not hitherto been felt, be- 
 cause the Bourbons have hitherto entertained a 
 wish that the power of the Clergy should be re- 
 established. But the French Clergy cannot again 
 be put in possession of their landed estates. 
 Those estates are now in the possession of the 
 Laity, and are divided among so many proprie- 
 tors, that any attempt to wrest those lands from 
 them must fail of success ; and those who made 
 the attempt, would probably fall the victims of 
 their own foil v. Everv Ecclesiastic must be de- 
 pendent upon that Government which, by with- 
 holding payment of his salary, can reduce him to 
 poverty. The Christian Church was established 
 with much political wisdom. Its founders ever 
 had in view, to make it independent of the Exe- 
 cutive Government ; and it bribed the existing 
 Government for the time being, by its readiness 
 to support the immediate views of such Govern- 
 ment. The Clergy were every where invested 
 with landed estates ; they were sensible how much 
 their political influence would be increased by the 
 possession of land, instead of being dependent on 
 Government for salaries. 
 
172 
 
 When the Reformation took place in England, 
 the property of the Convents was seized ; and 
 Queen Elizabeth obtained considerable portions 
 of episcopal property by forced exchanges. A 
 celebrated letter of the Queen, on this subject, to 
 a Bishop of Ely, is preserved in the British Mu- 
 seum. I have had occasion to see proofs of her 
 having taken large portions of the lands of the 
 Bishoprick of Lincoln, under pretence of similar 
 exchanges : and there is no doubt that she plun- 
 dered many bishopricks in the same manner. 
 The practice was carried so far by Queen Eliza- 
 beth, that on the accession of James I. the church 
 of England had sufficient influence to procure an 
 Act to be passed, to prevent the Crown from 
 making exchanges in future, with Bishops. The 
 English Clergy are so sensible of the political ad- 
 vantage of possessing lands, rather than monied 
 property, that in case of a bequest of money, up- 
 on condition that the trustees of Queen Anne's 
 bounty should add a sum of equal value, the 
 trustees will never permit the money to remain in 
 the funds, but insist that it shall be laid out in the 
 purchase of lands; and they require this, although 
 they are sensible that the Ecclesiastic intended 
 to be benefited, would receive double the income 
 from the Funds that he can expect to receive from 
 land : and although another inconvenience ensues 
 from this doctrine, that the money must be laid 
 out in land, viz. That the Courts of Law have 
 resolved, that these bequests are within the Sta- 
 
173 
 
 tute of Mortmain, and they are frequently void, in 
 consequence of the directions of that Statute not 
 having been observed. The great objection to 
 the Emancipation of the Catholics in Ireland is, 
 that the Pope will always retain influence over the 
 Catholic Clergy, and the Catholic Clergy over 
 those of their Church. But this objection would 
 vanish, if the Catholic Clergy were paid by the 
 Executive Government. 
 
 Consider the state of Ireland. Among four 
 millions of inhabitants, three millions are Catho- 
 lics ; and of the remaining million, six hundred 
 . thousand are computed to be Dissenters, and four 
 hundred thousand only of the Church of England. 
 Yet all the funds allotted for the maintenance of 
 Ecclesiastical Ministers, are confined to those of 
 the Church of England. Is this equitable? Would 
 it not be more advantageous that these funds 
 should be employed for the maintenance of the 
 Clergy of all those who profess the Christian re- 
 ligion? It will not be denied that all ought to 
 receive religious instruction. Whether a man 
 believes in transubstantiation, or does not believe 
 in it, is a matter of little importance to the State ; 
 provided his opinion on this subject does not lead 
 him to have political connections injurious to the 
 interests of his country. 
 
 It is this apprehension which leads men to fear 
 Catholic Emancipation. We had just reason to 
 fear the power of the Pope during the reigns of 
 the Stuarts : habituated to that fear, we cannot 
 
174 
 
 bring ourselves to believe, that if any such danger 
 still exists, it is easy to guard against it. Suppose 
 Bishopricks and Chapters as they became vacant 
 in Ireland, were not filled up, and their revenues 
 vested, for a few years, in trustees, to be employ- 
 ed under the direction of the Executive Govern- 
 ment, for the maintenance of the Clergy of every 
 branch of the Christian religion, while the Ro- 
 man Catholic Clergy received maintenance ac- 
 cording to the pleasure of their own government 
 — would there not be an end to all well-grounded 
 fear of Foreign influence? There are many pa- 
 rishes in Ireland, in which the inhabitants are al- 
 most all Catholics ; yet the owner of the advowson 
 is obliged to present a Clergyman of the Church 
 of England. Would it not be equitable, that the 
 incumbent on such a benefice, should be obliged 
 to contribute to the payment of Ministers for Ca- 
 tholics and Dissenters? I am well aware that 
 the Clergy of the Church of England will be in- 
 dignant at such a proposal ; but its adoption would 
 be beneficial to my country. 
 
 I will go one step further. I think it highly 
 probable that, ere long, a plan, somewhat of this 
 nature, will be adopted in the British Empire; 
 particularly in Ireland. It is already established 
 in France. A civil War is ready to break out in 
 Spain, between the King and the Clergy on one 
 side, and the Army and the Cortes on the other. 
 Should the latter be successful, much of the 
 Church property would probably be confiscated; 
 
175 
 
 and the Ministers of the Church in Spain, in the 
 same manner as those in France, would receive 
 their payments from Government. When such 
 a Revolution has taken place in France and Spain, 
 it is probable that the Clergy of the Church of 
 England would be allowed to retain that political 
 power which they now possess? It may be said, 
 that they are always readily subservient to the im- 
 mediate views of the Crown. This may be true t 
 but a more equitable distribution of emoluments 
 would be beneficial to the Crown, and could 
 scarcely be disapproved of by any one. 
 
 Seven hundred livings, in the King's gift, are 
 left at the disposition of the Lord Chancellor. 
 Five hundred of these are said to yield very small 
 emoluments to their several incumbents. If six 
 of the most opulent Bishopricks were not filled 
 up, as they severally became vacant, and their 
 incomes for a certain term of years vested in trus- 
 tees for the purpose of creating a fund, to be em- 
 ployed under the King's direction, in augmenting 
 the emoluments of the incumbents of these bene- 
 fices, could any man complain of this ? When 
 the Bishopricks of Winchester and Durham be- 
 come vacant, they will be disposed of by the 
 Crown, either to serve the views of a Minister, 
 or to gratify some Court favourite. Would not 
 the influence of the Crown be more increased, and 
 the interests of the country more advanced, by 
 the augmentation of small benefices in the gift of 
 the Crown, in the manner I have suggested ? 
 
176 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 On the Consequences likely to result from the Es- 
 tablishment of the United States of America. 
 
 These States form a Federative Republic. 
 They have neither King, nor Nobility, nor Esta- 
 blished Church. The English language, and the 
 English love of Liberty, prevail through the 
 whole confederacy. The facility with which land- 
 ed property may be acquired, and brought into 
 cultivation, gives to the inhabitants a disposition 
 to migrate ; a propensity which will much facili- 
 tate the extension of agriculture, and the rapid 
 population of the Country. 
 
 On the Sea Coast, the active spirit of the people 
 leads them to Commerce, and the Fisheries ; and 
 when compelled to become a Military State, they 
 have shewn the most courageous exertions. It is 
 visible, that they are capable of presenting them- 
 selves as a formidable Naval Power. Great Bri- 
 tain, France, and Spain, are the only naval pow- 
 ers of much consideration now in Europe ; and 
 even the most formidable of these — I mean Great 
 Britain — would find it difficult to carry on a Naval 
 War with the United States of America. It is 
 true, Great Britain, at present, possesses on that 
 
177 
 
 Continent, one Naval Port and Arsenal : viz. 
 Halifax. If deprived of this, Great Britain would 
 find it extremely difficult to carry on a Naval War 
 on the Coast of America ; and British America 
 could not long be defended, except at an expense 
 which could not be borne. 
 
 The United States of America may now be 
 considered as holding a high rank in the inter- 
 course between themselves and the several States 
 of Europe. The facility of acquiring landed pro- 
 perty, naturally leads the people to apply them- 
 selves to Agriculture, rather than to Manufac- 
 tures ; and it is more for the interest of the Ame- 
 ricans to bring land into cultivation, than to es- 
 tablish manufactures. The injudicious conduct 
 of the British Government has, in many places, 
 forced the Americans to establish manufactures: 
 and machinery will be used with more advantage 
 in a country where the population is thin, than 
 it can be in a country like Great Britain, where 
 the manufacturing population may perhaps be too 
 great. 
 
 The application of the Steam Engine to the 
 navigation of rivers, affords an advantage to Ame- 
 rica, almost beyond calculation. The inhabitants 
 on the upper parts of her great rivers, will easily 
 be supplied with every thing that commerce can 
 present. 
 
 The United States will be divided. If the 
 whole continent of North America formed but 
 one State, it could only be controuled by a Des. 
 
178 
 
 potic Government ; but the happiness of man re- 
 quires that Governments should be free. One of 
 the circumstances which at present contributes 
 the most to the happiness of the inhabitants of the 
 United States is, that they have occasion for so 
 little government. The facility with which sub- 
 sistence can be acquired, removes the temptation 
 to criminality. Whenever a division of the Unit- 
 ed States takes place, most probably it will not 
 be, in the first instance, a separation of the North- 
 ern from the Southern States ; though this sepa- 
 ration will, most probably, at one time or other, 
 take place. But the first division will probably 
 be, of the Western States from the Eastern, 
 That immense plain, which is watered by the 
 Mississippi, with her attendant streams, is natural- 
 ly separated from the Eastern States by ranges of 
 mountains ; and the difference of soil, climate, 
 produce, and occupation, will create that opposi- 
 tion of interest which leads to separation. But 
 though this separation may be attended with 
 bloodshed, it will ultimately be beneficial to the 
 Country. 
 
 There is, however, a danger, which perhaps 
 the wisdom of their Government will not be able 
 to avert : I mean, that they may be tempted by 
 the gold and silver of Spanish America, to relin- 
 quish agricultural pursuits, and attempt the con- 
 quest of Mexico. They will succeed ; and suc- 
 cess will be a misfortune. There are reasons to 
 believe, that the ancestors of those whom the 
 
179 
 
 Spaniards found in possession of Mexico, on their 
 arrival in that country, had migrated from the 
 more northern parts of America. It is said, that 
 in Kentucky there are proofs that the country 
 must, at some remote period, have been inhabit- 
 ed by men far more advanced in civilization, than 
 those Indians whom we found there. But whe- 
 ther this opinion is well or ill-founded, there is lit- 
 tle doubt but that the Americans, whenever they 
 choose it, will be able to penetrate into Mexico. 
 What may be the character of the inhabitants of 
 Spanish America, when the present motley race 
 is crossed with American blood ? This is a 
 question which we cannot answer. But it is to 
 Great Britain that the power of the United States 
 is most formidable. They can, to a considerable 
 degree, controul our intercouse with Jamaica : — 
 they may become the ally of the Black Popula- 
 tion in Saint Domingo : — they may even acquire 
 the possession of Cuba : — and in every part of 
 the world they will be our rivals in commerced 
 
 It is much to be regretted, that those among 
 us who had in vain attempted to deprive the Ame- 
 ricans of their rights, should have persevered in 
 their hatred to them, after the contest was termi- 
 nated. Unfortunately, this was the case. The 
 same language, the same love of liberty, descent 
 from the same common ancestors, to which I 
 might add, similitude of laws, (for the Americans 
 still retain those laws which they had carried with 
 them from England) would have rendered arnica- 
 
180 
 
 ble intercourse between the two countries, of easy 
 establishment. I believe that this was the opi- 
 nion of the Earl of Shelburne. I believe he open- 
 ly declared, that the intercouse between the two 
 nations ought to be re-established, as nearly as 
 possible the same, as it had existed before the se- 
 paration. Unfortunately, he was not listened to. 
 Injuries, insults, and affected contempt, have ex- 
 cited sentiments in the breasts of the Americans, 
 which it may be difficult to eradicate ; and Great 
 Britain now, exhausted by her Crusade against 
 French principles, may be obliged to submit to 
 humiliating concessions. 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 On the Effects likely to be produced by the French 
 Revolution on other Nations. 
 
 1 have considered the effects which the French 
 Revolution must have in France itself. I will now 
 consider the effects which it will probably pro- 
 duce on other nations. But in doing this, it will 
 be necessary to observe circumstances which 
 now exist, or are likely very soon to be in ex- 
 istence. 
 
 The American War established a Representa- 
 tive Government, in what are now called the 
 
181 
 
 United States of America. The French Revolu- 
 tion has established a Representative Government 
 in France. It is probable that we shall soon see a 
 Representative Government in Spain ; and Re- 
 presentative Governments in the continental pro- 
 vinces of Spanish America, will perhaps be esta- 
 blished in imitation of their parent country. Cuba 
 deserves a distinct consideration. It will either 
 be taken possession of by the United States of 
 America, or by England ; or become an Inde- 
 pendent state : for its size and population enable 
 it to assume this form. 
 
 When the Spanish Empire, in Europe and 
 America, shall have assumed the form which I 
 have mentioned, can we suppose that Portugal 
 will remain in its present situation ? Is there not 
 every reason to expect, that Portugal and Brazil 
 will not long remain under the same Government? 
 If the King returns to Portugal, he will lose the 
 Sovereignty of Brazil ; and if he remains in Bra- 
 zil, Portugal will shake off his government. Pro- 
 bably her new Government will be Representa- 
 tive ; and we shall see a Portuguese Cortes re- 
 called to power, as we have seen it in Spain. 
 
 I shall be told, all this depends on Ferdinand's 
 Government being overthrown ; but it is manifest, 
 that Ferdinand's Government cannot be durable. 
 Even though it should resist the present shocks, 
 the general wish of the people to see the Cortes 
 re-called, and a Constitution established, must ul- 
 timately prevail. 
 
 q.2 
 
182 
 
 Germany already feels the effects of the French 
 Revolution. The desire of a Representative Go- 
 vernment is every where prevalent. The dimi- 
 nution of the wealth and power of the Roman 
 Catholic Clergy in Germany, must have great 
 effect in producing changes in that country. Be- 
 fore the French Revolution, much sovereign pow- 
 er was possessed by the Catholic Clergy in Ger- 
 many ; I believe they are now every where de- 
 prived of Sovereignty. Their dominions are 
 assigned to neighbouring Princes. 
 
 Even Italy will be affected by the French Re- 
 volution. The principles of Liberty have been 
 discussed, and are understood in that country. 
 The fall of the Papal Power, which cannot long 
 be deferred, will necessarily occasion that country 
 to assume a new form. 
 
 The human mind trembles at the contemplation 
 «>f these probable events : — 
 
 "Through what variety of untried being, 
 Through what new scenes and changes must we pass? 
 The wide, the unbounded prospect lies before us, 
 Hut shadows, clouds, and darkness rest upon it." 
 
 The changes which I have alluded to, will not 
 only affect the Government of Nations ; it will 
 greatly affect their intercourse with each other. 
 The Spanish Provinces on the Western side of 
 South America, will open a trade with India and 
 China ; they will be supplied from those countries 
 
 a ith silk and cotton manufactures, because they 
 
183 
 
 oan be supplied from thence, at a cheaper rate 
 than they can from Europe, 
 
 Even the Black and Mulatto nations of Saint 
 Domingo, ought not to be left out of our conside- 
 ration. They will probably extend themselves 
 over the whole of that island ; perhaps even to 
 Porto Rico. Perhaps the time is not far remov- 
 ed, when posterity may see the inhabitants of the 
 four great Antilles, one motley race ; in which, 
 however, it is most likely that the Mulatto will 
 gradually predominate. 
 
 There is a circumstance in the changes already 
 occasioned by the American and French Revolu- 
 tions, and which will probably be found in the 
 changes about to take place : viz. that these 
 changes will not be the effect of conquest, but the 
 result of insurrections of the People against their 
 Governments ; whereas, almost all the other Re- 
 volutions which we read of in history, have been 
 the consequence of conquest. The Persian, the 
 Macedonian, the Roman Empires, were establish- 
 ed by conquest. The Roman Empire was de- 
 stroyed by conquerers from the Northern and 
 Eastern parts of the world. Revolutions, the re- 
 sult of conquest, necessarily occasion a change in 
 the race of inhabitants. Most probably the North- 
 ern Conquerors of the Roman Empire, did not 
 extirpate, but became blended with the inhabi- 
 tants ; for we every where find a language evi- 
 dently derived from the Latin. I believe, in every 
 part of France, the common people retain their 
 
184 
 
 patois ; a corruption of the language they used be- 
 fore they were conquered. In our island, the 
 Saxons extirpated or exterminated the Britons ; 
 and therefore we have no British words left in our 
 language. The Normans did not extirpate, and 
 our language is consequently a mixture of Saxon 
 and French ; the Latin words being derived to us 
 through the French. 
 
 I believe it will be found, that all the Revolu- 
 tions in Asia and Africa, as well as in Europe, 
 have been produced by conquest. What diffe- 
 rence may be occasioned, from the Revolutions 
 in our days being produced by insurrections of 
 the People, and not by conquest, I cannot say ; 
 nor can I venture to form an opinion, on the pro- 
 bable consequences of the fall of the Roman 
 Catholic Church ; for their wealth and power will 
 fall together. The Bramin says, " that sin came 
 into the world by the confusion of casts." I 
 hope the motley race of inhabitants about to occu- 
 py so large a portion of America, will not verify 
 this opinion. 
 
185 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 On the British Possessions in India. 
 
 The India Company was established solely 
 with a view to trade ; and as the voyage to India 
 was long, and supposed to be attended with great 
 danger, an exclusive privilege of trading beyond 
 the Cape of Good Hope was granted to the Com- 
 pany. 
 
 About the year 1740, the Mogul Empire fell 
 to pieces, in consequence of the invasion of Nadir 
 Shah, Kouli Khan. The different Governors, or 
 Nabobs of Provinces, seized the Government of 
 different districts. In the province of Arcot, or, 
 as it is generally called, the Arcot Carnatic, the 
 French India Company supported the claims of a 
 native named Chunda Saheb, and soon discover- 
 ed the inferiority of the native troops, when op- 
 posed to Europeans. The French acquired do- 
 minion rapidly ; this roused the jealousy of the 
 English India Company. They set up claims on 
 behalf of another native, called Mohammed Ali. 
 After various success, the cause of Mohammed 
 Ali prevailed. 
 
 About 1756, the English Factory in Bengal 
 was plundered by Sujah Dowlah, the Nabob of 
 that provice; and the Europeans found in it treat- 
 
186 
 
 ed with great cruelty. The British Troops, which 
 had placed Mohammed AH on the Throne of 
 Arcot, were transported to Bengal ; Sujah Dovv- 
 lah was defeated, and the Sovereignty of a large 
 district seized by the India Company. Much 
 wealth was acquired for the Civil and Military 
 Servants, as well as for the India Company, by 
 this Conquest ; and from that hour, the desire of 
 extending the India Company's acquisitions in 
 India, has never been relinquished. 
 
 It is said, that the India Company possesses 
 Sovereignty over 80,000,000 of people in India, 
 and Revenue to the amount of 17,000,000/. ster- 
 ling a-year. Ceylon, the Isle of France, and the 
 Cape of Good Hope have been obtained as ap- 
 pendages necessary to the safety of their Indian 
 Empire. A question naturally occurs, what bene- 
 fit accrues to Great Britain from these Indian pos- 
 sessions ? They furnish neither army, nor navy, 
 nor revenue, to be employed in Europe for the 
 service of Great Britain : on the contrary, they re- 
 quire soldiers to be annually sent from Great Bri- 
 tain to India. Very commonly they require a 
 navy, and sometimes even pecuniary assistance. 
 
 But it is said, that the wealth acquired by the 
 civil and military servants is remitted to Great 
 Britain, and has much contributed to give activi- 
 ty to improvements. I am not prepared absolute- 
 ly to deny this assertion. To a certain extent, it 
 may be true ; but I doubt whether this benefit 
 has compensated the mischief introduced by our 
 
187 
 
 Indian acquisitions. When we see 80,000,000 
 of subjects at the distance of 10,000 miles, go- 
 verned by twenty-four mercantile characters resi- 
 dent in Leadenhall Street, we are naturally led to 
 say, the Government of Empire cannot require so 
 much skill as we common people generally be- 
 lieve. And the Board of Controul engrafted on 
 the Court of Directors must rather contribute to 
 increase than to diminish embarrassment. 
 
 But the great advantage accruing from these 
 Indian possessions, if it be an advantage — is pa- 
 tronage. Much of this patronage is disposed of 
 by the Ministers of the Crown ; some remains 
 with the India Directors. When Jugurtha took 
 his last view of Rome, he exclaimed : u Vale 
 venalis civitas, moxperitura si emptor em mveneris? 
 Is not the same exclamation applicable almost with 
 equal truth to those who elect the House of Com- 
 mons ? Is it not a fact that Members have sat 
 in that House for seats purchased for them by an 
 Indian Prince ? 
 
 Has it not been acknowledged publicly, that a 
 Bengal writership was given by the Minister to 
 one of his friends that he might sell it, and with 
 the produce purchase a seat in the House of Com- 
 mons ? The French call us, arte nation pirate et 
 boutiquiere ; and has not Indian patronage pecu- 
 liarly contributed to give us that venal money-lov- 
 ing character, which the French attribute to us ? 
 But the material consideration is, what circum- 
 stances will accompany our abandonment of these 
 
188 
 
 possessions ? for abandoned they must be, soon- 
 er or later. Every acquisition renders it more ne- 
 cessary for us to extend our conquests ; we are 
 now told by every man returned from India, u you 
 must have the whole, or you must relinquish all 
 that you possess." 
 
