RECOLLECTIONS AND REFLECTIONS, PERSONAL AND POLITICAL, AS CONNECTED WITH Affairs, DURING THE REIGN OF GEORGE III. BY JOHN NICHOLLS, Eso. MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS IN THE FIFTEENTH, SIXTEENTH, AND EIGHTEENTH PARLIAMENTS OF GREAT BRITAIN. /.AT TWO VOLUMES. VOL. I. SECOND EDITION. LONDON: PRINTED FOR LONGMAN, HUIiST, RKKS, ORMK, AND BROWN, PATERNOSTKR-ROW. 1822. LONDON : Printed by A. & H. BpOttMWOodr, New-Street-Square. Stack Annex ADVERTISEMENT. 1 HE 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. A 2 I -I_V 1 think, its preservation was the result of the energies 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 for- ward the charges against Mr. Hastings, he conversed with me very fully on the subject. I put this question to him : " Can you prove, that Mr. Hastings ever derived any advantage to himself from that miscon- duct, which you impute to him?" He acknowledged, " that he could not ;" but added, " that his whole government of India had been one continued 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, " that in that case I must relinquish the friendship of the Duke of Portland." I replied, " that that u 3 294 would give me pain ; but that I would rather relinquish the Duke of Portland's friendship than support an impeachment which I did not approve." We parted, and our intercourse was terminated. 295 CHAP. 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 intercourse with him impressed me with the highest idea of his political erudi- tion. I say nothing 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 admiration of him was great ; it grad- ually diminished into disapprobation of his measures, and. disapprobation gradually in- creased 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 u 4 296 would be obliged to relinquish it, I was very anxious to see union established between the friends of the Marquis of Rock- ingham and those of the Earl of Shelburne. The friends of the Earl of Shelburne pro- fessed to wish it, and I firmly believe that they were sincere. This union was pre- vented by Mr. Burke ; the consequences of the continuance of disunion sufficiently appeared on the formation 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 separ- ation 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. When the separation between the friends of the deceased Marquis and the 297 Earl of Shelburne took place, there was a meeting of the Rockinghams at Earl Fitz- william'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 Rockinghams andShelburnes had separated, there existed 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 minister, and that he him- self 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 298 from Ireland, and proclaimed chief of the late Marquis's friends. He urged this ar- rangement, because he knew, that the Duke of Portland would be entirely under his guidance; and he sacrificed the political strength of his party to his own personal wishes. William Eden was the mezzano, who ef- fected 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 posses- sion of the administration, they were wholly under the guidance of Mr. Burke. His ar- rogance was sufficiently disgusting. He ultimately ruined them by his India Bill. It was much to be regretted, that when the Marquis of Buckingham came into office in 1765, his inexperience 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. .. >;^ 299 They grew up afterwards gradually, as their growth was encouraged by the occasion. While the Duke of Portland was first Lord of the Treasury, Mr. Burke' s influence was more authoritative than it had been during the life of the Marquis of Rockingham. For Lord Rockingham, when he would venture to do it, was capable of thinking for himself. When Mr. Burke brought forward his accusation against Mr. Hastings, he solicited me to support him. In the course of our discussion, he told me, that if I declined supporting him, I must relinquish the.friend- ship of the Duke of Portland ; and my con- nexion with Mr. Burke, as well as with the Duke of Portland, was from that hour ter- minated. 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 300 should take his place." He inculcated this doctrine both in his speeches and his pam- phlets : it always appeared to me a doctrine highly unconstitutional ; but it served the views of Mr. Burke, as it recommended him to the leaders of his party ; for he accom- panied the doctrine with this addition, "that as the ancestors of those leaders had placed the Brunswicks on the throne, they had a right to be the ministers, and to dictate the political measures which should be pur- sued." But the great injury, which Mr. Burke did to his country, was by preaching the crusade against French principles. He was empha- tically 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 on this subject. The French Revolution, at its very com- mencement, excited great alarm in the minds of princes and nobles, especially of German princes. It is well known that George III. did not conceal his opinion on this head. Mr. Burke expressed his disapprobation of 301 the French Revolution at an early period : his language gradually 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 confine himself to the limits of Great Britain and Ireland ; he en- deavoured to rouse every part of the Con- tinent. His son was sent to a meeting of princes and ministers at Coblentz. The Emperor Leopold and the King of Prussia were excited 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 prevailed on to move. I believe that Prince Kaunitz, the prime minister of the Emperor Leopold, dissuaded 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 302 that country against him. Their discontent had led them to take arms; but on the death of the Emperor Joseph, his successor Leo- pold 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 nobles. Prince Kaunitz thought it would be more advantageous to the Emperor Leopold to regain the affec- tions of his discontented subjects, than to embark in a war with France. But this wise minister was overruled : war was resolved on ; and the King of Prussia became the ally of the Emperor. Mr. Burke seems to have had more difficulty 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 re- luctance. But though he consented that war should be undertaken, he does not appear ever to have adopted Mr. Burke' s opinion, as to the motive for the war. Mr. Burke's opinion was, that war should be undertaken to re-establish France ex- actly in that state in which it had existed 303 before the commencement of the Revo- lution ; or, according to the technical lan- guage 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. 304 CHAP. 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 circumstances 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 hu- man creatures without being subject to the restraint of moral duties. (Note 23.) Perhaps there is no country in Europe in which the proportion of slaves to freemen was at one time greater than it was in Eng- land. I apprehend that this was owing to the Heptarchy. The division of the country 305 into seven kingdoms produced wars : wars occasioned captives, and captives became slaves. Servi quia servabantur. The wise decisions of our courts of law, assisted by other circumstances, effectuated enfranchise- ment. I will mention some of these cir- cumstances. First, the courts of law de- cided, that an illegitimate child could not be 'a slave, or, as our law calls him, a serf, or villein. He could inherit no advantage from his parents ; it would, therefore, have been unreasonable that he should have in- herited a disadvantage. Secondly, if the female slave, or, as she is called in our law books, a niefe, married a freeman, she be- came enfranchised during the coverture, and her children were free; which rule is con- trary to the maxim of the Civil Law, partus sequitur ventrem, as is remarked by Sir Ed- ward Coke. 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 enfran- chisement of villeins. I will only mention one more, and I shall select that because it was made at so late a period as the reign of VOL. i. x 306 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, be- came enfranchised ; for B, by pleading in bar to his action, had treated A as a free- man ; and he could not afterwards falsify his own admission. To prevent this incon- venience, B was under the necessity of pleading 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, regardant 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 Wellington in the county of Somerset." Then, according to the ordinary rules of pleading, this question, 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 307 Somersetshire. 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 reply 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 cir- cumstances of locality. The issue or ques- tion 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 inconvenience from this mode of plead- ing, and applying a remedy. The act re- cited, that it often happened, that a villein fled into a town, where the inhabitants were disposed to favour the claim of freedom. That he then brought' a fictitious and colour- able action against his lord, with a view to one of these two advantages, viz. " That if the lord pleaded in bar of his action, he, the villein, might be enfranchised by his x 2 308 lord's plea : and if the lord pleaded in dis- ability of his person, and in abatement of his action, that then the plea might be 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 ; accom- panying his plea with a protestation, that the plaintiff was his villein : and that a plea in bar, accompanied with this protestation, should not render the villein free. This statute was written in the French language. It was manifestly intended for the protection of the lord's interest against the ill founded claim of his villein. Sir- Edward Coke, in commenting on this statute, translated it incorrectly ; and having, from this circum- stance, puzzled himself, concludes by say- ing, " it is a perplexed statute, and that he does not know what to make of it." The words which Sir Edward Coke translated incorrectly are the following. The statute recites, that the villein flies into a town, ou il est fort a trier envers son seigneur. Sir Edward Coke translates these words, Where it is hard to try against his lord. Whereas, the true translation is, Where he, the villein, 9 309 ts powerful in trial against his lord. And thus, -by this mistake in the translation, Sir Edward Coke supposes the legislature to have had in view a mischief directly the re- verse of that which they really had in view, and which they wished to remedy. But the wise solicitude of our courts of law, to in- crease the numberof freemen, defeated these efforts of the legislature to preserve the character of villeins in England. For the courts decided, that if the plain tiffrecovered, his action then could not be deemed ficti- tious and colourable. It was, therefore, not a case within the statute. The defendant was not entitled to any benefit under the statute, and the villein was enfranchised by the defendant's plea. Perhaps one of the circumstances, which the most contributed to the enfranchise- ment of our villeins, is that which is gene- rally considered as one of the greatest