 And where are the boundaries of that whole? 
 To whatever extent your acquisitions are carried, 
 you will still have neighbours the object of your 
 fears. Many are now apprehensive that you have 
 already approached so near to the frontiers of 
 Russia, that on any difference with that power, 
 her forces may be employed to invade India ; but 
 as there are three States, viz. the Seiks, Zemaun 
 Shah, and Persia, between your possessions and 
 the Russian frontiers, I own I have never felt any 
 apprehensions of an attack from Russia. But 
 your empire is too large to be under the controul 
 of one Government ; you will be ruined by the 
 expense of repressing insurrections which will be 
 constantly renewed. Aureng Zebe ruined the 
 Mogul Empire by the acquisition of the Decan ; 
 from the time that he had made that acquisition, 
 the Empire was too large for Government ; you 
 may fear the same fate, and the loss of your Indian 
 Empire may be preceded by struggles destructive 
 of your happiness. 
 
 It may be asked, does not the possession of 
 Empire in India counterbalance the loss which 
 you have sustained in America ? I have no 
 hesitation in answering, No. Your Continental 
 
189 
 
 possessions in America added to the strength of 
 Great Britain, they enabled you to command the 
 French and Spanish West India Islands. Even 
 the treasures of the Continent of Spanish Ame- 
 rica, could not be safely brought to Europe, 
 while you were disposed to prevent it. Your 
 Continental possessions in America could not 
 be attacked by sea ; and whatever complaints 
 might be made of murders committed by the 
 Indians, it was manifest, that the Indians, like the 
 wild beasts of the forest, would either be extirpa- 
 ted or exterminated in proportion as the agricul- 
 turist advanced. 
 
 Your American Empire was inattackable ; it 
 was so happily united to your European posses- 
 sions, that it rendered you the most formidable 
 power in the world. But your Indian Empire is a 
 source of weakness ; you are under constant ap- 
 prehension, that it may be attacked by some fo- 
 reign enemy. 
 
 While you keep it, you must be always ex- 
 tending its limits ; for both your civil and milita- 
 ry servants derive immediate wealth from new 
 acquisitions. The very size of the Empire must 
 ultimately destroy it. But there is another cir- 
 cumstance in the present state of your Indian 
 Empire, which must necessarily create great em- 
 barrassment. This Empire has been acquired 
 by a Company of Merchants ; and they retained 
 the character of exclusive trader, after they had 
 assumed that of sovereign. They have now re- 
 
 R 
 
190 
 
 signed the character of exclusive trader. They 
 allow British subjects to trade concurrently with 
 themselves ; but retain the sovereignty. Sove- 
 reign and trader, are characters incompatible : as 
 traders, they will be defrauded; and as sovereigns, 
 they will oppress those who are their rivals in trade. 
 The present condition of the India Company, 
 therefore, cannot long subsist. They must con- 
 tent themselves with one character ; they must 
 either be sovereigns or traders. 
 
 CHAPTER XIIL 
 
 Impeachment of Mr. Hastings. 
 
 1 have hitherto only slightly alluded to the 
 Impeachment of Mr. Hastings. But of the twen- 
 ty-two charges exhibited against that gentleman, 
 two, viz. the first and the third, are of such histo- 
 rical importance, that I think it may be advisable 
 to state them accurately. 
 
 The first was denominated the Rohilla Charge: 
 the latter the Benares Charge. I have already 
 mentioned, that on the dissolution of the Mogul 
 Empire about the year 1740, by the invasion of 
 Nadir Shah, the Governors of Provinces in many 
 places assumed the Sovereignty. A chieftain of 
 Mountaineers, known by the name of the Rohillas. 
 
191 
 
 usurped the Sovereignty of a district, to which, 
 from his own tribe, he gave the name of the Ro- 
 hilla Country. This district was a rich soil, and 
 had about two millions of inhabitants. The Ro- 
 hilla Chief and his descendants had possesed this 
 Sovereignty, from the first usurpation in 1742, to 
 their expulsion in 1774, by Sujah Dowlah, the 
 Nabob of Oude. In the summer of 1773, Mr. 
 Hastings, at that time President of the Council in 
 Bengal, had an interview with Sujah Dowlah in 
 the upper provinces ; I believe at Benares. The 
 Directors of the India Company had pointed out 
 to Mr. Hastings two objects which they were 
 very solicitous to obtain. The first was a larger 
 payment from Sujah Dowlah for the use of their 
 troops whenever they were employed in his ser- 
 vice. The second was, to prevail on Sujah Dow- 
 lah to purchase from them two Provinces known 
 by the names of Corah and Allahabad When the 
 heir apparent of the great Mogul, called the Shah 
 Zaclee, had been received under the protection of 
 the India Company, they had assigned to the 
 Prince the possession of these two Provinces for 
 his maintenance. After having possessed these 
 Provinces for some few years, the young Prince 
 was persuaded to attempt to recover the throne 
 of Delhi. To enable him to execute this project, 
 he quitted these Provinces, which were imme- 
 diately again taken possession of by the India 
 Company. But Corah and Allahabad were so 
 remote from the other possessions of the India 
 
192 
 
 Company, that they could not be defended, ex- 
 cept at an expense exceeding the revenue which 
 could be drawn from them. And as the derang- 
 ed state of the Company's finances, both at home 
 and in India, did not make it advisable for them 
 to incur this additional expense, the Directors 
 wished to dispose of these Provinces to Sujah 
 Dowlah, the only Monarch who was capable of 
 defending them against the Mahrattas. 
 
 When Mr. Hastings met Sujah Dowlah in 
 1773, he succeeded with him in both these ob* 
 jects. He prevailed on him to make a larger pay- 
 ment for the use of the Company's troops ; and 
 he obtained the sum of 500,000/. for the sale of 
 the above named Provinces. Sujah Dowlah 
 then brought forward the object which he wished 
 to obtain from the India Company. He stated, 
 that in 1772, the Rohillas had applied to him for 
 assistance against the Mahrattas, who had invaded 
 their territory ; that he had been extremely un- 
 willing to afford them this assistance ; that he had 
 at last been prevailed on by Sir Robert Barker, 
 the Commander of the Company's troops in the 
 upper Provinces, to enter into a Treaty with them ; 
 that by this Treaty, he had engaged to assist the 
 Rohillas to drive out the Mahrattas ; and that in 
 consideration of this assistance, they had stipula- 
 ted to pay him 400,000/. That he had success- 
 fully assisted them ; — that he had driven out the 
 Mahrattas ; — and that the Rohillas refused to pay 
 him the stipulated sum. As he had afforded this 
 
193 
 
 assistance to the Rohillas solely through the per- 
 suasion of Sir Robert Barker, and at his earnest 
 solicitation, and from a reliance that his authority 
 would secure to him the stipulated payment, he 
 thought himself entitled to call on the India Com- 
 pany to assist him in punishing this gross breach 
 of faith by the Rohillas. Mr. Hastings acquiesced 
 in the justice of the demand. After these points 
 of the treaty had been arranged, Mr. Hastings 
 and Sujah Dowlah remained some days longer at 
 Benares. Before they separated, S;jah Dowlah 
 came to him and made the following statement : 
 i6 1 have yielded to your two objects, and you 
 have yielded to mine. But on more mature re- 
 flection, as I am immediately to pay to the India 
 Company, 500,000/. for the Provinces of Corah 
 and Allahabad, and have also agreed to increase 
 my payment for the use of their troops, I find that 
 my treasure will be so much exhausted that I 
 shall not be immediately able to adopt any mea- 
 sures against the Rohillas. I must therefore defer, 
 for the present, my intended designs against them. 
 But if future circumstances should make it neces- 
 sary for me to commence hostile proceedings 
 against the Rohillas, I trust that you will recollect, 
 that I have yielded to your two objects, and that 
 you, in consideration of this, have agreed to afford 
 me the assistance of the India Company for the 
 execution of this measure : and that whenever I 
 call for your assistance, no time shall be wasted in 
 
 n 2 
 
194 
 
 discussing the propriety of my demand; but that 
 your troops shall immediately obey my call." 
 
 Mr Hastings acquiesced in the fairness of this 
 reasoning, and pledged himself that the Compa- 
 ny's troops should march to his assistance against 
 the Rohillas whenever they were called on. 
 
 Whether the Rohillas received any intimation 
 of this discussion between Mr. Hastings and Su- 
 jah Dowlah, or whether their conduct was the 
 result of a consciousness of their own breach of 
 faith, I cannot say. But in the autumn of that 
 same year, Sujah Dowlah received information 
 that the Rohillas were negociating a treaty with 
 the Mahrattas for the invasion of his dominions. 
 He then saw that hostilities against the Rohillas 
 could no longer be deferred. He stated to Mr. 
 Hastings the intelligence which he had received, 
 and demanded the assistance of the Company's 
 troops. Mr. Hastings, with the approbation of 
 his Council, ordered the troops to place them- 
 selves under the direction of Sujah Dowlah. The 
 War was commenced in the spring, 1774. The 
 Rohillas were subdued ; and at the close of the 
 Campaign, a treaty was concluded between them 
 and Sujah Dowlah, called the Treaty of 'Lo/dong, 
 by which it was agreed, that one of the Rohilla 
 Chiefs should retain a certain portion of the coun- 
 try, and remove to it with five thousand of his 
 troops. The rest of the Rohilla Army were to 
 cross the Ganges, and place themselves under 
 another Rohilla chief of the name of Zabeda Caivn. 
 
195 
 
 On the discussion of this charge, Sir Robert Bar- 
 ker was examined at the bar of the House of 
 Commons. It appeared from his evidence that 
 he had signed that treaty by which Sujah Dowlah 
 engaged to assist the Rohillas against the Mah- 
 rattas. When asked why he had signed that 
 treaty, he answered, " That if he had not signed 
 it, there would have been no treaty ; for that nei- 
 ther of the parties had any confidence in the good 
 faith of the other ; and that each of the parties had 
 acceded to the Treaty relying on the security af- 
 forded by his signature: That he had urged 
 Sujah Dowlah to this treaty because he thought 
 that if the Mahrattas had possessed themselves of 
 the Rohilla Country, the India Company's terri- 
 tory would have been endangered." When ask- 
 ed whether he thought the Rohillas ever intended 
 to pay the money, he replied, " that he was fully 
 persuaded that they never would pay it, except 
 compelled by force." 
 
 It did not appear from the evidence before the 
 House of Commons, whether the evacuation of 
 the country by the Rohilla Army, was an article 
 which had been insisted on by Sujah Dowlah, 
 or had been granted at the request of the Rohilla 
 Chiefs. 
 
 This question of the Rohilla War was debated 
 for two nights in the House of Commons ; and on 
 the last debate the House did not divide till after 
 eight o'clock in the morning. Mr. Pitt took no 
 part in the debate, though, I believe, he voted for 
 
196 
 
 Mr. Hastings. No treasury letters had been sent 
 out, as is usual when the Minister has formed his 
 opinion on any subject. The charge had been 
 drawn up by Mr. Burke with great art. The 
 debate was also conducted with much unfairness : 
 for instead of the question proposed to the House, 
 being, that the House should adopt the Charge, 
 the question was put in these terms — That in 
 case the House should ultimately determine to 
 impeach Mr. Hastings, the Rohilla charge should 
 form part of the Impeachment. By this dexterity 
 in putting the question on which the House was 
 to divide, many members were brought to vote in 
 the affirmative, who could not otherwise have 
 been persuaded to do it. They voted for the 
 question from a belief, that at the close of the 
 discussion of the various Charges, no impeach- 
 ment would be preferred. But all this dexterity 
 failed of success. When it appeared that the two 
 millions of inhabitants remained in the country, 
 and that that which Mr. Burke had stated to be 
 " the Extirpation of a whole Nation," amounted 
 to nothing more than the evacuation of the Coun- 
 try by an army of 26,000 men, the House was 
 disgusted with the exaggeration which had been 
 practised; and notwithstanding every exertion of 
 the Foxite party, the question was negatived by 
 a majority of fifty-three votes. 
 
 It may not be foreign to this subject to remark, 
 that the Rohillas inhabit the same tract of moun- 
 tainous country with the Afghans; but that they 
 are considered as the inferior tribe. 
 
197 
 
 Arrian, in his account of India, speaks of two 
 tribes who inhabited the same mountainous coun- 
 try; and says that " one of these tribes was inferior 
 hi rank to the other." It is curious that the same 
 difference of rank which existed in the remote 
 period mentioned by Arrian, should be found to 
 prevail in our time. Arrian wrote in the reign of 
 the Roman Emperor, Adrian. And though he 
 wrote at a period when the Greek language may 
 be considered to have been on the decline, yet 
 his style has been thought so pure and elegant, 
 that it has obtained him the name of the younger 
 Xenophon. 
 
 He compiled his account of India from the pa- 
 pers of Megasthenes, physician to Seleneus, one 
 of Alexander's immediate successors. Alexander 
 never penetrated farther into India than the Pen- 
 jab. He sailed down one of the five rivers of 
 that country into the Indus, and from thence re- 
 turned to Babylon. Seleneus certainly reached 
 the Ganges. He resided for some time at a city 
 which the Greek historian calls Palibothra. There 
 is very little doubt but that this city is the same 
 which the Moderns call Patna, as it is still in the 
 language of the country called Palipoutre. Every 
 man acquainted with India, must find much plea- 
 sure in reading this work of Arrian, for he will 
 see that India, in those remote times, was nearly 
 the same in point of usages, manners, dress, 
 amusements, division of casts, &c. &c. as it is at 
 present. 
 
198 
 
 I will now speak of the Benares Charge. The 
 Rajah Bulwant-sing held the province of Benares, 
 as a Renter, or Zemindar, from Sujah Dowlah, 
 the Nabob of Oude. On the termination of the 
 India Company's War with Sujah Dowlah, Bul- 
 want-sing thought it for his interest to court the 
 protection of the India Company. And as the 
 province of Benares was situated between their 
 territories and the dominions of Oude, the India 
 Company thought it for their interest to afford to 
 Bulwant-sing that protection which he solicited. 
 They did not withdraw him from his subjection 
 to Sujah Dowlah, but they compelled Sujah 
 Dowlah to agree, that while Bulwant-sing paid 
 him annually the sum of 220,000/. he should 
 never call on him for any other payments or ser- 
 vices ; Sujah Dowlah died in 1775. The Go- 
 vernment of Bengal was at that time in the hands 
 of Mr. Hastings, General Clavering, General 
 Monson, Mr. Barvvell, and Mr. Francis ; or, to 
 speak more correctly, it was in the hands of Ge- 
 neral Clavering, General Monson, and Mr. Fran- 
 cis. For those three gentlemen had, by confede- 
 rating together, reduced Mr. Hastings and Mr. 
 Barwell to be of little importance. The three 
 gentlemen above mentioned proposed that Azoph 
 Ul Dowlah, the son and successor of Sujah Dow- 
 lah, should be compelled to resign the sovereign- 
 ty of Benares with the attendant rent, to the India 
 Company. Mr. Hastings strongly objected to 
 this proposal. He thought that it was for the 
 
199 
 
 interest of the Company to set bounds to its de- 
 sires of aggrandizement. He gave it as his opi- 
 nion, that the India Company would draw more 
 revenue from the possession of Bengal and Bahar, 
 than it would do if it extended its empire beyond 
 those limits. But the opinion of Mr. Hastings 
 was over-ruled ; and the sovereignty of Benares 
 was transferred by Azoph Ul Dovvlah to the India 
 Company. It is scarcely worth while to consi- 
 der, whether the opinion, at that time given by 
 Mr. Hastings, was founded in sound policy or 
 not. It was not only over-ruled at that time by 
 his colleagues, but an opinion directly contrary to 
 that of Mr. Hastings seems now to be entertained 
 by the India Company ; perhaps, by the majority 
 of the British nation : for the present opinion 
 seems to be, that you must possess the whole of 
 India ; and that except you possess the whole, 
 you cannot be secure in the possession of any 
 part. I will only express my wish, Quod Felix 
 sitfaustumque. In 1779, Hyder Ali invaded the 
 Carnatic. At that time, by the deaths of General 
 Clavering and General Monson, Mr. Hastings 
 had regained his ascendancy in the Bengal Go- 
 vernment. In the minutes of the deliberations of 
 the Council on that invasion, it appears that Mr. 
 Francis delivered as his opinion, " that neither 
 soldier nor rupee should be sent to the Carnatic ; 
 for that that country was irrecoverably lost : and 
 that every soldier, and every rupee, sent there, 
 would be uselessly expended." Mr. Hastings's 
 
200 
 
 opinion was directly the reverse of that of Mr. 
 Francis. His minute is in these terms : " While 
 I have a soldier, or a rupee, I will never abandon 
 the Carnatic ; for if we do not fight Hyder Ali in 
 that country, we shall have to fight him here.'' 
 In pursuance of this opinion, Mr. Hastings put 
 the whole force of the Bengal empire in activity* 
 At the moment that the army which he had col- 
 lected was about to set out for the Carnatic, 
 Chemnajee, the son of the Rajah of Berar, appear- 
 ed on the frontiers of Bengal, demanding the chout, 
 or tribute, paid in antient times to the Mahrattas. 
 Chemnajee had with him about fifty thousand ill- 
 disciplined followers. They could not have stood 
 before the army collected by Mr. Hastings, but 
 they could have delayed the march of that army, 
 the presence of which was so necessary in the 
 Carnatic. To prevent this delay, Mr. Hastings 
 entered into a treaty with Chemnajee. He agreed 
 to pay him 210,000/. ; in consideration of which 
 payment, Chemnajee engaged not only to relin- 
 quish all hostilities against the province of Bengal, 
 but also to grant to the British Army an unmo- 
 lested passage through the dominions of the Rajah 
 of Berar, and to supply the Army with provi- 
 sions during its march. This Treaty was faith- 
 fully observed on both sides, and the British Army 
 arrived in the Carnatic without the smallest loss. 
 I have mentioned this transaction, because it was 
 the subject of the second Charge exhibited by 
 Mr. Burke, against Mr. Hastings. Mr. Francis 
 
201 
 
 had resisted every proposal of Mr. Hastings for 
 sending relief to the Carnatic. Among others, 
 he had resisted this treaty with Chemnajee, and 
 had prevailed on Mr, Burke to introduce the sub- 
 ject as one of his Charges; but it was abandoned. 
 Mr. Fox told me, that he did not think it contain- 
 ed ground for impeachment. Were I to presume 
 to give my opinion on this subject, I should say, 
 that instead of reprehension, Mr. Hastings de- 
 served applause. That his conduct exhibited a 
 master-mind capable of firm decision on a ques- 
 tion of great emergency. I have said, that to en- 
 able himself to send relief to the Carnatic, Mr. 
 Hastings put every part of the Bengal empire in 
 motion. He called for men and money from 
 every quarter. He did not consider the Rajah of 
 Benares as entitled to exemption from this de- 
 mand ; and he required from Cheyt-sing, who had 
 succeeded his father, Bulwant-sing, in that Ze- 
 mindary, the assistance of two regiments of ca- 
 valry. 
 
 Mr. Francis was at that time at the head of the 
 opposition to Mr. Hastings in the Bengal council; 
 and as he had resisted every effort for sending re- 
 lief to the Carnatic, he objected to this demand of 
 two regiments from Cheyt-sing. This opposition 
 of Mr. Francis encouraged Cheyt-sing in disobe- 
 dience, and the repeated demand of Mr. Hastings 
 for assistance, was either wholly evaded, or only 
 in part complied with. Mr. Hastings determine*} 
 to punish Cheyt-sing for this conduct. He re- 
 
202 
 
 paired to Benares; he summoned Cheyt-sing be- 
 fore him ; he reprimanded him for his conduct, 
 and then ordered him to consider himself as un- 
 der arrest. Mr. Hastings then commanded an 
 Officer with about two hundred and eighty Se- 
 poys, to escort Cheyt-sing to his own palace, and 
 to guard him there as under arrest. The officer, 
 who commanded this escort, was guilty of a ne- 
 glect which produced disastrous consequences. 
 He marched off the escort without providing them 
 with powder and ball. When the dependants of 
 Cheyt-sing had discovered this circumstance, 
 they thought themselves strong enough to break 
 into the palace, and set the Rajah at liberty. The 
 Sepoys, with their bayonets, if they had acted 
 with firmness, would have been able to repel the 
 attack; but conscious that they were not provided 
 with their usual means of defence, they were seiz- 
 ed with a panic, they fled, and Cheyt-sing was set 
 at liberty. I believe that the generous character 
 of Mr. Hastings prevented this neglect of the 
 Commander of the escort from being generally 
 known; he felt reluctance at an attempt to excuse 
 himself by throwing blame on another. When 
 the Benares Charge was argued in the House of 
 Commons, Mr. Fox rested his argument solely 
 on this principle, that Cheyt-sing was an indepen- 
 dent Prince, no way liable to be called on for suc- 
 cour by the Bengal government. Mr. Pitt re- 
 sisted this opinion of Mr. Fox ; on the contrary, 
 tie said, " Cheyt-sing was a vassal of the Bengal 
 
£03 
 
 empire, and as he received protection from that 
 empire, he owed to it allegiance ; and in conse- 
 quence of that duty of allegiance, was liable to be 
 called on for extraordinary aids on extraordinary 
 emergencies/*' He also assented to an assertion, 
 which had been advanced in the course of the 
 debate, viz. " That Mr. Hastings having only put 
 Cheyt-sing under arrest for the purpose of sub- 
 jecting his conduct to examination, could not be 
 criminated for having inflicted too harsh a punish- 
 ment on him. 9 * But he said, " that the whole of 
 Mr. Hastings's conduct showed that he intended 
 to punish Cheyt-sing with too much severity; this 
 intention was criminal, and for this criminal in- 
 tention, he should, though with much reluctance! 
 vote for the impeachment of Mr. Hastings."* 
 Thus was this impeachment voted by a majority 
 of the House, although those who voted were 
 not agreed as to the ground of criminality. 
 