calamities recorded in our history : (Note 24.) I mean the long civil war between the houses of York and Lancaster. The lords enfranchised their villeins, that they might use them as soldiers. It is a common ex^ x 3 310 pression in the historians of that period, in speaking of a great lord who took part in the civil wars, servitia armavit. And, as an inducement to the villeins to serve as sol- diers, 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 propor- tion of copyhold land is now very much diminished, it is possible that some people may doubt the accuracy of Sir Edward Coke's assertion. But let it be recollected, that a great proportion of the land in the western counties was even so 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 great reason to believe, that the lands had antecedently been held by copy of court roll. (Note 25.) Wherever slavery has prevailed, it has generally been the result of conquest. On the fall of the Roman Empire, the Northern nations overran France, Spain, Portugal, and Italy. They established servitude in all 311 these countries. The Normans conquered England. Whether they reduced any of the Saxons to slavery, or were contented 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 Republic much of the popula- tion of Italy consisted of slaves. We know also, that a large proportion of the inhabit- ants 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 Ishmaelites passing from Palestine into Egypt. If the practice of carrying slaves into Egypt had not been established, it is not probable, either that Joseph's brethren would have thought of selling him, or that the Ishmaelites would have purchased him. These Ishmaelites 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 in- x 4 312 habitants 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 Portu- guese 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 oc- casioned 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 become a mixed race. When the Abolition of the Slave Trade was first suggested in the House of Com- mons, I did not think, that the means, by which it was proposed that the abolition should be effected, were judicious. I had entirely approved of the measures 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 trans- ported their slaves with the smallest average loss, appeared likely to produce the most beneficial consequences. I thought this 313 idea should have been farther extended. 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 appre- hension of the insurrection of their slaves: And from this circumstance, they are enabled to allow more indulgence to the Negroes. The number of the slaves on board each ship ought by law to have been regulated, and proportioned to the tonnage. I believe, that since the open exportation of slaves has been prohibited, much misery has been ex- perienced by the slaves, from their being carried by contraband in small ships im- moderately crowded. But my chief hope of an amelioration in the condition of the slaves was from the decisions of the courts of law. I believe, that the courts in the West Indies still per- severe in not permitting a Negro to give evidence in any cause, either civil or cri- minal. I cannot conceive how this maxim has arisen. It certainly is not drawn from the common law of England. If the vera- 314 city of the witness is doubted, from the circumstance of his being a slave, let the objection go to his credit, not to his com- petency. As the law now stands, the Negro is considered as below the rank of a reason- able being. When the Negroes were brought to the island, the legislature ought to have provided, as far as possible, that every Negro should be annexed to some plantation : that he should become glebes ascriptus, and that he should never afterwards be sold to any other master 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 connexions. 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 regulations, the legislature and the courts of law might have ameliorated the condition of the Negro, and gradually elevated him to the character of a subject But this plan was not approved of. The Trade was to be immediately abolished : its 315 abolition was voted by Parliament ; but it has not yet been effected. And I doubt whether that abolition ever will be effected by the means pursued. 316 CHAP. 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 hesitation in saying, that I think Revolution will add to the happiness of mankind. The only country in which we have yet seen a Revolutionary Government completely esta- blished is America : and there the prosperity of the Peoplehas been more rapidly 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 most part, necessitous courtiers ; and the object of Government was to check the growth of the Colonies. 317 In France the Revolution is not yet com- pleted : for although a Representative Go- vernment is established, those who are entrusted with the exercise of that Govern- ment are considered by the People as desirous of destroying it. The attention of the People is, therefore, employed anxiously to watch over the Executive Government, and to defeat its efforts. I will add, that the im- provements already derived from the Revo- lution in France are so great and so visible, that the People will never submit to see the ancien regime re-established. In Spain we at present only see the be- ginning of a revolution ; but the seed is sown, and a Revolutionary Government will be established in that country. Probably Governments . will be established 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 intercourse and connection with each other. One circumstance will probably be an immediate consequence of a revolution in Spain. If the Spanish Government re- 318 mains unaltered, Cuba must very soon belong either to the United States of America 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 member 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- 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 between 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 opinion how far it is probable, that a Revolutionary Government may be established in either of those two countries. In Great Britain we have a Representa- 319 live Government. Some few abuses have been allowed to creep into it : correct those abuses, and Revolution will not take place. But if those abuses are not corrected, an Oli- garchy will be established, which will fetter Royalty, humiliate Aristocracy, and trample on the People. Such an Oligarchy will be removeable only by Revolution. 320 CHAP. 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. The circumstance must influence the happiness of many millions. I have already made some remarks on the probability of such an event : but now that the Revolution in Spain is complete, I am unavoidably led to extend my reflec- tions. 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 country. For although the commercial cities and men of education were joined with the army in producing this Revolution, yet 321 the army was certainly 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 Revo- lution is America. The obstinate perse- verance of George III., in his endeavours to compel the inhabitants of the 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 Nobles, or political Church : and history does not afford us an example of any nation, in which the hap- piness of the inhabitants, or the prosperity of the whole, considered collectively, has been more rapidly increased. There were primary causes, which must at some mo- ment or other have produced a change in the French Government : but the Revo- lution in America certainly accelerated the Revolution in France. VOL. i. Y 322 The French Revolution has brought for- ward 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 Spain. Ger- man 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 pro- gress of liberty by what they have been pleased to denominate a Holy Alliance ; for this is the name which Kings have im- pudently given to their confederacy against the liberties of mankind. This Holy Al- liance 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 assistance of Ferdinand. Had they sent French troops, these would most probably have joined the insurgents ; and they hesitated to employ their Swiss corps. They endeavoured to retain in France 9- 323 those Spanish patriots, who had been ob- liged 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. Austria and Prussia could send no assistance to the King of Spain, because they had no ship- ping to transport their troops ; and although Russia might have sent assistance by sea, it could not have arrived in Spain before the summer. Knowledge has spread itself in the army of the King of Prussia. What sentiments must not he be inspired with by this Spanish Revolution ? Can he en- tertain the hope, that his army will assist him to keep down the general wish of his subjects for a Representative Government ? Throughout the Protestant 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 Catholic part of Germany, knowledge has made less progress : it is probable, therefore, that a Revolution will not take place in the Catholic part of Germany, so soon as it will in the Protestant part. The Y 2 324 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 Portugal will soon follow the example of Spain. 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 Portu- guese and Spaniards will prevent Portugal 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 Pro- vinces, and the whole united by a Confe- deracy, the Spanish empire will instantly 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 Floridas. The province of Mexico is much interested to prevent this cession ; and, when supported by the 325 mother country, Mexico will be able to prevent it. A Confederacy, such as I have suggest- ed, will create the most formidable barrier to the growth of the United States of Ame- rica. 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 improve- ment 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 the United States of America, or of Great Britain. The same language, with similitude of habits, and descent from the same common ances- tors, 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 cruel- ties are more justly to be attributed to Ferdinand and his ministers, than to the people of Spain. Both hemispheres have T 3 326 been struggling for the same object ; 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 century, when Ferdi- nand united Castile and Arragon by his marriage with Isabella, Spain was more ad- vanced 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 renew- ed 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 prevent them from acquiring either the Florid as or Cuba. Another consequence of the tranquillity likely to take place in Spanish America will be the increase of her productions, both agricultural and mineral ; and new 327 branches of commerce will be opened both with India and China. The establish- ment of a free Constitution in Spain will form an epoch in the history of mankind. We have seen, for some years past, at- tempts 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 Governments, they will not submit to be prohibited from transporting Negroes from Africa to America. Their desire to bring that fertile country