 A few mornings after the vote, I was with 
 Lord Thurlow. He strongly reprobated Mr. 
 Pitt's conduct ; especially his grounding the Im- 
 peachment on Mr. Hastings's intention to commit 
 a crime. Among other expressions, I recollect 
 he said, " If a girl had talked law in those terms, 
 she might have been excusable.'" No other 
 Charges against Mr. Hastings were discussed in 
 the House of Commons that session. The exa- 
 mination of the remaining nineteen Charges was 
 deferred till the ensuing Session. I had taken 
 part in the debates on the Rohilla and Benares 
 
204 
 
 Charges; but as I saw at the commencement ot 
 the next Session, that Mr. Pitt had decided that 
 the Impeachment against Mr. Hastings should be 
 voted, I gave myself no further trouble on the 
 subject. There were people who thought that 
 Mr. Pitt had adopted this line of conduct to pre- 
 vent the King from employing Mr. Hastings 
 in India affairs. But I do not believe that Mr. 
 Pitt was actuated by so personal and so paltry a 
 motive. I think he consented to the Impeach- 
 ment, because he saw the controul which he 
 should obtain over the Opposition by such ac- 
 quiescence ; and his expectations were answered. 
 I will now say a few words on the nature of an 
 Impeachment: — an Impeachment is an accusa- 
 tion preferred by the Commons to be tried by the 
 Peers. It is not ex debito justitia ; it is an extra- 
 ordinary mode of proceeding. It is not to be con- 
 sidered as analogous to an Indictment, for an In- 
 dictment is an accusation for one definite offence; 
 whereas the Impeachment may be preferred for 
 many offences considered together. Correctly 
 speaking, Impeachment is to be resorted to where 
 an Indictment could not reach the whole of the 
 criminality. It is an accusation preferred against 
 a public Minister: and the question which every 
 Member of the House of Commons ought to 
 consider before he gives his vote, is this: — " On 
 the whole of this public servant's conduct consi- 
 dered together, is it expedient that he should be 
 criminated V 9 On the charges against Mr. Hast- 
 
205 
 
 ings, I regulated my conduct by this mode of 
 reasoning ; I remembered that wise maxim of the 
 common law, Actio non est rea nisi mens sit rea. 
 I asked myself whether I could find the mens rea 
 in Mr. Hastings's conduct on either of the three 
 Charges I have above enumerated ; suppose for 
 instance, that he had mistaken the law of nations, 
 in thinking that Sir Robert Barker had pledged 
 the guarantee of the India Company, by signing 
 the Treaty between Sujah Dowlah and the Ro- 
 hillas; and that he had also been mistaken in the 
 opinion which he had formed, that in consequence 
 of this guarantee, the India Company was bound 
 to give assistance to Sujah Dowlah against the 
 Rohillas. Had Mr. Hastings derived any advan- 
 tage to himself from these mistakes? And if he 
 had derived no advantage to himself, how could 
 I fix on him the mens rea? He had given a sum 
 of money to Chemnajee to induce him to relin- 
 quish his design of invading Bengal, and to afford 
 assistance to the Army which was passing from 
 Bengal into the Carnatic. What personal advan- 
 tage accrued to Mr. Hastingr from this Treaty ? 
 He furthered his design of sending assistance as 
 expeditiously as possible to the Carnatic, and 
 manifestly this was his only object. In respect 
 to the ground on which Mr. Pitt had concurred 
 in the Benares Charge, viz. " That Mr. Hastings 
 had intended to punish Cheyt-sing too severely, 9 ' 
 the human mind could hardly imagine any thinp- 
 weaker. Mr. Hastings had never punished him. 
 
 s 2 
 
206 
 
 He had only put him under an arrest with a view 
 to the examination of his conduct, and for subse- 
 quent punishment, if he should be found to have 
 deserved it. The liberation of Cheyt Sing by his 
 dependants precluded all further examination. 
 But neither on the ground taken by Mr. Fox, viz. 
 H that he had demanded aid from Cheyt Sing 
 where none was due," nor on that taken by Mr. 
 Pitt, " that he had intended to punish Cheyt Sing 
 too severely," could I see any thing like a cri- 
 minal mind. If on all these points he had acted 
 erroneously, he had acted from mistake, and not 
 from that criminal mind, which alone is punisha- 
 ble. 
 
 In forming my opinion on the impeachment of 
 Mr. Hastings, I took various points into consi- 
 deration. The British nation had confided the 
 management of its Indian Empire to the India 
 Company. The India Company regulated its 
 Indian concerns through the agency of a Gover- 
 nor General and Council. The Governor Gene- 
 ral was the efficient person in that Council. If 
 in any instance Mr. Hastings had acted under the 
 influence of corrupt passions, he was punishable 
 by impeachment. But if on any occasion he had 
 only acted from a mistaken judgment, I thought 
 he ought not to be punished by the impeachment 
 of the House of Commons. On the Rohilla 
 Charge I thought, that Mr. Hastings had acted 
 consonantly to the law of nations. That Sir Ro- 
 bert Barker's signature of the treaty between 
 
207 
 
 Sujah Dowlah and the Rohillahs amounted to a 
 guarantee ; and that it authorised Sujah Dowlah 
 to call on the India Company to assist him in ob- 
 taining the stipulated payment. Here then Mr. 
 Hastings was guilty of no mistake, and the House 
 of Commons concurred in this opinion. The 
 treaty with Chemnajee was said to be disgraceful 
 to the English name. But the advantages gained 
 by it were so great, that I could never bring my- 
 self to disapprove of it. On the Benares Charge 
 my opinion still remains the same. Protection 
 and allegiance are reciprocal duties. Wherever 
 protection is received, allegiance is due. Cheyt 
 Sing could not have existed for a single hour if 
 unprotected by the British Government. He 
 would have been devoured by the Nabob of 
 Oude. He was like a pigeon under the eye of a 
 hawk, who would have pounced on him if unre- 
 strained by a superior power. I therefore could 
 not consider Mr. Hastings as having formed an 
 erroneous opinion, when he said, H Cheyt Sing 
 was the vassal of the India Company, and owes 
 assistance when the Company has occasion for 
 extraordinary aids." I also recollected the very 
 peculiar difficulties which Mr. Hastings was un- 
 der when he was called on to form an opinion on 
 great political questions. The nature of the British 
 Empire in India was hardly developed. We had 
 scarcely formed an accurate opinion on it our- 
 selves. The policy of the Mogul Government 
 had established two distinct departments in each 
 
208 
 
 province. In the military department the Nabob 
 was supreme: in the civil department the Dewan. 
 The English India Company founded its authori- 
 ty in Bengal and Bahar on a real or supposed 
 grant of the Dewanee of those provinces from the 
 Great Mogul. They continued, however, to ex- 
 hibit to the natives a splendid pageant, which they 
 called a Nabob, and all discussions with foreign 
 Princes were under the name of this Nabob. Mr. 
 Hastings must certainly have felt much embarrass- 
 ment from the undefined power of his masters. 
 
 I thought also, that it was reasonable to take 
 into consideration his situation in India. In Eng- 
 land, if the minister is called on to decide on a 
 great political question, he has many men at hand 
 who can assist him with their advice. He has 
 lawyers in every branch of that study. He has 
 men, who have travelled in all parts of the world, 
 and who know the relation which the concerns of 
 other countries bear to British interests. When 
 Mr. Hastings was called on to decide, he had no 
 such assistance near him. I therefore can only 
 wonder that he did not make more mistakes. 
 The three charges which I have taken notice of 
 were the three subjects on which Mr. Francis 
 had opposed the government of Mr. Hastings in 
 Bengal. He had prevailed on Mr. Burke to adopt 
 his opinions on these points; and Mr. Burke's 
 influence over Mr. Fox had induced that gentle- 
 man to bring down the Opposition in full force to 
 support these charges. In truth, the charges ex- 
 
209 
 
 nibited by Mr. Burke in the House of Commons 
 were nothing more than a continuation of that op- 
 position, which Mr. Francis, while in India, had 
 made to the measures of Mr. Hastings's govern- 
 ment. I was unacquainted with Mr. Hastings, 
 when these charges were laid on the table. When 
 I examined them, I was disgusted with the unfair 
 manner in which they were framed. This led 
 me to take part in the debates ; and after the ses- 
 ision was ended, I became acquainted with Mr, 
 Hastings. lie appeared to me to be a man of a 
 strong, vigorous, decisive mind ; well acquainted 
 with the character of the natives of India, and 
 with the views and interests of its various Prin- 
 ces. He seemed to me to be a man capable of 
 extricating himself from difficulties by his great 
 resources and dauntless courage. In one word, 
 he came nearer to the idea which I had formed of 
 an able statesman, than any other man with whom 
 I ever had intercourse. But he was a statesman 
 only for the affairs of India. He knew nothing of 
 the various parties in England, their interests, 
 their designs, their ability to effectuate those de- 
 signs, or how far they were likely to be influenced 
 or restrained by moral considerations. These 
 were subjects on which he seemed to me never to 
 have formed any opinion. I have said, that Mr. 
 Hastings was capable of extricating himself from 
 difficulties by his great resources and his daunt- 
 less courage. He displayed these qualities in a 
 most remarkable manner, while surrounded by 
 
210 
 
 the forces of Cheyt Sing at Benares. Mr. Hast 
 logs had with him only four hundred soldiers, 
 Cheyt Sing had forty thousand. If Cheyt Sing 
 had attacked him, Mr. Hastings's situation must 
 have been forced before he could have collected 
 assistance. But instead of an immediate attack, 
 the Rajah sent in a proposal to treat with him. 
 Mr. Hastings knew, that if he opened a treaty, 
 the Indian Prince's courage wouldibe increased, and 
 that he would, most probably, immediately attack 
 him. That, on the contrary, if he refused to treat, 
 Cheyt Sing would suppose, that Mr. Hastings 
 had some resources with which he was unac- 
 quainted. He therefore sent for answer to his pro- 
 posal, that before he would listen to any excuse 
 for his conduct, Cheyt Sing must come into Be- 
 nares, and throw himself at his feet. This an- 
 swer intimidated Cheyt Sing, and allowed time 
 for troops to come to the relief of Mr. Hastings. 
 
 I have thus given my opinion on the three first 
 charges exhibited by Mr. Burke against Mr- 
 Hastings. I have entered into the consideration 
 of them with much reluctance. I had taken part 
 in the debates on the first and third charges ; and 
 from that circumstance may be thought to have 
 my opinion prejudiced in favour of Mr. Hastings. 
 I was unacquainted with that gentleman when the 
 discussion was first entered on in the House of 
 Commons. But, after the close of that session, 
 I was introduced to him, and gradually admitted 
 to the most intimate and confidential communica- 
 
211 
 
 tions. I acknowledge, that I think of his me- 
 mory with the highest veneration. I think, that 
 he was a man of the most powerful mind I have 
 ever conversed with. 
 
 I have said, that the charges, brought forward 
 by Mr. Burke against Mr. Hastings, were on 
 those subjects, which had been matter of discus- 
 sion between Mr. Francis and Mr. Hastings, 
 while the former gentleman was in India ; that the 
 impeachment of Mr. Hastings was a continuation 
 of Mr. Francis's opposition to Mr. Hastings's 
 Government. I believe I am correct in this as- 
 sertion. All the materials for the twenty-two 
 charges, brought forward by Mr. Burke, were 
 furnished by Mr. Francis. And Mr. Burke had 
 sufficient influence to prevail on Mr. Fox to sup- 
 port the charges with the whole strength of Op- 
 position. Mr. Francis was a man of considera- 
 ble abilities. He was a very superior classical 
 scholar ; and he was capable of laborious applica- 
 tion. Strong resentment was a leading feature in 
 his character. I have heard him avow this sen- 
 timent more openly and more explicitly than I 
 ever heard any other man avow it in the whole 
 course of my life. I have heard him publicly 
 say in the House of Commons, " Sir Elijah Impey 
 is not fit to sit in judgment on any matter where 
 I am interested, nor am I fit to sit in judgment 
 on him," A relation of the ground of this ill 
 will may be amusing. Mrs. Le Grand, the wife 
 of a gentleman in the Civil Service in Bengal, 
 
212 
 
 vi as admired for her beauty, for the sweetness of 
 her temper, and for her fascinating accomplish- 
 ments. She attracted the attention of Mr. Fran- 
 cis. This gentleman, by means of a rope-ladder, 
 got into her apartment in the night. After he had 
 remained there about three quarters of an hour, 
 there was an alarm ; and Mr. Francis came down 
 from the lady's apartment by the rope-ladder, at 
 the foot of which he was seized by Mr. Le 
 Grand's servants. An action was brought by 
 Mr. Le Grand against Mr. Francis, in the Su- 
 preme Court of Justice in Calcutta. The judges 
 in that court assess the damages in civil actions, 
 without the intervention of a jury. The gentle- 
 men who at that time filled this situation, were 
 Sir Elijah Impey, Chief Justice, Sir Robert Cham- 
 bers, and Mr. Justice Hyde. I was intimate with 
 the first and the third from early life ; having liv- 
 ed with them on the Western Circuit. On the 
 trial of this cause, Sir Robert Chambers thought, 
 that as no criminality had been proved, no da- 
 mages should be given. But he afterwards pro- 
 posed to give thirty thousand rupees, which are 
 worth about three thousand pounds sterling. 
 Mr. Justice Hyde was for giving a hundred thou- 
 sand rupees. I believe, that Mr. Justice Hyde 
 was as upright a judge as ever sat on any bench ; 
 but he had an implacable hatred to those, who in- 
 dulged in the crime imputed to Mr. Francis. 
 Sir Elijah Impey was of opinion, that although 
 no criminal intercourse had been proved, yet that 
 
215 
 
 the wrong done by Mr. Francis to Mr. Le Grand 
 in entering his wife's apartment in the night, and 
 thereby destroying her reputation, ought to be 
 compensated with liberal damages. He thought 
 the sum of thirty thousand rupees, proposed by 
 Sir Robert Chambers, too small ; and that pro- 
 posed by Mr. Hyde, of a hundred thousand, too 
 large. He therefore suggested a middle course, 
 of fifty thousand rupees. This proposal was ac- 
 quiesced in by his two colleagues. When Sir 
 Elijah Impey was delivering the judgment of 
 the Court, my late friend, Mr. Justice Hyde, 
 could not conceal his eager zeal on the subject ; 
 and when Sir Elijah named the sum of fifty thou- 
 sand rupees, Mr. Justice Hyde, to the amusement 
 of the bystanders, called out, " Siccas, brother 
 Impey f* which are worth eleven per cent, more 
 than the current rupees. Perhaps this story may 
 not be thought worthy of relation : but it gave 
 occasion to that animosity, which Mr. Francis 
 publicly avowed against Sir Elijah Impey ; and 
 the criminal charge, afterwards brought against 
 him in the House of Commons, was the offspring 
 of that animosity. I will follow up this anecdote 
 by mentioning the consequences of the action 
 brought by Mr. Le Grand. The lady was di- 
 vorced : she was obliged to throw herself under 
 the protection of Mr. Francis for subsistence. 
 After a short time she left him, and went to Eng- 
 land. In London she fell into the company of 
 M. Talleyrand Perigord. Captivated by her 
 
214 
 
 charms, he prevailed on her to accompany him to 
 Paris, where he married her ; and thus the insult, 
 which this lady received from Mr. Francis, and 
 the loss of reputation, which was, perhaps unjust- 
 ly, the consequence of that insult, eventually ele- 
 vated her to the rank of Princess of Benevento. 
 
 As I took part in the defence of Mr. Hastings 
 on the two charges which I have mentioned, and 
 was known to interest myself much in the welfare 
 of Sir Elijah Impey, I speak with some reluc- 
 tance of Mr. Francis ; but the impeachment of 
 Mr. Hastings, and the accusation of Sir Elijah 
 Impey, both originated with him. 
 
 The first charge brought forward the ensuing 
 session, excited so much of the public attention, 
 that although I took no part in the debate while 
 it was depending in the House of Commons, yet 
 it may perhaps, not be improper to state the sub- 
 ject. It was called the Begum Charge. It grew 
 out of a political discussion between Mr. Francis 
 and Mr. Hastings, while those gentlemen were in 
 India. This charge rested on the following cir- 
 cumstances. Sujah Dowlah, the Nabob of Oude, 
 died in 1775. He left a widow, named the Bhow 
 Begum ; and by her one only son, Azoph Ul 
 Dowlah, who succeeded him in the sovereignty 
 of Oude. I believe the Mahometan law allows a 
 man to have four wives ; but Sujah Dowlah had 
 never availed himself of this permission. The 
 Bhow Begum was the only woman whom he had 
 ever married. For some years he had lived with 
 
215 
 
 her on indifferent terms. But when he was in a 
 state of distress, in consequence of his hostilities 
 with the English Government, his wife collected 
 all her treasure, and all the force which she could 
 draw together, and joined him in his hour of need: 
 determined to share with him his good or ill suc- 
 cess. This conduct regained her the affections 
 of Sujah Dowlah. From that hour she was the 
 person on whose attachment he placed the most 
 entire confidence. Those, who are not acquaint- 
 ed with the manners of an Asiatic Court, can 
 with difficulty form an idea of the power of a wo- 
 man locked up in a zenana, and precluded from 
 personal intercourse with men, except such as 
 stand related to her in the character of husband 
 or children. But the nower of the Bhow Bemjm 
 in her husband's court seems to have exceeded 
 that which is commonly allowed to the wives of 
 Sovereigns in Europe. She was his treasurer : 
 no payment was made except authorized by her 
 signature. At his death all his treasure was in 
 her apartments, and in her possession. Her only 
 son, Azoph Ul Dowlah, admitted his mother's 
 right to retain a portion of this treasure ; but con- 
 tended, that, by the Mahometan law, the greater 
 part of it belonged to himself, as his father's suc- 
 cessor in the Sovereignty of Oude. He also 
 urged, that very heavy arrears were due to his 
 father's army, and that if he were deprived of this 
 treasure he should be unable to satisfy their de- 
 mands. The mother declared, that she would 
 
216 
 
 keep the whole. I do not pretend to know enough 
 of the Mahometan law to be able to form an opi- 
 nion on this question between the mother and her 
 son. The Bengal government, at that time ex- 
 ercised by General Clavering, General Monson, 
 and Mr. Francis, espoused the cause of the Bhow 
 Begum, in opposition to the opinion of Mr. Hast- 
 ings. They allowed the lady to retain three parts 
 in four of the treasure : by which decision the 
 money received by Azoph Ul Dowlah amounted 
 only to about eight hundred thousand pounds. It 
 was generally believed, that the treasure left by 
 Sujah Dowlah much exceeded the sum admitted 
 by the Bhow Begum to be in her possession ; and 
 it was so very difficult to prove all the remittances 
 of money, which had been made to the treasury, 
 that the amount of the treasure left by Sujah Dow- 
 lah was necessarily estimated almost wholly by 
 the admission of the lady herself. The Bengal 
 Government guaranteed to the Bhow Begum, 
 not only the possession of this treasure, but also 
 of a large Jaghire> with the exercise of almost so- 
 vereign power within that district. This decision 
 of the Bengal Government compelled Azoph UI 
 Dowlah to begin the exercise of sovereignty under 
 great difficulties. The discharge of the debts left 
 unpaid by his father was claimed from him ; and 
 that treasure, with which they ought to have been 
 paid, was with-held from him. Mr. Hastings 
 considered the' Nabob of Oude as a dependant on 
 the Bengal Government ; and when the war with 
 
21? 
 
 France begun in 1778, and the invasion of the 
 Carnatic by Hyder Ali in the following year made 
 it necessary for him to call forth all the resources 
 of the Bengal Empire, he called for supplies of 
 men and money from Azoph Ul Dowlah. That 
 Prince furnished them cheerfully, and to a great 
 amount; but in the beginning of the year 1782 
 there was no money in this prince's treasury ; and 
 he was unable to make his payments to the Ben- 
 gal Government ; yet the money was absolutely 
 necessary to enable that Government to continue 
 its exertions against France and Hyder Ali. In 
 this embarrassment, the ministers of Azoph Ul 
 Dowlah suggested the propriety of cancelling 
 that division of Sujah Dowlah' s treasure between 
 the Bhow Begum and her son, which, as they 
 said, had been unjustly made under the authority 
 of the Bengal Government. Mr. Hastings resist- 
 ed this proposal : but he thought it equitable, 
 that the mother should come to the assistance of 
 her son ; and he therefore consented, that the mi- 
 nisters of Azoph Ul Dowlah should employ such 
 means as they thought expedient to prevail on her 
 to afford him pecuniary assistance, provided that 
 they most carefully abstained from offering any 
 mark of disrespect to her person, or any violation 
 of the privileges belonging to her place of resi- 
 dence. When Azoph Ul Dowlah's ministers 
 had obtained this permission, they watched the 
 first opportunity of finding the Bhow Begum's 
 two principal ministers, Johar Alt tiavm, and 
 
 T 2 
 
218 
 
 Behar All Caw?i y out of the privileged limits of 
 her residence, and seized their persons. These 
 two eunuchs directed all the concerns of the Be- 
 gum. They were privy to the amount of her 
 wealth, and to all her other secrets ; and were be- 
 lieved to be the persons, who had principally ad- 
 vised her to refuse assistance to her son. It was 
 the design of Azoph Ul Dowlah's ministers to in- 
 timidate the eunuchs to such a degree, as to in- 
 duce them to recommend to their mistress to ad- 
 vance money to her son. The design succeeded, 
 and the Begum assisted her son with five hundred 
 thousand pounds. 
 
 On this charge Mr. Sheridan made a speech 
 which both sides of the House professed greatly 
 to admire : for Mr. Pitt now openly approved of 
 the impeachment. I will acknowledge, that I did 
 not admire this speech of Mr. Sheridan. The 
 House was called on to concur with Mr. Burke 
 in accusing Mr. Hastings. Accusatorial func- 
 tions approach very nearly to judicial functions ; 
 and in my opinion ought to be exercised with the 
 same caution, and with equal observance of integ- 
 rity. Mr. Sheridan's speech was not calculated 
 to inform, but to mislead his hearers. The 
 charge was adopted. The remaining charges oc- 
 casioned little discussion. The impeachment of 
 Mr. Hastings was voted, and carried up to the 
 House of Lords. 
 
 I have thus stated the four political charges 
 brought by Mr. Burke against Mr. Hastings. 
 
219 
 
 The remaining charges were of much less impor- 
 tance ; they related chiefly to objections to Mr, 
 Hastings's conduct in the details of his govern- 
 ment. Although I took no part in the debate on 
 the Begum Charge, I voted against it. Mr. 
 Hastings had derived no advantage to himself 
 from the permission which he had thus granted 
 to the ministers of Azoph Ul Dowlah. He stood 
 the minister of the British Nation, exercising 
 powers scarcely defined by that Nation which 
 had confided them to him. He was to exercise 
 these powers without being assisted with the ad- 
 vice of others. I looked only to the integrity of 
 his conduct: I could not bring myself to punish 
 him for mistakes, even if I had thought that mis- 
 takes had been committed. But, in this Begum 
 Charge, 1 did not think that Mr. Hastings had 
 made any mistake. I thought it was equitable, 
 that the unjust division of Sujah Dowlah's trea- 
 sure, which had been made in 1775, should be 
 set aside. 
 
 In thus resisting the impeachment of Mr. Has- 
 tings, I am not conscious that I was influenced 
 by any improper motive. I had never lived in 
 such intercourse with Mr. Francis, but I had al- 
 ways been impressed with the idea of his being 
 a man of very considerable abilities. I acknow- 
 ledge, that I had disapproved of his conduct 
 while he stood, in the Bengal Government, the 
 opponent of those measures, which were recom- 
 mended by Mr. Hastings. The French and 
 
220 
 
 Hyder Ali had attacked our possessions in India. 
 Mr. Hastings thought, that every effort of the 
 British empire in India should be employed to 
 resist them. Mr. Francis was of a different opi- 
 nion. He scrupulously examined every exertion 
 that was proposed. He viewed it in all its bear- 
 ings, and raised every objection, which his abi- 
 lities and his well-informed mind enabled him to 
 bring forward. My mind had been accustomed 
 to meditate on the misfortunes brought on us by 
 the American War. At the commencement of 
 that war, in 1 775, the American Colonies formed 
 the Western branch, and our possessions in In- 
 dia the Eastern branch of our Empire. In the 
 course of that war the American branch was 
 torn from us. What must have been our situa- 
 tion if we had experienced similar misfortunes in 
 India? How should we have treated with France, 
 Spain, Holland, and the United States of Ameri- 
 ca, at the commencement of the year 1783, if the 
 British empire in India had been conquered by 
 our enemies ? It was preserved to us; and, as I 
 think, its preservation was the result of the ener- 
 gies of that able statesman, Warren Hastings. I 
 had lived in habits of acquaintance with Mr. 
 Edmund Burke. I had no prejudices against 
 him ; for he had not at that time involved my 
 country in the crusade against French principles. 
 Before he brought forward the charges against 
 Mr. Hastings, tie conversed with me very fully 
 on the subject. I put this question to him : 
 
221 
 
 " Can you prove, that Mr. Hastings ever derived 
 any advantage to himself from that misconduct 
 which you impute to him ?" He acknowledged 
 " that he could not ;" but added, " that his 
 whole government of India had been one conti- 
 nued violation of the great principles of justice." 
 Before the charges were laid on the table, I had 
 a second conversation with Mr. Burke on the 
 subject. When he found that I persevered in 
 my opinion, he told me, u that in that case I 
 must relinquish the friendship of the Duke of 
 Portland." I replied, " that that would give me 
 pain; but that I would rather relinquish the Duke 
 of Portland's friendship than support an impeach- 
 ment which I did not approve." We parted, and 
 our intercourse was terminated. 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 On Mr. Edmund Burke. 
 
 I may perhaps be thought to have spoken 
 in some places with too much severity of Mr. 
 Edmund Burke. My acquaintance with this 
 gentleman began about the year 1780. My in- 
 tercourse with him impressed me with the high- 
 est idea of his political erudition. I say nothing 
 
222 
 
 of his abilities : my opinion of him on that head 
 is the same as is generally entertained, viz. that 
 he had great powers, with very little judgment. 
 I never had any personal difference with him : at 
 the commencement of our intercourse my admira- 
 tion of him was great; it gradually diminished 
 into disapprobation of his measures, and disap- 
 probation gradually increased into disesteem. In 
 the autumn, 1781, when it was visible that the 
 nation was every day becoming more tired of the 
 American War, and that Lord North would be 
 obliged to relinquish it, I was very anxious to see 
 union established between the friends of the Mar- 
 quis of Rockingham and those of the Earl of 
 Shelburne. The friends of the Earl of Shelburne 
 professed to wish it, and I firmly believe that 
 they were sincere. This union was prevented 
 by Mr. Burke; the consequences of the continu- 
 ance of disunion sufficiently appeared on the for- 
 mation of the Cabinet of Eleven in the ensuing 
 spring. During the three months that Lord 
 Rockingham was minister, in 1782, I saw much 
 in Mr. Burke's conduct which I disapproved ; 
 on the death of that noble Marquis, the separa- 
 tion between Mr. Fox and the Earl of Shelburne 
 was effected solely by the efforts of Mr. Burke. 
 Mr. Fox was a man of kindness : malice seemed 
 to me not to enter into his composition ; and I 
 am very certain that he had no ill will to the Earl 
 of Shelburne, even down to the hour of the 
 Marquis of Rockingham's death. 
 
223 
 
 When the separation between the friends of 
 the deceased Marquis and the Earl of Shelburne 
 took place, there was a meeting of the Rocking- 
 hams at Earl Fitzwilliam's, and at this meeting 
 Mr. Burke spoke of the Earl of Shelburne in 
 terms so coarse and unmeasured as to preclude 
 all possibility of reconciliation. When the Rock- 
 inghams and Shelburnes had separated, there ex- 
 isted three political parties, viz. Lord North's, 
 the late Lord Rockingham's, and the Earl of 
 Shelburne's. It was obvious, that whichever 
 two of these parties joined, they would be too 
 powerful in the House of Commons for the third. 
 It may therefore be supposed, that when Mr. 
 Burke prevailed on the Rockinghams to separate 
 from Lord Shelburne, he had in view a union 
 between the Rockinghams and Lord North ; but 
 I do not believe that he at that time had any such 
 idea. The Duke of Richmond was very earnest, 
 that the Earl of Shelburne should be prime mini- 
 ster, and that he himself should be considered as 
 the head of the Rockingham party. But this 
 was extremely disagreeable to Mr. Burke. He 
 knew, that he had no influence over the Duke of 
 Richmond ; and it was Mr. Burke's wish that 
 the Duke of Portland should be brought from 
 Ireland, and proclaimed chief of the late Mar- 
 quis's friends. He urged this arrangement, be- 
 cause he knew that the Duke of Portland would 
 be entirely under his guidance ; and he sacrificed 
 
2-24 
 
 the political strength of his party to his own per- 
 sonal wishes. 
 
 William Eden was the mezzano, who effected 
 the coalition between Lord North and Mr. Fox ; 
 or, as the late Duke of Norfolk, while Earl of 
 Surrey, expressed it in the House of Commons, 
 " He was the priest who married us." During 
 the nine months in 1783, that the Coalitionists 
 were in possession of the administration, they 
 were wholly under the guidance of Mr. Burke. 
 His arrogance was sufficiently disgusting. He 
 ultimately ruined them by his India Bill. It was 
 much to be regretted, that when the Marquis of 
 Rockingham came into office in 1765, his inex- 
 perience in public business should have made it 
 necessary that he should have about him a person 
 who might act as his guide. I believe Mr. Burke 
 was a very proper person for the situation. For 
 his failings did not perhaps at that time exist. 
 They grew up afterwards gradually, as their 
 growth was encouraged by the occasion. While 
 the Duke of Portland was first Lord of the Trea- 
 sury, Mr. Burke's influence was more authorita- 
 tive than it had been during the life of the Mar- 
 quis of Rockingham. For Lord Rockingham, 
 when he would venture to do it, was capable of 
 thinking for himself. 
 
 When Mr. Burke brought forward his accu- 
 sation against Mr. Hastings, he solicited me to 
 support him. In the course of our discussion, 
 
9M 
 
 told me, that if I declined supporting him, I must 
 relinquish the friendship of the Duke of Portland; 
 and my connection with Mr. Burke, as well as 
 with the Duke of Portland, was from that hour 
 terminated. While Mr. Burke was the guide of 
 the Marquis of Rockingham and of the Duke of 
 Portland, he inculcated more openly than ever 
 had been done before, " that every man ought 
 to be enlisted in a party : that a member of the 
 House of Commons ought not to consider the 
 merit of the question immediately before the 
 House : that he should only consider whether he 
 wished the minister to remain in office, or that his 
 rivals should take his place." He inculcated this 
 doctrine both in his speeches and his pamphlets : 
 it always appeared to me a doctrine highly un- 
 constitutional ; but it served the views of Mr. 
 Burke, as it recommended him to the leaders of 
 his party ; for he accompanied the doctrine with 
 this addition, " that as the ancestors of those lea- 
 ders had placed the Brunswicks on the throne, 
 they had a right to be the ministers, and to dic- 
 tate the political measures which should be pur- 
 sued." r 
 
 But the great injury, which Mr. Burke did to 
 his country, was by preaching the crusade against 
 French principles. He was emphatically the 
 Peter the Hermit, who preached up this holy war. 
 I consider this as the great measure of his life, 
 and if I have ever spoken of him with harshness, 
 my language has been the result of my feelings 
 
 v 
 
226 
 
 on this subject. The French Revolution, at its 
 very commencement, excited great alarm in the 
 minds of princes and nobles, especially of Ger- 
 man princes. It is well known that George III. 
 did not conceal his opinion on this head. Mr- 
 Burke expressed his disapprobation of the French 
 Revolution at an early period : his language gra- 
 dually became more violent : he professed to 
 wish to excite all parties. Not only all parties, 
 but every religious sect in the British Empire 
 was called on to exert itself. He did not con- 
 fine himself to the limits of Great Britain and 
 Ireland ; he endeavoured to rouse every part of 
 ihe Continent. His son was sent to a meeting 
 of princes and ministers at Coblentz. The Em- 
 peror Leopold and the King of Prussia were ex- 
 cited by Mr. Burke's publications. In a word, 
 he left no means unemployed to inflame the whole 
 of Europe to the adoption of his opinion. The 
 German Princes were the first who were prevail- 
 ed on to move. I believe that Prince Kaunitz, 
 the prime minister of the Emperor Leopold, dis- 
 suaded his master from undertaking a war against 
 France. The Emperor Joseph had left several 
 parts of his dominions in a state of agitation ; 
 particularly the Netherlands, and Hungary. The 
 Empress Maria Theresa had been much beloved 
 in the Netherlands; but the Emperor Joseph, her 
 son, had contrived to set the monastic orders and 
 the nobles in that country against him. Their 
 discontent had led them to take arms ; but on 
 
227 
 
 the death of the Emperor Joseph, his successor 
 Leopold found means to appease them. Much 
 ill humour however still remained among them. 
 Matters were not much better in Hungary, where 
 the Emperor Joseph had much disgusted the no- 
 bles. Prince Kaunitz thought it would be more 
 advantageous to the Emperor Leopold to regain 
 the affections of his discontented subjects, than to 
 embark in a war with France. But "this wise mi- 
 nister was overruled : war was resolved on ; and 
 the King of Prussia became the ally of the Em- 
 peror. Mr. Burke seems to have had more dif- 
 ficulty in England. He at length prevailed on 
 the party of the great Whig families to declare 
 for war. But Mr. Pitt hesitated. He yielded at 
 last with reluctance. But though he consented 
 that war should be undertaken, he does not ap- 
 pear ever to have adopted Mr. Burke's opinion 
 as to the motive for the war. Mr. Burke's opi- 
 nion was, that war should be undertaken to re- 
 establish France exactly in that state in which it 
 had existed before the commencement of the Re- 
 volution ; or, according to the technical language 
 of that day, to re-establish the ancien regime. Mr- 
 Pitt viewed it as a political war ; the object with 
 him was a diminution of the power of France, 
 The two objects were inconsistent with each 
 other. The crusade has lasted nearly thirty years. 
 Europe has already suffered much ; and I fear 
 her sufferings are not at an end. 
 
228 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 On the Slave Trade. 
 
 I was in the House of Commons during the 
 discussions on the Abolition of the Slave Trade; 
 but I never voted on the subject : there were cir- 
 cumstances which led me to hesitate : and where 
 I doubted on which side I ought to vote, I thought 
 it most safe to abstain from voting at all. No 
 man can like the Slave Trade. It is oppressive 
 to the slave ; it is more injurious to the master, 
 for it corrupts his morals ; accustoming him to 
 believe, that he may live with other human crea- 
 tures wit-bout being subject to the restraint of mo- 
 ral duties. 
 
 Perhaps there is no country in Europe in which 
 the proportion of slaves to freemen was at one 
 time greater than it was in England. I apprehend 
 that this was owing to the Heptarchy. The di- 
 vision of the country into seven kingdoms produ- 
 ced wars : wars occasioned captives, and captives 
 became slaves. Servi quia servabantur. The 
 wise decisions of our courts of law, assisted by 
 other circumstances, effectuated enfranchisement. 
 I will mention some of these circumstances. First, 
 the courts of law decided, that an illegitimate 
 child could not be a slave, or, as our law calls 
 him, a serf or villein. He could inherit no advan- 
 
229 
 
 tage from his parents ; it would therefore have 
 been unreasonable that he should inherit a disad- 
 vantage. Secondly,. if the female slave, or, as she 
 is called in our law books, a nieje, married a free- 
 man, she became enfranchised during the cover- 
 ture, and her children were free. Thirdly, if the 
 male slave became a monk he became free. It 
 was the same if the female slave became a nun. 
 There were many other decisions of the courts of 
 law, which favoured the enfranchisement of vil- 
 leins. I will only mention one more, and I shall 
 select that because it was made at so late a period 
 as the reign of Richard II., and in opposition to 
 the wishes of the legislature. If A, the villein of 
 B, brought an action in a court of law against B, 
 and B pleaded in bar of his action, though A failed 
 in his suit, yet A, the villein, became enfranchi- 
 sed ; for B, by pleading in bar to his action, had 
 treated A as a freeman ; and he could not after- 
 wards falsify his own admission. To prevent this 
 inconvenience, B was under the necessity of plead- 
 ing in abatement, or disability of A's person. His 
 plea therefore would regularly have run in these 
 words, " That he, B, was not bound to answer 
 A's action, because that he, A, was his villein, re- 
 gardant to B's manor of Wellington in the county 
 of Somerset." To this plea in abatement, A, 
 according to the regular course of pleading, ought 
 to have replied in these words, viz. ; *' That he, 
 A, was free, without this: that he, A, was the 
 villein of B, regardant to B ? s manor of Welling- 
 
 u 2 
 
230 
 
 ton in the county of Somerset." Then, accord- 
 ing to the ordinary rules of pleading, this ques- 
 tion, whether A was a villein regardant to B's 
 manor of Wellington in the county of Somerset, 
 ought to have been tried by a jury of Somerset- 
 shire. But, in favour of liberty, the courts of law 
 departed from the ordinary course of pleading, 
 and decided, that A should be allowed to plead in 
 a manner different from what was commonly pre- 
 scribed : and they allowed A to plead in these 
 words, viz. " That he, A, was free," omitting 
 any answer to the other part of B's plea. By this 
 advantage thus allowed to A, the question or issue 
 between A and B was no longer accompanied 
 with any circumstances of locality. The issue or 
 question between the parties was simply whether 
 A was free, and was therefore to be tried by a 
 jury of that county in which A had brought his 
 action. In the seventeenth of Richard II. an Act 
 of Parliament was passed, reciting an inconveni- 
 ence from this mode of pleading, and applying a 
 remedy. The act recited, that it often happened, 
 that a villein fled into a town, where the inhabi- 
 tants were disposed to favour the claim of free- 
 dom. That he then brought a fictitious and co- 
 lourable action against his lord, with a view to one 
 of these two advantages, iitr. u That if the lord 
 pleaded in bar of his action, he, the villein, might 
 be enfranchised by his lord's plea : and if the lord 
 pleaded in disability of his person, and in abate- 
 ment of his action, that then the plea might be 
 
23i 
 
 tried by a jury every way disposed to find in the 
 villein's favour." To remedy this mischief, the 
 statute enacted, that the lord might plead in bar 
 of the villein's action ; accompanying his plea 
 with a protestation, that the plaintiff was his vil- 
 lein : and that a plea in bar, accompanied with 
 this protestation, should not render the villein 
 free. This statute was written in the French lan- 
 guage. It was manifestly intended for the pro- 
 tection of the lord's interest against the ill found- 
 ed claim of his villein. Sir Edward Coke, in 
 commenting on this statute, translated it incorrect- 
 ly ; and having, from this circumstance, puzzled 
 himself, concludes by saying, " it is a perplexed 
 statute, and that he does not know what to make 
 of it. 5 ' The words which Sir Edward Coke trans- 
 lated incorrectly are the following. The statute 
 recites, that the villein flies into a town, ou il est 
 fort a trier envers son seigneur. Sir Etfward Coke 
 translates these words, IVhere is it hard to try 
 against his lord. Whereas the true translation is, 
 IVhere he y the villein, is powerful in trial against 
 his lord. And thus, by this mistake in the transla- 
 tion, Sir Edward Coke supposes the legislature to 
 have had in view a mischief directly the reverse 
 of that which they really had in view, and which 
 they wished to remedy. But the wise solicitude 
 of our courts of law, to increase the number of 
 freemen, defeated these efforts of the legislature to 
 preserve the character of villeins in England. 
 For the courts decided, that if the plaintiff reco- 
 
232 
 
 vered, his action then could not be deemed ficti- 
 tious and colourable. It was therefore not a case 
 within the statute. The defendant was not enti- 
 tled to any benefit under the statute, and the vil- 
 lein was enfranchised by the defendant's plea. 
 
 Perhaps one of the circumstances, which the 
 most contributed to the enfranchisement of our 
 villeins, is that which is generally considered as 
 one of the greatest calamities recorded in our his- 
 tory : I mean the long civil war between the 
 houses of York and Lancaster. The lords en- 
 franchised their villeins, that they might use them 
 as soldiers. It is a common expression in the 
 historians of that period, in speaking of a great 
 lord who took part in the civil wars, seiuitia ar- 
 tnavit. And, as an inducement to the villeins to 
 serve as soldiers, they enfranchised them, and 
 granted them lands to be held by copy of court 
 roll. Sir Edward Coke, who wrote in the reign 
 of James L, says, that half the land in England 
 was at that time copyhold. As the proportion of 
 copyhold land is now very much diminished, it is 
 possible that some people may doubt the accura- 
 cy of Sir Edward Coke's assei tion. But let it be 
 recollected, that a great proportion of the land in 
 the western counties was even ^o late as in the 
 memory of people now living, held by leases for 
 ninety-nine years determinable on lives. And 
 wherever this practice prevailed, there is ^reat 
 reason to believe, that the lands had antecedently 
 been held by copy of court roll. 
 
233 
 
 Wherever Slavery has prevailed, it has gene- 
 rally been the result of conquest. On the fall of 
 the Roman Empire, the Northern nations overran 
 France, Spain, Portugal, and Italy, They es- 
 tablished servitude in all these countries. The 
 Normans conquered England. Whether they re- 
 duced any of the Saxons to slavery, or were con- 
 tented with the slaves whom they found in the 
 island, is a question on which I have not formed 
 any opinion. During the time of the Roman Re- 
 public much of the population of Italy consisted 
 of slaves. We know also, that a large proportion 
 of the inhabitants of Athens were slaves. It was 
 probably the same in other states of Greece. We 
 find in the Old Testament, that Joseph was sold 
 to the Midianites passing from Palestine into 
 Egypt. If the practice of carrying slaves into 
 Egypt had not been established, it is not proba- 
 ble, either that Joseph's brethren would have 
 thought of selling him, or that the Midianites 
 would have purchased him. These Midianites 
 were probably a caravan of slave merchants. 
 
 Let it not be supposed, that I am a friend to 
 Slavery, because I thus remark on its antiquity. 
 My only difficulty is about the best means of 
 abolishing Slavery. I doubt whether it ever can 
 be abolished by the means which have been 
 adopted. The inhabitants of the southern and 
 western parts of the United States of America 
 will with great reluctance be brought to relinquish 
 the use of slaves. In Spanish and Portuguese 
 
234 
 
 America, all attempts to abolish the Slave Trade 
 will be unsuccessful. I have remarked, that the 
 change of the race of the inhabitants has in most 
 countries been occasioned by conquest. But 
 this will not be the case in respect to the Negroes 
 carried to America. They will be carried there 
 as slaves, but the inhabitants will gradually be- 
 come a mixed race. 
 
 When the Abolition of the Slave Trade was 
 first suggested in the House of Commons, I did 
 not think, that the means, by which it was pro- 
 posed that the abolition should be effected, were 
 judicious. I had entirely approved of the mea- 
 sures by which it was hoped that the sufferings of 
 the slaves in their passage from Africa to the 
 West Indies might be diminished. The bounty 
 given to those captains, who transported their 
 slaves with the smallest average loss, appeared 
 likely to produce the most beneficial consequences. 
 I thought this idea should have been farther ex- 
 tended. I thought no slaves should be allowed 
 to be transported from Africa to the islands, ex- 
 cept in large ships. In a large ship the number 
 of the crew frees them from apprehension of the 
 insurrection of their slaves. And from this cir- 
 cumstance, they are enabled to allow more indul- 
 gence to the Negroes. The number of the slaves 
 on board each ship ought by law to have been re- 
 gulated, and proportioned to the tonnage. I be- 
 lieve, that since the open exportation of slaves has 
 been prohibited, much misery has been experi- 
 
235 
 
 enced by the slaves, from their being carried by 
 contraband in small ships immoderately crowded. 
 But my chief hope of an amelioration in the con- 
 dition of the slaves was from the decisions of the 
 courts of law. I believe, that the courts in the 
 West Indies still persevere in not permitting a 
 Negro to give evidence in any cause, either civil 
 or criminal. I cannot conceive how this maxim 
 has arisen. It certainly is not drawn from the 
 common law of England. If the veracity of the 
 witness is doubted, from the circumstance of his 
 being a slave, let the objection go to his credit, 
 not to his competency. As the law now stands, 
 the Negro is considered as below the rank of a 
 reasonable being. When the Negroes were 
 brought to the island, the legislature ought to 
 have provided, as far as possible, that every Ne- 
 gro should be annexed to some plantation : that 
 he should become gleka ascriptus, and that he 
 should never afterwards be sold to any other mas- 
 ter except with the plantation. As the law now 
 stands, the judgment creditor may levy his debt 
 by the sale of the Negroes on the plantation, and 
 thus break the nearest connections. Privileges 
 might have been granted to such Negroes as were 
 born within the island, for they are not so likely 
 to take part in insurrection as the Negroes newly 
 imported. By these, and other similar regula- 
 tions, the legislature and the courts of law might 
 have ameliorated the condition of the Negro, and 
 gradually elevated him to the character of a sub- 
 
236 
 
 ject. But this plan was not approved of. The 
 Trade was to be immediately abolished : its abo- 
 lition was voted by Parliament ; but it has not yet 
 been effected. And I doubt whether that aboli- 
 tion ever will be effected by the means pursued. 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 Will Revolution produce an increase of Happiness 
 to Mankind ? 
 