into cultivation will in- duce them to resist the restraint. The ar- guments, which have been employed to ex- cite an abhorrence of the Slave Trade, have been of two sorts ; first, that the trade was repugnant to humanity ; second- ly that it was repugnant to the Christian religion. Political objections, which, per- haps, are the strongest, have not been much resorted to. I will acknowledge, that I have never been able to discover any pas- Y 4 328 sage, either in the Old or New Testament, prohibiting such a trade. Joseph was cer- tainly sold by his brethren to a caravan of slave merchants. This was an act of wicked- ness ; but it is censured only as the wicked act of individuals. I do not recollect in the New Testament any reference to the trade in Slaves. In respect to the inhu- manity 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 have most com- monly 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 re- linquish 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. De Bussy, in 1761, failed of success, because Mr. Pitt demand- ed a cession of more factories on the 329 western side of Africa, than the French minister chose to yield. Those factories were only wanted for the purpose of car- rying 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 considered as im- moral. If, when fairly contemplated, it is found to increase human misery, every man must wish it to be abolished : but the improvement of those parts of America, which are yet uncultivated, will most pro- bably render its abolition impracticable. A Representative Government in Spain will render the re-establishment of the ancien regime in France impossible. No- bles and fanatics may make the attempt, but it will only occasion their own destruc- tion. When, in a former place, I spoke of a Revolution 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 330 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 pro- bably they will be formed into Indepen- dent States, and united with the mother country by a Confederacy. Such an ar- rangement would give more force to the Confederated States of the Spanish Em- pire than they could possess if under one government. Portugal will very soon fol- low her example. What influence must not the L Spanish Revolution have on France? At the com- mencement of this winter, the object of the French Government was confined to the change of the law of Elections, 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 No- blesse the commissions in the army. The assassination of the Duke de Berri induced 331 the French Government to extend their views ; and they have brought forward two other projects ; viz. a bill for re-establish- ing lettres de cachet, and another bill for establishing a censure on the Press. The first project has has been carried into effect; the two Chambers 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 assassin- ation of the Duke de Berri by those publi- cations, 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 nation is opposed to the wishes of the Government. The army, the com- mercial interest, and men of reading and reflection, unite in wishing to preserve a Representative Government in France. The noblesse, the fanatics, and the Bour- bons, oppose them. The strength of the two parties is so unequal, that there can be 332 little doubt which must be overpowered. Revolution will probably soon take place in the Protestant part of Germany ; perhaps even in the Catholic part. England may avert Revolution : but it can only avert it by a Reform of the House of Commons. I will acknowledge, that I have accustomed 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 Suffrage. The new Spanish Constitution seems to hold out something, which approaches very near to Universal Suffrage : it remains to be seen whether 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 Commons ? They certainly will require a more perfect Representation of the Peo- ple. They will be led to call for this, not 333 solely from theoretical reflections, but from their sufferings under that immoderate 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, ha- tred to the Magistracy of Royalty ? 334 CHAP. XVIII. On the Consequences of the Transition from an Agricultural to a Manufacturing and Commercial Character. AT the commencement of the Rebellion, in 1640, England must be considered as an agricultural 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 manufac- ture, except that of woollen. This she owed to the refuge which Queen Eliza- beth had afforded to the manufacturers driven out of the Low Countries by the Duke of Alva. The Navigation Act, esta- blished by Oliver Cromwell, gave the first 335 spring to English commerce ; and from that period to the present day, we have gra- dually relinquished the character of an agricultural, and assumed that of a manu- facturing and commercial nation. From the peace of Aix la Chapelle, in 1748, to the commencement of the seven years war, in 1756, England seems still to have re- tained its agricultural character. The price of corn was low. The Journals of the House of Commons show, that, during that period, a large sum of money was an- nually 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 pre- sume to state how they have produced this change; but I believe they have produced it. They have changed the nature of pro- perty from real to personal ; for the Nation- al Debt, as well as the increased moveable, is all personal property. This transition has changed the national character. Wai- has been so advantageous to many indivi- duals, that the people have been easily de- 336 1 tided into unnecessary 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 con- curred with the ministry 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 station among the other nations of the world. Dividends 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 ex- ceed what the public revenue can pay, they 337 will necessarily be diminished. Whenever this event happens, the distress will be ex- treme. 