 This is a question, which must frequently 
 recur to every reflecting mind. I have no hesita- 
 tion in saying, that I think Revolution will add to 
 the happiness of mankind. The only country in 
 which we have yet seen a Revolutionary Govern- 
 ment completely established is America : and there 
 the prosperity of the people has been more rapid- 
 ly increased than it is probable that it would have 
 been under the old Government, Before the in- 
 dependence of the United States of America, the 
 governors sent from Great Britain to its colonies 
 were, for the nlost part, necessitous courtiers ; 
 and the object of Government was to check the 
 growth of the Colonies. 
 
 In France the Revolution is not yet completed: 
 for although a Representative Government is es- 
 
237 
 
 tablished, those who are entrusted with the exer- 
 cise of that Government are considered by the 
 People as desirous of destroying it. The atten- 
 tion of the People is therefore employed anxious- 
 ly to watch over the Executive Government, and 
 to defeat its efforts. I will add, that the improve- 
 ments already derived from the Revolution in 
 France are so great and so visible, that the People 
 will never submit to see the ancien regime re-es- 
 tablished. 
 
 In Spain we at present only see the beginning 
 of a revolution : but the seed is sown, and a Re- 
 volutionary Government will be established in 
 that country. Probably Governments will be es- 
 tablished in the Spanish Colonies of a character 
 similar to that which is about to be established in 
 the mother country. This will be fortunate ; for 
 similitude of government will promote their inter- 
 course and connection with each other. One cir- 
 cumstance will probably be an immediate conse- 
 quence of a revolution in Spain. If the Spanish 
 Government remains unaltered, Cuba must very 
 soon belong either to the United States of Ame- 
 rica or to Great Britain. But if Revolutionary 
 Governments are established in Old Spain and 
 the Spanish Colonies on the Continent, Cuba may 
 adopt a similar government, and become a mem- 
 ber of that confederacy. A revolution in Old 
 Spain, if accompanied by the establishment of free 
 Governments in her Colonies, will produce a most 
 rapid improvement. Her agriculture, her manu- 
 
238 
 
 factures, her commerce, and her naval power, will 
 soon increase to such an extent as must give her 
 great weight in the affairs of Europe. I have said 
 her naval power ; for an unfettered intercourse be- 
 tween Old Spain and the Spanish Colonies will 
 create a marine, equal to that which now exists 
 in any other state in Europe. 
 
 I am not sufficiently acquainted with the state 
 of Germany, or Italy, to be able to form any opi- 
 nion how far it is probable, that a Revolutionary 
 Government may be established in either of those 
 two countries. 
 
 In Great Britain we have a Representative Go- 
 vernment. Some few abuses have been allowed 
 to creep into it : correct those abuses, and Revo- 
 lution will not take place. But if those abuses 
 are not corrected, an Oligarchy will be establish- 
 ed, which will fetter Royalty, humiliate Aristocra- 
 cy, and trample on the People. Such an Oligar- 
 chy will be removable only by Revolution. 
 
239 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 On the Consequences of the Revolution in Spain. 
 
 Toulouse, March 14, 1820. 
 
 An account has been this morning received in 
 this city, that the King of Spain has accepted the 
 Constitution declared by the Cortes in 1812. 
 This circumstance must influence the happiness 
 of many millions. I have already made some re- 
 marks on the probability of such an event ; but 
 now that the Revolution in Spain is complete, I 
 am unavoidably led to extend my reflections. The 
 first circumstance which will occur to every man 
 is, that there is now a second revolution in Europe, 
 brought about by the standing army of the coun- 
 try. For although the commercial cities and 
 men of education were joined with the army in 
 producing this Revolution, yet the army was cer- 
 tainly the most efficient instrument. Knowledge 
 had spread itself in the Spanish army, and it rose 
 to rescue its country from wretchedness and igno- 
 miny. 
 
 The first country in which we have seen a new 
 Government established by Revolution is Ame- 
 rica. The obstinate perseverance of George III., 
 in his endeavours to compel the inhabitants of the 
 
240 
 
 British Colonies to submit to a violation of their 
 rights, has given birth to a new nation, called the 
 United States of America. The Government 
 established in this nation is without King, or No- 
 bles, or political Church : and history does not 
 afford us an example of any nation, in which the 
 happiness of the inhabitants, or the prosperity of 
 the whole, considered collectively, has been more 
 rapidly increased. There were primary causes, 
 which must at some moment or other have pro- 
 duced a change in the French Government : but 
 the Revolution in America certainly accelerated 
 the Revolution in France. 
 
 The French Revolution has brought forward 
 the Revolution in Spain. In both these countries 
 revolution has been the work of standing armies. 
 Kings have been accustomed to consider standing 
 armies as that support of their power on which 
 they could most rely : let them ponder on what 
 they have seen in France and in Spain. German 
 Princes have been already led to this reflection by 
 what has taken place in France ; and they have 
 entertained a hope, that they should be able to 
 stop the progress of liberty by what they have 
 been pleased to denominate a Holy Alliance ; for 
 this is the name which Kings have impudently 
 given to their confederacy against the liberties of 
 mankind. This Holy Alliance has not been able 
 to prevent the Revolution in Spain. Whatever 
 may be the wish of the Bourbons in France, they 
 have not dared to send their troops to the assis- 
 
241 
 
 tance of Ferdinand. Had they sent French troops, 
 these would most probably have joined the insur- 
 gents ; and they hesitated to employ their Swiss 
 corps. They endeavoured to retain in France 
 those Spanish patriots, who had been obliged to 
 take refuge in that country: but even in this their 
 efforts were ineffectual ; for most of the Spanish 
 refugees found means to return to Spain. Aus- 
 tria and Prussia could send no assistance to the 
 King of Spain, because they had no shipping to 
 transport their troops ; and although Russia might 
 have sent assistance by sea, it could not have ar- 
 rived in Spain before the summer. Knowledge 
 has spread itself in the army of the King of Prus- 
 sia. What sentiments must not he be inspired 
 with by this Spanish Revolution ? Can he enter- 
 tain the hope, that his army will assist him to keep 
 down the general wish of his subjects for a Re- 
 presentative Government? Throughout the Pro- 
 testant part of Germany this wish is everywhere 
 prevalent ; and it does not appear, that there is in 
 any part of Germany much personal attachment 
 from the subjects to their sovereigns. In the Ca- 
 tholic part of Germany knowledge has made less 
 progress : it is probable therefore, that a Revolu- 
 tion will not take place in the Catholic part of 
 Germany, so soon as it will in the Protestant part. 
 The impending downfal of the Papal power will 
 occasion a change in the Government of Italy. I 
 will not pretend to say what effects such a change 
 may produce. There can be little doubt but that 
 
 x2 
 
242 
 
 Portugal will soon follow the example of Spairt, 
 The Braganza family cannot hold both Brazil and 
 Portugal : whichever of these two countries this 
 family may choose to reside in, the other will 
 withdraw itself from its subjection. Whether the 
 animosity which has so long subsisted between 
 the Portuguese and Spaniards will prevent Por- 
 tugal from uniting itself to Spain, I cannot say ; 
 but the union would be advantageous to both 
 countries. Should a Representative Government 
 be established in Spain, a similar constitution in 
 her American Provinces, and the whole united 
 by a Confederacy, the Spanish empire will in- 
 stantly become of the first importance, both in 
 Europe and in America. The United States of 
 America will probably first feel her influence : 
 she will not consent to the cession of the two Flori- 
 das. The province of Mexico is much interested 
 to prevent this cession ; and, when supported by 
 the mother country, Mexico will be able to pre- 
 vent it. 
 
 A Confederacy, such as I have suggested, will 
 create the most formidable barrier to the growth 
 of the United States of America. It will check 
 their growth to the westward : for although the 
 western part of the United States is the richest 
 country, and that from which the greatest im- 
 provement may be expected, yet it is at present 
 the least defensible part : the Spanish force would 
 be able to prevent its progress. Cuba, likewise, 
 would be preserved from the dominion, either of 
 
243 
 
 the United States of America, or of Great Britain. 
 The same language, with similitude of habits, and 
 descent from the same common ancestors, render 
 such a Confederacy probable. It is possible, that 
 the cruelties practised during the late civil war in 
 America may have alienated the inhabitants of that 
 country from Old Spain ; but those cruelties are 
 more justly to be attributed to Ferdinand and his 
 ministers, than to the people of Spain. Both 
 hemispheres have been struggling for the same 
 object: viz. civil liberty. 
 
 This newly created Spanish empire will have 
 the means of commerce beyond any other nation 
 in the world. Commerce will give her a military 
 marine. Towards the close of the fifteenth cen- 
 tury, when Ferdinand united Castile and Arragon 
 by his marriage with Isabella, Spain was more 
 advanced than any other nation of Europe, in 
 science, in literature, in agriculture, in commerce, 
 and, above all, in the love of civil liberty. Is it 
 not possible, that we may soon see the Spanish 
 character renewed in all its strength, the ornament 
 of the human race ? But even though such a 
 Confederacy should not take place, Mexico will 
 check the growth of the United States, and pre- 
 vent them from acquiring either the Floridas or 
 Cuba. 
 
 Another consequence of the tranquillity likely 
 to take place in Spanish America will be the in- 
 crease of her productions, both agricultural and 
 mineral ; and new branches of commerce will be 
 
£44 
 
 opened both with India and China. The esta- 
 blishment of a free Constitution in Spain will form 
 an epoch in the history of mankind. 
 
 We have seen, for some years past, attempts 
 to stop the exportation of Slaves from Africa to 
 America. I have already said, in the course of 
 these reflections, that I always thought that these 
 efforts would be ineffectual. If the Spanish Co- 
 lonies severally establish Representative Govern- 
 ments, they will not submit to be prohibited from 
 transporting Negroes from Africa to America. 
 Their desire to bring that fertile country into cul- 
 tivation will induce them to resist the restraint. 
 The arguments, which have been employed to 
 excite an abhorrence of the Slave Trade, have 
 been of two sorts ; viz. first, that the trade was 
 repugnant to humanity ; secondly, that it was 
 repugnant to the Christian religion. Political 
 objections, which perhaps are the strongest, 
 have not been much resorted to. I will acknow- 
 ledge, that I have never been able to discover 
 any passage, either in the Old or New Tes- 
 tament, prohibiting such a trade. Joseph was 
 certainly sold by his brethren to a caravan of slave 
 merchants. This was an act of wickedness ; but 
 it is censured only as the wicked act of individuals. 
 I do not recollect in the New Testament any re- 
 ference to the trade in Slaves. In respect to the 
 inhumanity consequent on the Slave Trade, every 
 man must think of it with extreme regret, but 
 there certainly are means, by which the sufferings 
 of the Negroes may be diminished. Nations 
 
245 
 
 have most commonly changed their places of 
 abode in the shape of conquering armies: the Ne- 
 groes change it in the character of slaves : it may- 
 be doubtful which mode occasions the greatest 
 loss of human life. As late as the treaty of 
 Utrecht, we bargained for the exclusive privilege 
 of selling Negroes in Spanish America ; and we 
 did not relinquish this privilege till the peace of 
 Aix-la-Chapelle in 1748. If my memory is not 
 incorrect, the negociation for peace between Mr. 
 Pitt and M. Bussy, in 1761, failed of success, be- 
 cause Mr. Pitt demanded a cession of more fac- 
 tories on the western side of Africa, than the French 
 minister chose to yield. Those factories were 
 only wanted for the purpose of carrying on the 
 Slave Trade more extensively. I mention these 
 circumstances with a view to remind those, who 
 are most zealous for the abolition, to how late a 
 period the Trade in Slaves has not been consi- 
 dered as immoral. If, when fairly contemplated, 
 it is found to increase human misery, every man 
 must wish it to be abolished ; but the improve- 
 ment of those parts of America, which are yet un- 
 cultivated, will most probably render its abolition 
 impracticable. 
 
 A Representative Government in Spain will 
 render the re-establishment of the ancien regime 
 in France impossible. Nobles and fanatics may 
 make the attempt, but it will only occasion their 
 own destruction. 
 
 When, in a former place, I spoke of a Revolt* 
 
* 246 
 
 lion in Spain, I spoke of it only as a probable 
 event ; but a Revolution has now actually taken 
 place in that country. The Constitution, which 
 the people call for, is that which the Cortes voted 
 in 1812; and if it should be ultimately adopted, 
 the Government of Spain must be considered as 
 republican. The Spanish Colonies in America 
 are in a different situation now from what they 
 were in 1812. Most probably they will be form- 
 ed into Independent States, and united with the 
 mother country by a Confederacy. Such an ar- 
 rangement would give more force to the Confede- 
 rated States of the Spanish Empire than they could 
 possess if under one government. Portugal will 
 very soon follow her example. 
 
 What influence must not the Spanish Revolu- 
 tion have on France ? At the commencement of 
 this winter, the object of the French Government 
 was confined to the change of the law of Elec- 
 tions, and of the law for recruiting the Army. 
 By changing the first, they hoped to give to the 
 Noblesse more influence in the election of the 
 Chamber of Deputies : by changing the latter, 
 they hoped to give to the Noblesse the commis- 
 sions in the army. The assassination of the 
 Duke de Berri induced -the French Government 
 to extend their views: and they have brought for- 
 ward two other projects ; viz. a bill for re-estab- 
 lishing lettres de cachet, and another bill for es- 
 tablishing a censure on the Press. The first pro- 
 ject has been carried into effect : the two Cham 
 
247 
 
 bers have passed it into a law. The second will 
 most probably be adopted. The pretence for the 
 censure on the Press is, that the minds of men are 
 heated by political publications ; and this is true. 
 But Louvel will most probably be found to have 
 been excited to the assassination of the Duke de 
 Berri by those publications, which held out the 
 necessity of re-establishing the ancien regime ; and 
 these are publications, which the French Govern- 
 ment does not wish to repress. Lettres de cachet 
 can have very little effect where the bias of the na- 
 tion is opposed to the wishes of the Government. 
 The army, the commercial interest, and men of 
 reading and reflection, unite in wishing to pre- 
 serve a Representative Government in France. 
 The noblesse, the fanatics, and the Bourbons, op- 
 pose them. The strength of the two parties is 
 so unequal, that there can be little doubt which 
 must be overpowered. Revolution will proba* 
 bly soon take place in the Protestant part of Ger- 
 many ; perhaps even in the Catholic part. 
 
 England may avert Revolution: but it can on- 
 ly avert it by a Reform of the House of Com- 
 mons. I will acknowledge, that I have accus- 
 tomed myself to think, that this Reform might 
 be effected by correcting abuses, and repairing 
 on the old foundation ; and that I have listened 
 with aversion to the proposal of Universal Suf- 
 frage. The new Spanish Constitution seems to 
 hold out something, which approaches very near 
 to Universal Suffrage : it remains to be seen whe- 
 
248 
 
 ther it can be carried into effect. But when the 
 People of England see a pure Representative 
 Government established in the United States of 
 America, in Spain, in France, perhaps even in 
 Portugal ; can it be supposed, that they will be 
 content with that mutilated and disfigured Repre- 
 sentation, which now exists in the House of Com- 
 mons? They certainly will require a more perfect 
 Representation of the People. They will be led 
 to call for this, not solely from theoretical reflec- 
 tions, but from their sufferings under that immo- 
 derate load of taxes, which has been imposed 
 on them in consequence of the unnecessary wars 
 of George III. 
 
 A Question. Will not the hatred excited by 
 Kings against the principles of Liberty excite, in 
 the course of its re-action ; hatred to the Magis- 
 tracy of Royalty? 
 
249 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 On the Consequences of the Transition from an 
 Agricultural to a Manufacturing and Commer- 
 cial Character. 
 
 At the commencement of the Rebellion, in 
 1640, England must be considered as an agricul- 
 tural nation. The cod fishery on the banks of 
 Newfoundland was scarcely discovered ; and the 
 herring fishery, at that time the great fishery of 
 Europe, was in the possession of the Dutch. 
 The Dutch also possessed the carrying trade. 
 The French were the manufacturers of Europe. 
 England possessed scarcely any manufacture, 
 except that of woollen. This she owed to the 
 refuge, which Queen Elizabeth had afforded to 
 the manufacturers driven out of the Low Coun- 
 tries by the Duke of Alva. The Navigation 
 Act, established by Oliver Cromwell, gave the 
 first spring to English commerce ; and from that 
 period to the present day we have gradually re- 
 linquished the character of an agricultural, and 
 assumed that of a manufacturing and commercial 
 nation. From the peace of Aix la Chapelle, in 
 1748, to the commencement of the seven vears* 
 war, in 1756, England seems still to have re- 
 gained its agricultural character. The price of 
 
 v 
 
250 
 
 corn was low. The Journals of the House oi 
 Commons show, that, during that period, a large 
 sum of money was annually granted to assist the 
 export of our corn. 
 
 The wars during the reign of George III. seem 
 to have had the greatest effect in producing the 
 change. I will not presume to state how they 
 have produced this change ; but I believe they 
 have produced it. They have changed the na- 
 ture of the property from real to personal ; for 
 the National Debt, as well as the increased 
 moveable, is all personal property. This transi- 
 tion has changed the national character. War has 
 been so advantageous to many individuals, that 
 the people have been easily deluded into unne- 
 cessary wars. From the commencement of the 
 year 1775 to the present time (a space of forty- 
 five years) we can scarcely be said to have had 
 more than ten years of peace. An immense debt 
 has been the consequence. During the war begun 
 in 1793, the opposition concurred with the mini- 
 stry in the wish for war: taxes were therefore laid 
 with very little consideration of the manner in 
 which they bore upon the people. The only ob- 
 ject was to destroy those French principles, on 
 the destruction of which certain great nobles had 
 persuaded themselves that their power depended. 
 Their efforts failed : the principles of the French 
 Revolution have been established ; and Great 
 Britain is left with a debt, a great part of which 
 she must either get rid of, or relinquish her sta- 
 
251 
 
 tion among the other nations of the world. Divi- 
 dends payable by the public are of the nature of 
 pensions ; with this difference, that dividends 
 have been sold by the public, while pensions 
 have been gratuitously granted. But whether 
 sold or gratuitously granted, if they exceed what 
 the public revenue can pay, they will necessarily 
 be diminished. Whenever the event happens, 
 the distress will be extreme : I think of it with 
 terror: but I know the time will come when Troy 
 must fall ! 
 
 It is to be hoped, that those men who may be in 
 power when this event shall take place will do 
 every thing they can to diminish the calamity. 
 The most rigorous retrenchment, the abolition of 
 gratuitous Pensions and unnecessary Places, the 
 sale of Crown Lands, perhaps even of Church 
 and Corporation Lands, ought all to be resorted 
 to before a suspension of dividends should take 
 place. Above all, we should avoid embarking in 
 any more unnecessary wars. Let the nations of 
 the world settle themselves as they please, or 
 rather in the manner which chance may occasion. 
 No statesman has sufficient penetration to foresee 
 the effects of that war in which he embarks his 
 country. We began the crusade against French 
 principles in the year 1793. Did those who be- 
 gan that war expect the consequences which have 
 followed from it? For French principles have 
 most certainly been established in France, and 
 will most probably be established in Spain and her 
 
252 
 
 Colonies. I believe, that none of those, who ex- 
 cited us to war in Spain, will venture to say, that 
 they at that time wished to see the principles of 
 Civil Liberty established in that country; yet they 
 will probably live to see those principles establish- 
 ed there. Did those ministers, who in April 1806 
 brought forward the doctrine of blockade, intend 
 to establish manufactures in Germany ? Human 
 foresight is too uncertain to justify ministers in 
 risking the happiness of nations by embarking in 
 speculative projects. 
 
 There is one class of men, whose character has 
 been remarkably changed by this transition from 
 real to personal property : I mean the Lawyers. 
 I began my attendance in Westminster Hall in 
 January, 1765. Lord Mansfield was at that time 
 Chief Justice of the King's Bench. He was not 
 only a man of great abilities, but he possessed a 
 great store of legal knowledge acquired by patient 
 reading. I am aware, that this is an opinion not 
 generally entertained of him. Vanity led him to 
 wish to intimate, that he did every thing by ge- 
 nius, and nothing by industry ; and perhaps this 
 induced men to believe, that he was not what the 
 lawyers call a black lettered lawyer : but he cer- 
 tainly had a great store of knowledge, well trea- 
 sured up ; and, as far as I could observe, he was 
 a very upright judge. Were I to mark the fail- 
 ing, which was most prominent in his character, 
 it would be his want of courage : he seemed to 
 me alwavs to stand in fear of Sir Fletcher Nor- 
 
253 
 
 | 
 
 ton ; but I very much doubt whether he had any 
 good will to him. On the right hand of Lord 
 Mansfield sat Mr. Justice Wilmot, a very learned 
 judge, formed by much reading and reflection. 
 He tried causes at Nisi Prius with the most com- 
 mendable patience and the strictest integrity. On 
 the left hand of the Chief Justice sat Sir Joseph 
 Yates, a well-read lawyer, particularly eminent 
 for his knowledge of pleadings. The fourth 
 judge, who took his seat on the bench the day on 
 which I first attended the court, was Sir Richard 
 Aston. He was a man of a very old family in the 
 North — I believe in Cheshire. I had an oppor- 
 tunity of seeing him several times in the character 
 of judge on the Western Circuit. He tried causes 
 with strict integrity ; and though, perhaps, he had 
 not that store of legal learning, which was pos- 
 sessed by his three colleagues, he was a man of 
 sound sense, and his decisions were generally 
 right. 
 
 Whoever contemplates the characters of these 
 four judges will, I believe, concur with me in opi- 
 nion, that no man ought to expect, that the Court 
 of King's Bench should ever be better filled. 
 These judges had all been formed by patient read- 
 ing and thinking. The books to which they had 
 applied themselves are those, which have handed 
 down to us the law of real property from remote 
 times. These books had given to the lawyer a 
 species of logic peculiar to his profession. It was 
 not the same with the logic of the Schoolmen, but 
 
 y 2 
 
254 , 
 
 it was more powerful. When employed by Lit- 
 tleton, the mind is kept on the stretch, as it is by 
 the reasoning of Aristotle. In the hands of Sir 
 Edward Coke, it approaches nearer to the subtle- 
 ty of Locke. 
 
 I have no doubt, but that you will see upon the 
 bench, in future times, men equal in natural abili- 
 ties to those whom I have mentioned ; but they 
 will not have been formed in the same manner : 
 they will have been formed at the desk, not by 
 patient reading. By .the old mode of education, 
 the lawyer first acquired science, and afterwards 
 immersed himself in practice. By the modern 
 mode, he begins with that knowledge which is to 
 be acquired by practice, and he must emerge to 
 science, if he ever acquires it. Lawyers, formed 
 according to the modern mode, will perhaps have 
 more dexterity in the application of their know- 
 ledge, than lawyers formed according to the old 
 mode : perhaps they may be even more useful 
 advocates for private clients : but it is to be fear- 
 ed, that they will be deficient on great constitu- 
 tional questions. Lord Somers remarked to King 
 William, that it was of great importance to the 
 crown, that the bench should be filled with Con- 
 stitutional Lawyers. 
 
 I will now mention a few circumstances respect- 
 ing the characters of those advocates, whom I 
 found in possession of business when I first atten- 
 ded Westminster Hall. Mr. Serjeant Glynn 
 possessed the largest store of legal knowledge. 
 
255 
 i 
 
 1 recollect a conversation, which I had with Mr, 
 Serjeant Hill on this subject, towards the latter 
 end of that gentleman's life. I mentioned to him 
 Mr. Dunning, and asked whether he was not equal 
 in legal knowledge to Mr. Serjeant Glynn ? He 
 answered, "No, every thing which Dunning knew, 
 he knew accurately ; but Glynn knew a great deal 
 more." I need scarcely mention Mr. Serjeant 
 Hill's own character as a lawyer. His death hap- 
 pened so very few years ago, that his legal repu- 
 tation is known to every one. He was full of 
 knowledge ; but, in conversing with him, it was 
 very difficult to keep him from wandering from 
 that subject on which you wished to be informed. 
 He hated the law of tythes ; he said, " that the 
 decisions on that branch of the law were founded 
 in folly and injustice." Whenever I conversed 
 with him on this subject, he became in a very 
 short time so heated, that there was no getting any 
 farther information from him. 
 
 I have heard the late 'Mr. Serjeant Walker 
 say, that Mr. Serjeant Prime was the ablest law- 
 yer he had ever known ; and I recollect an anec- 
 dote told me by Lord Thurlow respecting this 
 gentleman. Lord Thurlow said, " I drove Mr. 
 Serjeant Prime from the bar, without intending 
 it. I happened to be walking up and down 
 Westminster Hall with him while Dr. Florence 
 Henzey was on his trial in the Court of King's 
 Bench for High Treason. Serjeant Prime was at 
 that time the King's Prime Serjeant, and as such 
 
256 
 
 had precedence over all lawyers in the King's 
 service. But the ministers of that day wished 
 to pay court to Sir Fletcher Norton, though at 
 that time he had no other rank than that of King's 
 Counsel : they had therefore entrusted the con- 
 duct of the trial to Sir Fletcher Norton. I hap- 
 pened/' said Lord Thurlow, " to make this re- 
 mark to Mr. Serjeant Prime : 'It is a little sin- 
 gular, Sir, that I should be walking up and down 
 Westminster Hall with the King's Prime Ser- 
 jeants while a trial at bar for High Treason is 
 going on in that Court.' The expression struck 
 him : he felt the affront which had been put on 
 him : he went the next morning, resigned his of- 
 fice, and retired from the profession." 
 
 There are two other men of the profession, on 
 whom I cannot refrain from making a few obser- 
 vations. I knew them both intimately: I loved 
 them both; for both were peculiarly kind to me: 
 I mean Mr. Dunning, afterwards Lord Ashbur- 
 ton ; and Mr. Thurlow, afterwards Lord Thur- 
 low. Mr. Dunning was the quickest man I ever 
 knew at the Bar. If an objection was to be taken 
 or answered at Nisi Prius, he did it on the in- 
 stant : his style of reasoning was sometimes too 
 subtle for his hearers. Mr. Thurlow was not a 
 quick man ; I have often heard him make a speech 
 at Nisi Prius, while he was considering what an- 
 swer he should give to an objection taken by his 
 adversary. He had a magniloquentia, which was 
 •always imposing ; but perhaps neither his style 
 
257 
 
 of speaking, nor his legal knowledge, nor the 
 powers of his mind, were suited to the common 
 run of Nisi Prius practice. He obtained no in- 
 considerable share of business in the Court of 
 King's Bench at an early period of his life. Lord 
 Mansfield checked his progress ; not from ill- 
 will to Mr. Thurlow, but from a wish to pay 
 court to Sir Fletcher Norton. I will give an in- 
 stance of this, much talked of when I first at- 
 tended the courts. Mr. Thurlow had to argue 
 against the execution of a power in a marriage 
 settlement : he took three objections : he argued 
 the two first objections with great ability, and 
 closed with telling the court, that he thought the 
 case so clear on the two objections which he had 
 argued, that he would not trouble them with any 
 argument on his third objection. When Lord 
 Mansfield delivered the opinion of the court, two 
 or three days afterwards, he did it in these words: 
 11 Mr. Thurlow, we decide against your client on 
 the two objections which you have argued ; we 
 decide in his favour on the objection which you 
 have abandoned." No young lawyer could rise 
 while exposed to such unfavourable remarks. I 
 saw him afterwards for several years in the Court 
 of King's Bench, a King's Counsel, almost with- 
 out business. Soon after he had begun to obtain 
 some degree of practice at the bar, he was put in- 
 to the House of Commons for the Borough of 
 Tamworth, by Lord Weymouth. 1 have been 
 told, that he was at first heard with very little at- 
 
258 
 
 tention : I saw him afterwards the most powerful 
 and the most useful lawyer ever possessed by a 
 minister in that House. He was made Chancel- 
 lor in 1778 : when the Coalition came into power 
 in the spring of 1783, Mr. Fox deprived him of 
 the Great Seal. He accompanied this depriva- 
 tion with circumstances of harshness, which 
 always surprised me : harshness was not conge- 
 nial to the natural disposition of Mr. Fox ; and 
 there was no personal enmity between them ; for 
 Lord Thurlow always spoke of Mr. Fox with 
 partiality, and continued to do so to the day of his 
 death. On Mr. Pitt's return to office, on the 20th 
 December, 1783, Lord Thurlow again received 
 the Great Seal. It is well known, that for some 
 years before Lord Thurlow was a second time de- 
 prived of the Great Seal, he and Mr. Pitt had not 
 lived on pleasant terms. I never could discover 
 the cause of this. I recollect Lord Thurlow's 
 having once said to me, " When Mr. Pitt first 
 became Prime Minister, it was a very unpleasant 
 thing to do business with him ; but it afterwards 
 became as pleasant to do business with him as 
 with Lord North." Every one knows, that in- 
 tercourse with Lo»d North was peculiarly plea- 
 sant. Lord Thurlow strongly disapproved of 
 Mr. Pitt's conduct on the impeachment of Mr. 
 Hastings : how far that contributed to excite ill 
 humour in him I cannot say. Lord North once 
 said to me, " Your friend Lord Thurlow thinks, 
 that his personal influence with the King autho* 
 
259 
 
 rises him to treat Mr. Pitt with humeur. Take 
 my word for it, whenever Mr. Pitt says to the 
 King, ' Sir, the Great Seal must be in other hands/ 
 the King will take the Great Seal from Lord 
 Thurlow, and never think any more about him." 
 It turned out exactly as Lord North had said to 
 me : the Kjng took the Great Seal from Lord 
 Thurlow, and never concerned himself about him 
 afterwards. I have no doubt, that this conduct 
 of the King was wholly unexpected by Lord 
 Thurlow : it mortified him most severely. I re- 
 collect his saying to me, " No man has a right to 
 treat another in the way in which the King has 
 treated me : we cannot meet again in the same 
 room." But Lord Thurlow had not read the 
 character of his master with the penetration of 
 Lord North. 
 
 CHx\PTER XIX. 
 
 On the Consequences of a King of Great Britain 
 being a German Sovereign. 
 
 The Brunswick family was selected to wear 
 the Crown of England, as the best means of se- 
 curing us from the return of popery and despo- 
 tism. The establishment of this family, on the 
 
260 
 
 death of Queen Anne, has preserved us from those 
 evils which we dreaded. But the benefits which 
 we have received have been mixed with some 
 alloy. We have the character of George I. 
 sketched by the hand of the Earl of Chesterfield, 
 He had opportunities of approaching this Monarch, 
 and I believe he has given us a correct character 
 of him. He tells us, that he was a dull German 
 gentleman. That he neither understood, nor con- 
 cerned himself about the interests of England ; 
 but that he was well acquainted with the interests 
 of Hanover. One of his first acts, after his acces- 
 sion, was to prevail on the British Parliament to 
 purchase for him the Duchies of Bremen and 
 Verden, from the King of Denmark, for the sum 
 of 250,000/. This act was unjust, impolitic, and 
 a violation of good faith. During the difficulties 
 of Charles XII. of Sweden, the King of Denmark 
 had seized on these territories. It was evident, 
 that the King of Denmark, who had not a pre- 
 tence of right, would not be able to keep them. 
 It was therefore a purchase of stolen goods from a 
 thief, who, if we had not purchased, must have 
 abandoned them. It was impolitic ; for it render- 
 ed Sweden the enemy of Great Britain for very 
 many years. It was also a violation of that treaty 
 of Munster, in 1648, which England had guaran- 
 teed. I believe the pretence for calling on Eng- 
 land to pay this money was the advantage which 
 she derived from her trade up the river Weser ; 
 an advantage which she could not have been de- 
 
261 
 
 prived of, even if the King of Denmark had kept 
 the territories. During this reign, we were in- 
 volved in all the mysteries of German politics. 
 We engaged in a war with Spain in 1718, in sup- 
 port of the views of the Emperor of Germany. 
 It was a subject in which Great Britain was 
 wholly uninterested. Fortunately, the war was 
 short. 
 
 Perhaps the character of George II. may be 
 drawn nearly in the same words as that of his 
 father. He was a dull German. Possibly the ex- 
 pression gejitleman, might be left out ; for he was 
 sometimes coarse and brutal. The war of 1741 
 had originated in a dispute with Spain. It might 
 have been begun for British interests : it was con- 
 tinued in consequence of German connections. 
 The same may be said of the war of 1756. It 
 was begun for the support of British interests in 
 America ; but the lavish expenditure and the con- 
 tinuance of this war, were for the support of 
 George the Second's views and interests in Ger- 
 many. 
 
 When George III., in his first address to the 
 British Parliament, made use of these words, 
 " Born and educated in this country, I glory in the 
 name of Briton," the expression was hailed with 
 joy. The nation thought, that they had got a 
 British King, and that German interests would 
 not in future be attended to ; but they have been 
 mistaken. Though George III. never visited 
 Hanover, yet in the progress of his life he became 
 
262 
 
 in character as truly a German Prince as ever his 
 grandfather had been. All his younger sons were 
 sent to Hanover to be educated. They returned 
 to England fashioned after the manner of the 
 younger sons of a German Prince. The enlarge- 
 ment of His Majesty's German dominions seems 
 to have been as much the object of attention in 
 the reign of George III. as it was in the reign of 
 George I. or George II. George I. acquired 
 Bremen and Verden. George II. acquired the 
 Duchy of Saxe Lawenberg. But the acquisitions 
 during the reign of George III. have been more 
 extensive and more important. By the treaty of 
 Amiens he acquired the Bishopric of Osnaburg ; 
 and by the late arrangements at Vienna the rich 
 Bishopric of Hildesheim, with the Duchy of Min- 
 den and principality of East Friesland, have been 
 added to his German dominions. The title of 
 Elector has also been changed for that of King of 
 Hanover. What difference was intended to be 
 produced by this change I cannot say. It may 
 perhaps be imagined, that, as the Duke of York 
 was Bishop of Osnaburg, the King, his father, 
 had some right to the acquisition of that Bisho- 
 pric. But this is a mistake : Osnaburg and Hil- 
 desheim have both been obtained by acts of injus- 
 tice. During the thirty years war, which prece- 
 ded the treaty of Munster in 1648, every Protes- 
 tant Prince in Germany took possession of the 
 dominions of those ecclesiastical princes whom he 
 was able to oppress. I believe, that during that 
 
263 
 
 period, the Elector of Brandenburg got possession 
 of thirteen ecclesiastical sovereignties, and by the 
 Treaty of Minister he got them annexed to his 
 dominions. A Prince of the House of Brunswick 
 Lunenburg had got possession of the Bishopric 
 of Osnaburg, and wished to have it allotted to him 
 as a temporal fief. The Roman Catholic powers 
 saw that it was necessary to resist the views 
 which the Protestant Princes had formed of secu- 
 larizing the different Bishoprics in Germany, 
 They decided to make a stand on the question for 
 secularizing Osnaburg. After much discussion, 
 the matter was compromised : it was agreed, that 
 the Bishop should alternately be Catholic and Lu- 
 theran ; that the Catholic Bishop should be elect- 
 ed by the chapter, and the Lutheran Bishop 
 named by the Duke of Brunswick Lunenburg. 
 This arrangement was adhered to until the treaty 
 of Amiens in 1802. By that treaty the chapter 
 was deprived of its right of alternately nominating 
 the Bishop, and the whole Bishopric secularized 
 in favour of the Elector of Hanover. Those sove- 
 reigns who engaged in the crusade against French 
 principles were, I have no doubt, as they profess- 
 ed, enemies to the violation of established rights ; 
 or, to use a fashionable expression, they were ene- 
 mies to the violation of la legitimise. Yet, some 
 how or other, it has so happened, that there is 
 scarcely one German Prince, who has been a par- 
 ty in this crusade, who has not violated the rights 
 
264 
 
 of his weaker neighbour for his own immediate 
 benefit. 
 
 The British Nation saw with pleasure the pro- 
 bability of the Princess Charlotte succeeding to 
 the throne of Great Britain. Their pleasure arose 
 from this circumstance ; that by her succession 
 Great Britain would be disentangled from her 
 connection with Hanover. For as the King's 
 German dominions are male fiefs, the Princess 
 Charlotte was not capable of succeeding to them. 
 Our hopes were that time disappointed. We 
 now flatter ourselves with a similar hope from the 
 succession of the daughter of his late Royal High- 
 ness the Duke of Kent and Strathern. Should she 
 succeed to the throne, we may have the good for- 
 tune to possess in her a Sovereign exclusively 
 British. 
 
 I have thus stated the inconveniences which 
 have arisen from the House of Brunswick being 
 possessed of dominions in Germany. I do not 
 mean by this statement to undervalue the advan- 
 tages which we have obtained from their succes- 
 sion to the Crown of Great Britain. The sup- 
 port of that family on the throne of Great Britain 
 has preserved us from popery and despotism, and 
 the deliverance is inestimable. By the expression 
 popery, I do not mean the religious opinions in 
 which the Catholics differ from the Protestants ; I 
 mean papal power considered politically. It was 
 to that power that James II. was bigotedly de- 
 voted. Had he succeeded in establishing it, des 
 
265 
 
 potism must have followed. But every English 
 man must feel the advantage which his country 
 would derive from possessing the Brunswick fa- 
 mily unconnected with German dominions. 
 Those dominions are incapable of defence by 
 their own internal strength. Hamelen, the only 
 fortress in the country, was taken and dismantled 
 by Buonaparte. The King of Prussia can at any 
 time take possession of Hanover, if it is not pro- 
 tected either by Russia or by Austria. If Great 
 Britain is interested in its defence, she becomes 
 thereby to a certain decree subservient to the 
 views of Russia or Austria ; a subserviency which 
 every Englishman must regret 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 Characters of George II. and Queen Caroline. 
 
 I have said in a former place, that the death 
 of George II. did not appear to have occasioned 
 much regret in the nation. I believe, that I am 
 correct in this assertion. He has been reproach- 
 ed with having burnt the will of his father ; Mr. 
 Walpole, in his Reminiscences, gives a detailed 
 account of Archbishop Wake's having produced 
 the will at the Council table ; of the King's hav- 
 
 z2 
 

 ing taken it, and walked out of the room without 
 saying a word ; and that neither the Archbishop 
 nor any member of the Council had the courage 
 to demand, that the will should be registered. 
 But the King is unjustly reproached for this con- 
 duct. The will was really waste paper : for by 
 the common law, a King of England can dispose 
 of no property by wall. All his property, whether 
 real or personal, is vested in him in his corporate 
 capacity, and devolves on his successor. 
 
 During the reign of Queen Anne a circum- 
 stance happened, which made it necessary that 
 this question should be discussed. King Wil- 
 liam had furnished the palace of Hampton Court: 
 he made a will and appointed executors. A 
 question arose, to whom did this furniture belong, 
 to the executors of King William, or to Queen 
 Anne, his successor? Eight of the most eminent 
 lawyers gave their opinion, that the property be- 
 longed to the Queen. As the matter is curious, 
 and the opinion short, I will here state the words 
 in which it was given, with the names of the se- 
 veral lawyers who concurred in it. 
 
 11 We the undersigned declare, that we hold it 
 for undoubted law, that jewels, and other perso- 
 nal property of that nature, have ever been by the 
 law of England denominated catalla, Anglice 
 chattels. We also declare, that by the same law 
 jf England, jewels and other personal chattels of 
 
 \t nature, which have been purchased by the 
 
267 
 
 King or Queen of England, and not disposed of 
 during his or her life, do not descend on the death 
 of such King or Queen to that person whom such 
 King or Queen may have appointed executor of 
 his will ; but that they belong solely to that per- 
 son who is successor to the Crown ; and this law 
 has been established by the opinion of lawyers, 
 and has been ever approved and observed ; and 
 this we well know to be the law, from our own 
 experience, from the writings of men learned in 
 the law of England, from the books of the annals 
 of decisions during the reigns of the several Kings 
 of England, and from the records in our courts of 
 justice ; and to this opinion we have subscribed 
 our names. 
 
 HEN. HATSELL. THO. POWYS. 
 
 JA. MOUNTAGUE. R. EYRE. 
 
 JO. HAWLES. JO. CONYERS. 
 
 CON. PHIPPS. SAM. DODD. 
 
 " Declared and subscribed by the above named 
 persons, on the 24th December, 1708, Old Style, 
 before me, 
 
 Tho. Trevor." 
 
 In the year 1800, I had further occasion to 
 consider this subject. Towards the close of the 
 session, Sir John Mitford, at that time Attorney 
 General, brought in a Bill to enable the King to 
 make a will of his personal property. The House 
 was very thin, as it usually is at that season of the 
 
268 
 
 year. Sir John Mitford moved, that the bill 
 should be read a second time the next day. I 
 was a little startled at this, as it had the appear- 
 ance of the bill being a measure, which Sir John 
 Mitford wished to have passed through the House 
 without observation. I pressed, that the second 
 reading might be deferred for two or three days ; 
 he yielded at last, though with much reluctance. 
 When the subject was the next time mentioned 
 in the House, I suggested two points for his con- 
 sideration. First, " whether the King's personal 
 property, which was the expression used in the 
 bill, was not too large and too indefinite ; and I 
 wished him to consider, secondly, whether he in- 
 tended that, if the King should die without hav- 
 ing made a will, his personal property should be 
 distributed to his next of kin, according to the 
 statutes of distribution." In consequence of these 
 suggestions, the bill was altered to its present 
 form, viz. ; confined to the power of bequeathing 
 any property that might be accumulated out of cer- 
 tain funds ; and enacting, that in case his Majes- 
 ty made no will, his personal property should de- 
 scend according to the course of the common 
 law ; that is to say, to his successor. I believe I 
 was the only member who made any objections 
 to this bill. I cannot therefore say, that it was 
 discussed in the Hous. ; but the objections, 
 which I had taken, made it necessary for me to 
 examine the subject. 
 
 His late Majesty, King George III., had acted 
 
269 
 
 by his grandfathers will in the same manner as 
 his grandfather had acted by that of George I. ; 
 for he considered it as a non-operative instrument, 
 and as such put it into the fire. I knew that 
 William Duke of Cumberland, son of George II., 
 had applied to the late Mr. Booth, as to the prac- 
 ticability of his recovering a large legacy left him 
 by his father's will. As Mr. Booth's papers were 
 in the possession of a friend of mine, I applied to 
 him to permit me to see Mr. Booth's opinion. 
 He complied with my request. Mr, Booth's opi- 
 nion was like all the other opinions of that learned 
 lawyer, a most elaborate investigation of the sub- 
 ject ; and he closed his opinion with this expres- 
 sion, u that a King of England has, by the com- 
 mon law, no power of bequeathing personal pro- 
 perty." When my friend furnished me with this 
 opinion of Mr. Booth, he furnished me at the 
 same time with a copy of George the Second's 
 will of his Hanoverian property, made in 1751 ; 
 and also with a copy of a codicil to the same will, 
 made in 1759 ; he also furnished me with copies 
 of two codicils to the will of the King's English 
 property. I had read in Bub Doddington's Me- 
 moirs, the late Earl of Chatham's notion as to the 
 immense personal property of George II. When 
 I read it I thought the suggestion wild. But 
 when I read the will of His Majesty's Hanoverian 
 property, ' made in 1751, I saw that the Earl of 
 Chatham's opinion was not so void of foundation 
 as I had imagined, In that will the King had 
 
270 
 
 left legacies to a prodigious amount. To the 
 Duke of Cumberland alone he had left near four 
 millions of German dollars ; with large legacies to 
 his other children and private friends. But in a 
 codicil to this will, made towards the close of the 
 year 1759, he revoked many of these legacies, 
 assigning as a reason, that his personal property 
 was greatly diminished by the expenses of the 
 German war. This codicil contained many very 
 pathetic expressions, denoting his great affection 
 for his Hanoverian subjects ;. and pointing out the 
 necessity there would be of taking off many of 
 those taxes, which had been imposed on them 
 during the war. I do not know whether the Elec- 
 tor of Hanover is restrained by the laws of that 
 country from disposing of his personal property 
 by will : but I have been told, that William Duke 
 of Cumberland never was paid the more mode- 
 rate legacy, which he was entitled to under the 
 codicil. 
 
 George II. had always publicly kept a mistress; 
 most certainly with the knowledge of the Queen ; 
 and it was generally believed that his mistresses 
 were chosen by the Queen. I believe Mr. Wal- 
 pole is right when he says, that the Queen was 
 the woman who had the strongest hold of his af- 
 fections. I recollect a circumstance mentioned 
 to me by my father, which is a proof of this asser- 
 tion. The morning after the King's death, my 
 father and Sir Edward Wilmot, who were the only 
 two King's physicians then in town, received an 
 
271 
 
 order to be present at the opening of the body, 
 and to report their opinion as to the causes of his 
 Majesty's death- A paper of directions left by 
 the King, as to the manner in which his body 
 should be treated, &c, was produced ; and in 
 that paper he had directed, that the coffin should 
 be so constructed, that one side of it might be 
 drawn out. The coffin in which the body* of 
 Queen Caroline was placed had been construct- 
 ed in a similar manner ; and his Majesty direct- 
 ed, that one side of each coffin should be drawn 
 out, so that the two bodies might be in one 
 coffin. I believe these directions were very ex- 
 actly observed. 
 
 George II. while Electoral Prince of Hanover, 
 had served in the Duke of Marlborough's army, 
 and had given distinguished proofs of personal 
 courage : but I believe that this was the only mi- 
 litary qualification which he possessed. He had 
 neither literature, nor taste, but had a strong sense 
 of decorum. I will mention a little anecdote as a 
 proof of this. The Duke of Richmond of that 
 day was one of the King's chief companions. A 
 Doctor of Divinity of the Duke's acquaintance, 
 eminently learned, had acquired a knack of imi- 
 tating the various caterwawlings of a cat. The 
 Duke had no taste for his friend's learning ; but 
 he took great pleasure in hearing him imitate the 
 cat. He had often talked to the King of this un- 
 common talent which his friend possessed, and 
 had pressed his Majesty to allow him to place 
 
272 
 
 this gentleman behind his chair, one day at din- 
 ner, that he might himself judge of his extraor- 
 dinary power of imitation. The King at last con- 
 sented ; and this learned man was one day placed 
 behind the King's chair, while he was at dinner. 
 The King was for some time amused with his 
 various imitations; he at last turned round to see 
 the, gentleman, when he received a bow from a 
 gentleman full dressed in canonicals. The King 
 was so shocked at the sight, that he could not 
 refrain from saying to the Duke of Richmond, 
 " Do take him away : I cannot bear buffoonery 
 from a man in such a dress." If this may not 
 be mentioned as a proof of the King's good 
 taste, it mav at least serve to show that he had a 
 strong sense of decorum. 
 
 We have a character of Queen Caroline drawn 
 by the Earl of Chesterfield. He begins with 
 saying, u She was a woman of lively, pretty 
 parts. Her death was regretted by none but the 
 King. She died meditating projects, which must 
 have ended either in her own ruin, or in that of 
 the country." This is the character given of her 
 by Lord Chesterfield. The latter part of it al- 
 ludes to an opinion, which some people enter- 
 tained, that she wished to set aside Frederic 
 Prince of Wales, and place William Duke of 
 Cumberland on the throne. She was remarked 
 for insincerity. It was a common saying among 
 the courtiers, that they wished his Majesty had 
 less sincerity, and her Majesty more. She seems 
 
273 
 
 to have had taste. We are indebted to her for 
 the Serpentine River in Hyde Park, and the trees 
 so happily disposed in that Park. 
 
 On the accession of George II., Sir Robert 
 Walpole's rival exerted himself to gain the favour 
 of Mrs. Howard, the King's mistress. Sir Ro- 
 bert had the sagacity to discover, that the wife 
 had more influence than the mistress. He often 
 exulted in his superior judgment on this occa- 
 sion ; and used to say, in language somewhat 
 coarse, "I took the right sow by the ear." The 
 Queen knew enough of the King's disposition to 
 be sensible, that he did not choose to part with 
 his money ; and as she never wished to displease 
 his Majesty, Mr. Walpole tells us, that she ob- 
 tained money from his father without the King's 
 knowledge. I have no doubt that this account 
 was true ; but she had probably other ways of 
 supplying herself. It was so generally believed 
 that she sold church preferment, that the clergy, 
 who attended court, usually went by the name of 
 her Majesty's black game: she died in conse- 
 quence of an operation most injudiciously recom- 
 mended. 
 
 Mr. Walpole says, that Lady Sundon's influ- 
 ence with Queen Caroline arose from her being 
 possessed of the secret of her Majesty's being 
 aiflicted with a navel rupture. I doubt the accu- 
 racy of Mr. Walpole's opinion on this subject. 
 Before her death the circumstance was generally 
 known, Dr, Sands, a man midwife, suggested, 
 
 a a 
 
274 
 
 that a cure might be effected by the injection of 
 warm water. Though my father was not at that 
 time a court physician, yet he was sufficiently 
 eminent in his profession to have the circum- 
 stances communicated to him by medical men. 
 I have heard him say, that Dr. Mead entered a 
 most positive protest against the experiment ; 
 and my father added, that any man, who was ac- 
 quainted with anatomy, must have known that 
 the proposed remedy could by no possibility be 
 of service, and was likely to produce calamity. 
 I believe, that Sir Edward Hulse was the only 
 court physician who approved of the proposal. 
 At the time that the operation was performed, 
 every wish to keep her Majesty's malady a se- 
 cret must have been abandoned : for the courtiers 
 both male and female were assembled in the an- 
 tichamber waiting the event. The intestine was 
 burst in the operation, and Dr. Sands and Sir 
 Edward Hulse saw, that the Queen must inevitably 
 die of a mortification within a few hours. The 
 only question which then remained for the two 
 physicians was to consider how they might get 
 out of the palace before the unfortunate issue was 
 known. They determined to say that the opera- 
 tion had succeeded. As soon as the two physi- 
 cians came out of the Queen's chamber, and an- 
 nounced their success, the old Duke of New- 
 castle, who was among those who waited in the 
 antichamber, ran up to Dr. Sands and hugged 
 him, exclaiming, f 1 You dear creature, the nation 
 
275 
 
 can never sufficiently reward you for having saved 
 the life of the most valuable woman in the world V' 
 The doctor struggled to get away, apprehensive 
 that some of the ladies, who had gone in to the 
 Queen after the physicians had left her, might 
 come out and disclose the truth. 
 
 CHAPTER XXL 
 
 Reflections on an intended Marriage between Fre- 
 deric Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spencer. 
 
 Among the Reminiscences of Mr. Horace 
 Walpole, he takes notice of a plan, which had 
 been formed by Frederick Prince of Wales to mar- 
 ry Lady Diana Spencer, the granddaughter of the 
 old Duchess of Marlborough, who was to have 
 given him 100,000/. with her as a dowry ; and 
 that his father, Sir Robert Walpole, had prevent- 
 ed the design from being carried into effect. If 
 this marriage had taken place, would it have been 
 beneficial or injurious to Great Britain ? 
 
 I have already taken notice of the mischiefs, 
 which have ensued from Frederick Prince of 
 Wales having married a Princess of Saxe Gotha. 
 It was natural, that this German Princess should 
 
276 
 
 wish that her husband should possess the same 
 sort of sovereignty as she had seen exercised by 
 her father in Germany. But sovereignty of this 
 character is inconsistent with the principles of the 
 English Constitution. Had the Prince of Wales 
 married Lady Diana Spencer, he would have had 
 a wife not actuated by these sentiments. It may 
 be said, that had the Prince of Wales married this 
 lady, he would have degraded himself by thus 
 forming an inferior connection ; but this is rather 
 a German than an English notion. Lady Diana 
 Spencer was of a family eminently noble : it is 
 true, she was not of a princely house, and there- 
 fore by the laws of Germany the marriage would 
 have been a mesalliance^ and the children would 
 not have been entitled to succeed to the Electo- 
 rate of Hanover. But would not this have been 
 a benefit to Great Britain ? We have derived 
 many advantages from the Brunswick family hav- 
 ing been placed on the throne of Great Britain ; 
 but the possession of German dominions by that 
 family has been a considerable drawback. From 
 the accession of George I. the interests of Great 
 Britain have been too frequently sacrificed to the 
 interests of the Elector of Hanover. 
 
 Of the six wives of Henry VIII. four were the 
 daughters of hrs English subjects ; yet he was 
 never thought degraded by those marriages. 
 King Edward VI., Queen Elizabeth, King James 
 I., Queen Mary, and Queen Anne, were the chil- 
 dren of subjects ; yet they were never thought of 
 
277 
 
 with less respect on that account. They were re- 
 lated by blood to many of their subjects ; but this 
 circumstance never occasioned any prejudice to 
 the country. The House of Brunswick has pos- 
 sessed the crown of Great Britain more than one 
 hundred years ; but it still remains a German 
 family. Of the King's seven sons, five have been 
 educated in Germany ; and with the exception of 
 the Duke of Sussex, whose health rendered such 
 an education impracticable, they have been edu- 
 cated in the same manner as the voun^er sons of 
 other German Princes ; that is to say, as German 
 military. But this is an education not likely to 
 produce those sentiments, which are suited to an 
 English Prince. Let me suppose that Frederick 
 Prince of Wales had had as many children by an 
 English wife as he had afterwards by his marriage 
 with the Princess of Saxe Gotha, and that he had 
 given his daughters in marriage to British Nobles, 
 and married his sons to British Heiresses. 
 Would this have been a prejudice to the country ? 
 I think the contrary. I think it would have been 
 highly beneficial. He would have surrounded 
 the throne with nobles interested to guard its 
 rights : his sons would not have been viewed as 
 men drawing maintenance from the public purse ; 
 as unnecessary, but expensive appendages. They 
 would have been ingrafted in the common stock ; 
 and while solicitous to guard the prerogatives of 
 royalty, they would have been interested to defend 
 the principles of the Constitution. View the dif- 
 
 a a 2 , 
 
278 
 
 ference which at this time exists between a young- 
 er son of the King, and a nobleman of large land- 
 ed estate, with a power of placing half a score 
 members in the House of Commons. Is such a 
 difference of situation beneficial to the country ? 
 King Henry IV. is said to have been related by 
 blood to every Earl in the kingdom ; and that 
 the usage of the King's addressing Earls by the 
 title of Cousin has arisen from this consanguinity. 
 Long may the dynasty of Brunswick remain : but 
 let it be a British family. I am aware, that there 
 are men, who might profess to fear this influence 
 of the crown over great families from consanguini- 
 tv. Let it however be remembered, that it would 
 be an influence perfectly consistent with the prin- 
 ciples of our Constitution. I think it would be 
 advantageous to the country, that a great family 
 should be connected with the crown by the means 
 which I have mentioned, rather than by the pos- 
 session of great sinecure employments. Under 
 the Plantagenet dynasty, many of our noble fami- 
 lies were allied to the crown. Between sixty and 
 seventy members of that family are said to have 
 perished during the contest between the houses of 
 York and Lancaster. This sufficiently shows 
 how much the alliances of the royal family were 
 extended ; and it does not appear, that any incon- 
 venience ever arose from these alliances. On the 
 deposition of Richard II. it is scarcely possible, 
 that the title of Mortimer could have been forgot- 
 ten; for he had been publicly recognized as the 
 
279 
 
 heir and successor to the crown but a little while 
 before. Henry IV. did not choose to define ex- 
 actly by what title he claimed the crown. He 
 was, by his mother's side, the heir of the Earls of 
 Lancaster, who were descended from a brother of 
 King Edward I. Mr. Hume takes notice of a 
 report that had been propagated, that this brother 
 of Edward I. was really the elder brother ; and 
 that he had been postponed in the line of succes- 
 sion by his parents, on account of some personal 
 deformity. Whether such report ever had exist- 
 ed before the accession of Henry IV., or whether 
 it was ever much credited, cannot now be ascer- 
 tained. Henry IV. did not choose to claim as a 
 King elected by Parliament. He seems to have 
 stated his title to have been that of a King de facto 
 et de jure, without further explanation. If the 
 principles, avowed at the Revolution in 1688, had 
 been fully recognized on the deposition of Rich- 
 ard II., most probably Henry IV. would have 
 stated his title in a different manner. For at the 
 Revolution in 1688 the Parliament proceeded on 
 the idea, that James II. had abdicated, or in other 
 words forfeited, not for himself alone, but for all 
 those who might claim as heirs through him ; and 
 therefore, after Queen Mary's death, William III. 
 was preferred, in the succession, to the Princess 
 Anne of Denmark. The same principle was ob- 
 served in the act of settlement, when the Bruns- 
 wick family, descended from a daughter of James 
 I., was called to the succession before the nearer 
 
280 
 
 heirs, descended from Henrietta, Duchess of Or- 
 leans, daughter of Charles I. Nor is the princi- 
 ple unreasonable. A peer, by the commission of 
 high treason, forfeits not only for himself, but for 
 all who claim through him. I am aware, that 
 this is under an act of Henry VIII. ; but, if the 
 subject were fully considered, I think it would be 
 found, that that act of Henry VIII. was only de- 
 claratory of the common law. I am also aware, 
 that though the Scottish Parliament used the 
 word " forfeited," the English Parliament only 
 said, that the King had " abdicated." But the 
 word abdicated was certainly used as synonimous 
 to forfeited. At the accession of Henry IV., how 
 far a King could forfeit, how far a Parliament 
 could elect a new dynasty, were questions not ac- 
 curately settled. And although discontented no- 
 bles sometimes set up the title of Mortimer, dur- 
 ing the reign of Henry IV., yet, if the mental de- 
 rangement of Henry VI., inherited most probably 
 from his maternal grandfather, had not given oc- 
 casion to the title of Mortimer being brought for- 
 ward, the same principle of law, which was adopt- 
 ed in 1688, would have been held to have been 
 the law on the deposition of Richard II. ; viz. 
 that a King, whose conduct has induced a for- 
 feiture of royalty, has forfeited, not for himself 
 alone, but for all who claim the succession as 
 heirs to him. But the dispute between the houses 
 of York and Lancacter did not result from the 
 numerous alliances of the royal family. It was a 
 
281 
 
 question, as to the right of succession, between 
 two branches of the same family. In reference 
 to this doctrine, that a King, by his conduct, may 
 forfeit for his heirs as well as for himself, I may 
 be told perhaps, that, by the common law of Eng- 
 land, a King can do no wrong. I admit this doc- 
 trine in its fullest extent : it is the doctrine of liber- 
 ty, not of despotism. The meaning of the prin- 
 ciple is, thai ministers shall not protect them- 
 selves from being punishable for their conduct by 
 saying, that they acted under the immediate orders 
 of the King himself. But since the Norman Con- 
 quest, we have four instances of Kings who have 
 suffered for their conduct : viz. Edward II., 
 Richard II., Charles I., and James II. The three 
 first were put to death ; the latter was deprived of 
 royalty. Upon what principle can the conduct of 
 the nation towards these four Monarchs be justi- 
 fied, except on this principle, that they were pun- 
 ishable for misconduct ? Whether we say that 
 James II. had abdicated, or had forfeited, or had 
 been deprived, if we do not use this expression to 
 signify, that the right of those who were in the 
 line of succession to him was extinguished by the 
 King's misconduct, upon what principle was the 
 princess Anne of Denmark postponed in the order 
 of succession to William III. ? 
 
282 
 
 CHAPTER XXIL 
 
 On the Consequences produced by the personal 
 Character of George III. 
 
 George III. is now no more. This circum- 
 stance authorizes us to review his character with 
 the same freedom as we may do that of any of 
 those Monarchs who have preceded him. I 
 have already mentioned the character which he 
 displayed at the commencement of his reign ; that 
 he was sober — temperate — of domestic habits — 
 addicted to no vice — swayed by no passion. 
 
 The whole tenour of his life has justified the 
 impression, which was first received of him. 
 Those who approached him formed another opi- 
 nion of his character; in which, however, the event 
 has shown, that they have been totally mistaken. 
 They thought, that he was a weak man, and that 
 we should probably have a reign of favouritism. 
 These ideas were entertained even by sagacious 
 men ; but they were conceived erroneously. 
 George III. was not a weak man. His objects 
 were little, and injudiciously chosen : but no 
 Monarch ever displayed more dexterity in his 
 choice of the means to obtain those objects. So 
 far from his life having been a reign of favouri- 
 tism, he does not appear ever to have entertained 
 
£8S 
 
 kindness for any minister whom he employed, ex- 
 cept for the Earl of Bute : and after he found, that 
 this nobleman wanted the courage necessary for 
 his purposes, he seems to have withdrawn all his 
 favour from him, and never more to have wished 
 to replace him in office. But George III. had 
 been educated by his mother. She had formed 
 her ideas of sovereign power at the court of her 
 father, the Duke of Saxe Gotha : and she could 
 never bring herself to be of opinion, that sove- 
 reignty should be exercised in Great Britain in a 
 manner different from that in which she had seen 
 it exercised at her father's court. In Saxe Gotha, 
 sovereignty is property : in Great Britain it is 
 magistracy. In Saxe Gotha, the Sovereign's per- 
 sonal wishes and opinions are to be obeyed, and 
 he is his own minister ; in Great Britain, the So- 
 vereign is to choose for his ministers those, whonfi 
 he thinks most qualified to advise measures bene- 
 ficial to the country. If he does not approve of 
 the measures they recommend, he may remove 
 his ministers and appoint others ; but whatever 
 measures are carried into effect, the advisers ought 
 not only to be responsible, but distinctly known 
 and recognized as the advisers. This is not an 
 opinion, which has been only theoretically adopt- 
 ed by those who have treated of the English Con- 
 stitution ; it has been explicitly declared in Parlia- 
 ment. An act once existed, enacting, that every 
 measure recommended by the Privy Council 
 should be signed by those Privy Counsellors who 
 
284 
 
 advised it. This law sufficiently declared the 
 principles of our Constitution, It completely ne- 
 gatived the idea of the King being his own minis- 
 ter. But ministers did not choose to have their 
 names so openly exposed, and the act was repeal- 
 ed. The sentiment, which the princess Dowager 
 had most anxiously impressed on the King's mind 
 was this, viz. that he should be his own minister; 
 that he should vigilantly observe every attempt of 
 his ministers to assume control over him, and use 
 his endeavours to prevent it. The Princess Dow- 
 ager was led to enforce this sentiment on her son, 
 not only from the manner in which she had seen 
 sovereign power exercised in her father's court, 
 but also from the control which she had seen ex- 
 ercised by the Pelham party over George II. 
 The conduct of that party to her late husband and 
 herself had excited her resentment ; and this re- 
 sentment mingled itself with her political aversion. 
 The wish to be his own minister, and to exercise 
 his power personally, was the leading feature in 
 George the Third's character, through his whole 
 reign. It influenced his domestic, as well as his 
 political conduct. There does not appear any in- 
 terval, in which this sentiment was suspended. 
 The miseries occasioned by his reign have all 
 flowed from this source. Like other Monarchs, 
 he was desirous of power. But it was not the de- 
 sire of becoming a military conqueror, or even of 
 extending his dominions. It was little more than 
 the desire of appearing great in the eyes of his 
 
285 
 
 pages and valets de chambre — that it might be said 
 " The King gave away such a bishoprick," or 
 " appointed to such an employment." It was the 
 little object of a little mind. 
 
 The reign of George III. has from its com- 
 mencement exhibited a struggle between the 
 King's personal wishes and the opinions of his os- 
 tensible ministers. The two first wishes, which 
 he seems to have entertained, were to break the 
 power of the Pelham faction, and to restore peace. 
 These wishes were judicious. But the instrument, 
 which he employed to effectuate- his objects, was 
 unfortunately chosen. The Earl of Bute was not 
 qualified to be a minister. He was removed ; 
 and from the time of his removal we may date the 
 establishment of the double cabinet ; viz. secret 
 advisers and ostensible ministers. 
 
 The measure of taxing our American Colonies 
 by the vote of a British Parliament, was brought 
 forward while Mr. Grenville was the ostensible 
 minister. Whether this measure proceeded from 
 the interior cabinet, or from the ostensible minis- 
 ter, is a matter of doubt. From the obstinacy 
 with which the King persevered in it, from the 
 eagerness with which it was proclaimed, that it 
 was personally the King's object ; that those who 
 supported it were his friends, while those who 
 opposed it were to be ranked as disloyal, and as 
 his enemies ; from this language being held long 
 after the death of Mr. Grenville, when his influ- 
 ence must have ceased, men are induced to s\ 
 
 Bb 
 
286 
 
 pect, that it was the King's measure rather than 
 that of Mr. Grenville. 
 
 There is another circumstance, which leads 
 men to doubt, whether the measure originally 
 proceeded from Mr. Grenville. From the begin- 
 ning of that gentleman's administration it was 
 manifestly his object to increase the public reve- 
 nue. If the only idea which operated on his mind 
 was, that America ought to contribute a portion 
 of the public revenue, he had no occasion to bring 
 forward the Stamp Act. He had the money 
 already collected. He might have employed it 
 in aid of the public service, without affording the 
 Americans a pretence for complaint. I will ex- 
 plain what I mean by this assertion. It had been 
 deemed advisable to encourage the growth of va- 
 rious articles of American produce, by allowing a 
 bounty on their importation into Great Britain. 
 I have been told, that when the Stamp Act was 
 brought forward by Mr. Grenville, the bounties 
 thus payable on American produce amounted to 
 five hundred thousand pounds a year. Mr. 
 Grenville only proposed to raise two hundred 
 thousand pounds a year by the Stamp Act. If 
 revenue alone was his object, it is scarcely credi- 
 ble, that he could have overlooked this sum, 
 which was already in the coffers of the public ; and 
 resorted to a mode of taxation, which from its 
 novelty was necessarily uncertain. But revenue 
 was not the object of those who recommended 
 the Stamp Act. Power and patronage influenced 
 
287 
 
 their wishes. I do not pretend to know who 
 were the real advisers of the Stamp Act. Per- 
 haps hereafter it may be ascertained. The 
 King dismissed George Grenville, because he 
 found him not sufficiently subservient to his 
 views ; he dismissed the Marquis of Rockingham, 
 because that nobleman had repealed the Stamp 
 Act ; he appointed the Duke of Grafton minister, 
 and it was given out that the noble Duke was to 
 act under the guidance of the Earl of Chatham ; 
 but soon after the establishment of this ministry, 
 the Earl of Chatham was taken ill ; his illness 
 was of very long continuance, and of such a na- 
 ture as to preclude him from all intercourse with 
 others on any public business. During this inter- 
 val of Lord Chatham's absence from the cabinet, 
 the King contrived to have the question of taxing 
 the American Colonies again brought forward. 
 By playing man against man, and faction against 
 faction, he at length obtained his wishes, and the 
 American Colonies found themselves reduced to 
 the alternative of unconditional submission, or ex- 
 plicit and avowed resistance : they chose the lat- 
 ter. While the King was pursuing this object of 
 reviving the dispute with America, he seems to 
 have employed that maxim of the politician, Di- 
 vide et impera, with much dexterity. The late 
 Earl of Shelburne told a friend of mine, " that the 
 King possessed one art beyond any man he had 
 ever known ; for that, by the familiarity of his in- 
 tercourse, he obtained your confidence, procured 
 
288 
 
 irom you your opinion of different public charac- 
 ters, and then availed himself of this knowledge to 
 sow dissension." 
 
 The war began in 1775, and was continued for 
 eight years* when the King, much against his 
 wishes, was compelled to relinquish the contest — 
 he was compelled to relinquish it, because he 
 could find no man, who would consent to be the 
 ostensible minister for carrying on the war. But 
 he still retained so strong a desire to continue the 
 contest, that he could not refrain from employing 
 his household troops to affront the Earl of Shel- 
 burne, the minister who had made the peace. 
 The Earl of Shelburne would not submit to the 
 affront ; he resigned, and the King found him- 
 self under the necessity of appointing the Coali- 
 tionists his ministers. These gentlemen came 
 into office strongly impressed with .the opinion 
 they had formed of the King's character ; viz. 
 that nothing could induce him to relinquish the 
 wish he entertained of being his own minister. I 
 recollect the answer which Mr. Fox once made 
 me when I put this question to him ; " Whether 
 it was not possible for him to conciliate the King?" 
 He replied, u No, it is impossible : no man can 
 gain the King." And I believe Mr. Fox's an- 
 swer was just. The King must have seen, that 
 Lord Thurlow was devoted to him ; yet he re- 
 moved Lord Thurlow the moment Mr. Pitt re- 
 quired his dismission. And he did this, not from 
 any regard for Mr. Pitt, for he never had any re- 
 
289 
 
 gard for him : but because Mr. Pitt was more ne- 
 cessary to his immediate views. When the 
 Coalitionists came into office in the early part of 
 the year 1783, they were impressed with the ne- 
 cessity of controlling the King's wishes : and 
 although the Coalition had to a certain degree 
 rendered Mr. Fox and his friends unpopular, yet 
 I think that the Coalitionists would have retained 
 their power, if they had not been under the gui- 
 dance of Mr. Burke. But the wrong-headedness, 
 the arrogance, the violence, and the corrupt views 
 of that gentleman, deprived the ministers of the 
 confidence of the country. Mr. Pitt consented to 
 be the King's ostensible minister ; and the gene- 
 ral election which followed his appointment com- 
 pleted the downfal of the Coalitionists. I have 
 said, that Mr. Pitt consented to be the King's os- 
 tensible minister. But I do not mean by this to 
 insinuate, that Mr. Pitt was ready on all occasions 
 to comply with the King's wishes. Neither of 
 them loved the other. It was impossible for Mr. 
 Pitt to forget the King's treatment of his father ; 
 and there was too much original integrity in Mr. 
 Pitt's character to allow him to be acceptable to 
 the King. I believe they had many quarrels. 
 There was one in particular, which became gene- 
 rally known. The King had relied, that he could 
 make Mr. William Grenville minister, in case he 
 was compelled to separate himself from Mr. Pitt. 
 Mr. Pitt determined to deprive the King of this 
 great card. He therefore suggested to his Majes- 
 
 b b 2 * 
 
ly, that it was necessary that Mr. Grenville should 
 be placed in the House of Lords. The King saw 
 Mr. Pitt's object* and resisted. It was said, that 
 this resistance was Carried to such a length* that 
 Mr. Pitt had actually resigned \ but that the Queen 
 prevailed on the King to yield to Mr. Pitt's de- 
 mand. Mr. William Grenville was removed to 
 the house of Lords, and thus the King was de- 
 prived of the only man, whom he could have 
 named as successor to Mr. Pitt in the House of 
 Commons. 
 
 During the whole of the King's reign much use 
 had been made of his personal and private charac- 
 ter. It was industriously propagated, that the 
 moral character of a King was the circumstance 
 the most to be attended to by his subjects. And 
 when the King's eldest son grew up, the contrast 
 between the father and the son was industriously 
 and malevolently remarked by every courtier. 
 This operated two ways. It raised the King's 
 character, and depressed that of him who was to 
 be looked to as his successor. 
 
 The Prince of Wales is now become our So- 
 vereign ; posterity will appreciate his merits. I 
 will however mention one or two circumstances 
 in which he has been unfortunate. The King was 
 very happy in the choice of Bishop Markham and 
 Mr. Cyrill Jackson, as the Prince's preceptor and 
 sub-preceptor ; I believe also, that the Earl of 
 Holdernesse was a very proper man for the office 
 of Governor to the Prince. Ill health made it ne- 
 
291 
 
 cessary for the Earl of Holdernesse to go abroad. 
 On his return, sickness had probably rendered 
 him peevish. He complained of the ascendancy, 
 which Mr. Jackson had obtained over the mind 
 of the young Prince. Bishop Markham vindi- 
 cated his assistant ; and the King availed himself 
 of the disunion to dismiss them all. I consider 
 the removal of Mr. Jackson as a national calami- 
 ty. I knew him well. He was a man of a, mas- 
 ter mind : eminently qualified to educate a young 
 Prince. After he had quitted the office of sub- 
 preceptor to the Prince of Wales he took orders, 
 was made Dean of Christ Church, and dwindled 
 into the character of a schoolmaster. Those who 
 have only known him while Dean of Christ 
 Church will form a very inadequate idea of the 
 powers of his mind. The Prince was in his fif- 
 teenth year when the Earl of Holdernesse, Bishop 
 Markham, and Mr. Jackson, were removed from 
 about his person. If the King could have replaced 
 them even with men better qualified, they would 
 most probably not have possessed the same means 
 of guiding the Prince as were possessed by those 
 who had the care of him from his earliest years. 
 But the men who succeeded were wholly une- 
 qual to the charge ; and the Prince's education 
 was terminated. The Princess Dowager of 
 Wales had kept the King out of society. Tie 
 pretence was the preservation of his morals. The 
 King seems to have had the same ideas respect- 
 ing the Prince of Wales ; not recollecting, that. 
 
292 
 
 as his preceptors were removed, the remaining 
 part of his education must depend on his compa- 
 nions. 
 
 There was another circumstance in the King's 
 conduct towards the Prince, equally unfortunate. 
 When his Royal Highness came of age, an esta- 
 blishment was assigned to him far beyond what 
 could be supported by the very moderate income 
 which was allowed him. This occasioned him 
 to contract debts ; and when it became necessary 
 that those debts should be discharged, very little 
 care was shown to protect the Prince's character 
 from disgrace. The courtiers were everywhere 
 active in contrasting the regularity of the King's 
 life with the indiscretions of the Prince. On the 
 establishment of the Prince's household, every 
 man must have seen, that an expense was created 
 which his income would not be able to discharge. 
 Parental affection, and the political solicitude 
 which the Monarch in possession ought to have 
 for the character of his immediate successor, 
 should both have attracted the King's attention. 
 There was another circumstance also, which 
 ought not to have been overlooked. The 
 Duchy of Cornwall was the Prince's property 
 from the hour of his birth. When he came of 
 age, the Prince was put in possession of the re- 
 venues of this Duchy. But the Prince obtained 
 no part of that revenue, which had been received 
 from the Duchy during his minority. A differ- 
 ent treatment was shown to the Duke of York. 
 
293 
 
 When he came of age, the whole revenue re- 
 ceived from the Bishoprick of Osnaburg, during 
 his minority, was paid over to him. There was 
 another circumstance respecting the Duchy of 
 Cornwall, by which a still greater injury was done 
 to the Prince of Wales. The King procured an 
 act of Parliament to be passed, authorizing him 
 to grant leases of the Prince's lands in Cornwall 
 for ninety-nine years, determinable upon lives ; 
 for these leases the King received fines during 
 the Prince's minority, to the amount I believe of 
 about two hundred and fifty thousand pounds. 
 What a difference would it have made to the 
 Prince, if, when he came of age, estates in pos- 
 session had been delivered up to him, instead of 
 reversions expectant on leases for ninety-nine 
 years, with small rents reserved. Even this sum 
 of two hundred and fifty thousand pounds received 
 by the King for the leases which he had granted, 
 though obviously an inadequate compensation, 
 was not paid over to the Prince. It may be said 
 perhaps, that the King received this power from 
 Parliament. I admit it : but the Parliament had 
 no right to grant this power. It was a gross breach 
 of faith by the guardian of the Prince's estates. I 
 am justified in saying, that the Parliament is as 
 much the guardian of the Prince's estates as it is 
 of the demesnes of the Crown. I am justified in 
 saying this by the conduct of the House of Com- 
 mons in the reign of Henry IV. Richard II. had 
 granted away many of the estates of the Duchy 
 
294 
 
 of Cornwall. The House of Commons took no- 
 tice of this, and sent up a bill to the House of 
 Lords, requesting their concurrence in a bill for 
 the restoration of these lands to Prince Henry, af- 
 terwards King under the name of Henry V. The 
 House of Lords refused to concur ; but though 
 they refused to concur with the Commons in the 
 bill, the House of Lords addressed the King, to 
 direct the law officers of the crown to commence 
 suits against the possessors of these lands on be- 
 half of the Prince : the address was complied with, 
 and the lands were recovered for the Prince. In 
 the suit subsequently instituted, in the reign of 
 James I. by his son Prince Henry, for lands, part 
 of the Duchy of Cornwall, which had been im- 
 providently granted away by Queen Elizabeth, 
 though the proceedings were only in a court of 
 law, the same doctrine seems to have been adopt- 
 ed ; viz. that the estates of the Prince of Wales 
 were as much under the protection of Parliament 
 as the demesnes of the crown. I am aware that 
 it will be said, the Prince of Wales afterwards re- 
 ceived a compensation for his rights. He brought 
 a suit against the King, by petition, and, in 1803, 
 received two hundred and twenty thousand pounds 
 for compromising his claim ; a sum shamefully 
 inadequate. But what would have been the dif- 
 ferent situation of the Prince, if he had received 
 even this sum in 1783, when he came of age, in- 
 stead of receiving it in 1803 ? In mentioning the 
 subject, one can scarcely refrain from contrasting 
 
295 
 
 the conduct of Edward III. with that of George 
 III. When Edward the Third's son was little 
 more than eleven years of age, he gave him an 
 hereditary estate in the Duchy of Cornwall, with 
 the immediate possession of all its revenues. He 
 at the same time invested him for his life in the 
 Principality of Wales, and the Earldom of Ches- 
 ter, with the immediate possession of their reve- 
 nues. The reason assigned in our law books for 
 this conduct is, because the King's son coruscat 
 patris radiis. Edward III. saw with pleasure the 
 attention of his subjects attracted towards his son 
 and future successor. German sentiments pre- 
 vented George III. from feeling this delight. 
 
 Mr. Pitt was completely established in the si- 
 tuation of prime minister after the general election 
 in 1784; and seems to have had more control 
 over the King than any other ostensible minister, 
 subsequently to the resignation of the Earl of 
 Bute. Mr. Pitt owed this power to the fear in 
 which the King stood of the Coalitionists ; and 
 after his Majesty's illness in 1788-9, his apprehen- 
 sions were probably increased. The French Re- 
 volution burst forth in 1789. George III. saw 
 the consequences, which this Revolution was like- 
 ly to produce on kingly power. It is well known, 
 that he said to every courtier who approached 
 him, " If a stop is not put to French principles, 
 there will not be a King left in Europe in a few 
 years." But Mr. Pitt had sufficient control over 
 the King to restrain him from embarking in war 
 
296 
 
 against France. It was not till the end of the 
 year 1792, that Mr. Pitt's influence on this sub- 
 ject was overruled. At the close of that year, 
 Mr. Burke prevailed on the great Whig families 
 to declare themselves in favour of a war with 
 France. They were received by the King with 
 joy. Mr. Pitt yielded to the King's wishes, and 
 the crusade against French principles was com- 
 menced. The contest is not yet terminated. 
 This is my opinion, while resident in France, on 
 the 7th of March, 1820. In the town which I 
 now inhabit, the house formerly occupied by the 
 Inquisition has been purchased for the use of the 
 Missionaries : and it is well known, that a body 
 of men, under the name of secrets, are still kept 
 in the same town and its neighbourhood. Proba- 
 bly they are not so numerous as they were in 1815. 
 They were then uncontrollable. They openly 
 murdered General Ramel, the Commander of the 
 King's forces in this town. I believe other ge- 
 nerals in the service of Louis XVIII. experien- 
 ced the same fate in other parts of France. The 
 Missionaries openly preach the necessity of restor- 
 ing confiscated property to the church ; and their 
 discourses have much influence on the common 
 people. While it is known, that two such bodies 
 of men are kept on foot, can it be believed, that 
 the nobles and fanatics have relinquished their 
 hope of re-establishing the ancien regime ? They 
 will probably make the attempt, but their efforts 
 will fail. The great body of the French Nation 
 
297 
 
 will never consent to the re-establishment of old 
 abuses. 
 
 The contest is begun in Spain : the army, the 
 commercial interest, and men of learning, are 
 united in the demand of a Constitution, and the 
 assembly of the Cortes. They are opposed by 
 the King, the priesthood, and a large proportion 
 of the nobles. Most probably a free Constitu- 
 tion will terminate the contest. Kings and nobles 
 ought to recollect, that the United States of Ame- 
 rica have now acquired that degree of impor- 
 tance, that the opinions of the inhabitants of that 
 country must necessarily influence the opinions of 
 the inhabitants of Europe. The Spanish Colo- 
 nies in America will probably soon form a Go- 
 vernment similar to that of the United States. Let 
 Kings and Nobles also recollect, that every effort, 
 which has hitherto been made to stop French 
 principles, has only contributed to strengthen their 
 growth. 
 
 During five months, in the year 1788-9, Roy- 
 alty in Great Britain existed only in abeyance. 
 This was a misfortune. Should a long minority 
 take place before the House of Commons is 
 made the representative of the intelligence and 
 opulence of the country, Oligarchy or Revolu- 
 tion will most probably be our lot. There is an- 
 other circumstance which deserves the considera- 
 tion of Kings. It has been generally supposed, 
 that standing armies form the surest support of 
 
 c c 
 
298 
 
 royal power : but this is not always the case: the 
 French Revolution was effected by the army. If 
 Spain succeeds in establishing a free Constitution, 
 she will be indebted for it to her army. 
 
 I have said, that George III. had not the wish 
 to be a military conqueror. Some perhaps may 
 think that the acquisitions in India prove this 
 opinion to be erroneous. But let it be remem- 
 bered, that the acquisitions in India were not the 
 work of the King, or even of the British Nation. 
 The civil and military servants of the India Com- 
 pany derived immediate wealth to themselves 
 from every new conquest. They suggested, that 
 the newly acquired dominion would yield an in- 
 crease of revenue to the India Company. But 
 this statement was most commonly found to be 
 false. The revenues of the new conquest were 
 almost always found, after a few years possession, 
 to be unequal to the increased expense. The 
 conquests in India are the acquisitions of a trading 
 company, pirate et boatiqitiere. 
 
 At the accession of George III. he seemed to 
 pay very little attention to his German dominions. 
 They had been the object of his grandfather's 
 affection; and George III. had been educated to 
 dislike every thing which his grandfather had 
 been fond of. But in the progress of his reign 
 his attention was drawn to his German sovereignty. 
 His younger sons were sent to Germany, and 
 educated like the sons of other German Princes. 
 
299 
 
 There is no proof that George III. was avaricious. 
 There is reason to believe, that he received large 
 presents from Indian Princes ; but those presents 
 were in diamonds, and given by him to the 
 Queen. Although he was not avaricious, yet he 
 never displayed any signal marks of generosity. 
 It is possible, that at the commencement of his 
 •reign he conferred considerable gifts on the Earl 
 of Bute. But he does not appear ever to have 
 been solicitous to relieve his own sons from their 
 pecuniary embarrassments. 
 
 In his children George III. was peculiarly for- 
 tunate. For of fifteen, only two died in their in- 
 fancy. Of the remaining thirteen, every man in 
 private life would have been proud. 
 
 I will add but one reflection more. Few Kings 
 haye ever reigned, whose personal character and 
 personal wishes have operated such important 
 changes. 
 
300 
 
 CHAPTER XXIIL 
 
 On the Three Kings of the Brunsxvick Race. 
 
 Three reigns of Princes of the Brunswick fa- 
 mily have passed away. During the reign of 
 George I., the King never seems to have thought 
 of Great Britain, except only as he could make it 
 subservient to his German views. The first act 
 of his reign was to acquire Bremen and Verden. 
 This was a gross act of injustice : and a violation 
 of that guarantee of the treaty of Minister, in 
 1648, to which England stood pledged. That 
 treaty had settled the rights of the different 
 Princes of Germany. I believe the seizure of 
 Bremen and Verden was the first open violation of 
 that treaty ; and it served as a precedent for 'all 
 those infringements of the rights of German 
 Princes which have since followed. The Bri- 
 tish Parliament paid two hundred and fifty thou- 
 sand pounds for this acquisition. The loss of the 
 friendship of Sweden, which was the consequence 
 
301 
 
 of this act of injustice, was an injury to the in- 
 terests of Great Britain of much more impor- 
 tance. Every year of this King's reign seems 
 to have produced some treaty, which had for its 
 object his own interest as a German Prince. In 
 1718, Sir George Byng, an English Admiral, 
 destroyed the Spanish Fleet. The gallantry of 
 this achievement was much applauded, but with- 
 out reason ; for the Spanish Fleet was in such a 
 condition as to render it wholly unequal to the 
 contest. It was a violation of the law of nations, 
 for no hostilities had been previously declared be- 
 tween Spain and Great Britain. The measure 
 was adopted to promote the views of the House 
 of Austria in Sicily. 
 
 Perhaps George II. was more attentive to the 
 interests of Great Britain than his father had 
 been. But the Continental wars of 1741 and 
 1756 were undertaken purely to promote the 
 King's interests as a German Prince. 
 
 George III., at his accession, did not appear 
 to have the same partiality for Hanover as had 
 been shown by his predecessors. As he had ne- 
 ver been in Hanover, he did not feel that predi- 
 lection, which is the result of early habits : and 
 he had been educated to dislike the German war, 
 because it was the measure of his grandfather. 
 But he gradually became a German Prince. To 
 that country he sent his younger sons for educa- 
 tion. From that country their wives were to be 
 
 Dd 
 
302 
 
 brought ; and when the French Revolution broke 
 out, the danger of its example affecting other 
 Governments, must have been more strongly felt 
 by him as a German Prince than as a King of 
 Great Britain. But the calamity, which George 
 III. has brought upon Great Britain, by the pres- 
 sure of those taxes, which have been imposed to 
 support his unnecessary wars, has almost absorbed 
 every other consideration. Yet the People of 
 England have not abandoned the wish of being 
 separated from Hanover. This led them to see 
 with pleasure the prospect of the succession of 
 the Princess Charlotte. In that hope they have 
 been disappointed. Should the daughter of the 
 late Duke of Kent succeed to the Crown, their 
 wishes may be realized. 
 
 ITNJD. 
 
 fly*. 
 

^h^«s 
 
 
 
 m*z^X3££?jm£L 
 
 
 J&& 
 
 
 : *dS^ 
 
 
 <SE3 o«r "C <c 
 
 <M 
 
 
 C# C<§£'<< 
 
 «MC5*t!<i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 J«E^«K*L: 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CTcac 
 
 :<^- cc 
 
 
 
 < ®: «:< 
 
 
 
 
 c<3C <H_c 
 ^- c<csc - 
 
 CI < <JT ' • 
 
 Ml <S< 
 
 / c < 
 
 :>cccc 
 
 
 4tX 
 
 
 
 CcOSCil^- <5< 
 
 g CfSCcJ 
 
 «: <«C 
 
 < 
 
 r<c 
 
 ^| j^ . f A^pM 
 
 1 ,-^ ^ 
 
 , *<:<ca 
 
 ^ ^ ■ ^^^^^y- - 
 
 
 KCCCC4L 
 
 < "3SKSCl^C£iC 
 
 < < 
 
 3 s " ' .■ < 
 
 ^M 
 
 
vmsm. 
 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 iilllllflllllir 
 
 021 934 779 
 
 
 r*T 
 
 wmk 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 i« 
 
 
 > 
 
 
 ffW* 
 
 Urn