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 fore- see the effects of that war in which he em- barks his country. We began the crusade against French principles in the year 1793. Did those who began that war expect the consequences which have followed from it? For French principles have most certainly VOL. i. z 338 been established in France ; and will most probably be established in Spain and her Colonies. I believe, that none of those, who excited 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 established there. Did those ministers, who in April 1806 brought forward the doctrine of blockade, intend to establish manufactures in Germany ? Hu- man foresight is too uncertain to justify mi- nisters in risking the happiness of nations by embarking in speculative projects. There is one class of men, whose cha- racter has been remarkably changed by this transition from real to personal property : I mean the Lawyers. I began my attend- ance in Westminister 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. 1 am aware, that this is an opinion not generally entertained of him. 339 Vanity led him to wish to intimate, that he did every thing by genius, 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 certainly 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 failing, which was most prominent in his character, it would be his want of courage : he seemed to me always to stand in fear of Sir Fletcher Norton ; 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 commendable 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 know- ledge 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 z 2 340 had an opportunity 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 possessed 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 opinion, 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 reading and thinking. The books to which they had applied them- selves 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 it was more powerful. When employed by Littleton, 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 subtlety of Locke. 341 I have no doubt, but that you will see upon the bench, in future times, men equal in natural abilities 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 after- wards immersed himself in practice. By the modern mode, he begins with that know- ledge 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 feared, that they will be deficient on great constitutional questions. Lord Somers remarked to King William, that it was of great importance to the crown, that the bench should be filled with Constitu- tional Lawyers. I will now mentkm a few circumstances respecting the characters of those advocates, 342 whom I found in possession of business when I first attended Westminster Hall. Mr. Sergeant Glynn possessed the largest store of legal knowledge. I recollect a con- versation, which I had with Mr. Sergeant 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. Sergeant Glynn ? He answered, " No, every thing which Dunning knew, he knew ac- curately ; but Glynn knew a great deal more." I need scarcely mention Mr. Ser- geant Hill's own character as a lawyer. His death happened so very few years ago, that his legal reputation is known to every one. He was full of knowledge ; but, in convers- ing 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 deci- sions on that branch of the law were founded in folly and injustice. Whenever I con- versed with him on this subject, he became in a very short time so heated, that there was no getting any farther information from him. 343 I have heard the late Mr. Sergeant Walker say, that Mr. Sergeant Prime was the ablest lawyer he had ever known ; and I recollect an anecdote told me by Lord Thurlow respecting this gentleman. Lord Thurlow said, " I drove Mr. Sergeant Prime from the bar, without intending it. I happened to be walking up and down Westminster Hall with him while Dr. Flo- rence Henzey was on his trial in the Court of King's Bench for High Treason. Ser- geant Prime was at that time the King's Prime Sergeant , and as such had prece- dence over all lawyers in the King's Ser- vice. 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 conduct of the trial to Sir Fletcher Norton. I happened," said Lord Thurlow, " to make this remark to Mr. Sergeant Prime : ( It is a little singular, Sir, that I should be walking up and down Westminster Hall with the King's Prime Sergeant, while a trial at bar for High Treason is going on in that Court.' The expression struck him : he felt the affront z 4 344: which had been put on him : he went the next morning, resigned his office, and re- tired from the profession." (Note 26.) There are two other men of the profes- sion, on whom I cannot refrain from making a few observations. I knew them both intimately : I loved them both ; for both were peculiarly kind to me : I mean Mr. Dunning, afterwards Lord Ashburton ; 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 instant : his style of rea- soning 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 consi- dering what answer he should give to an objection taken by his adversary. He had a magniloquentia, which was always impos- ing ; but perhaps neither his style of speak- ing, nor his legal knowledge, nor the powers of his mind, were suited to the common run of Nisi Prius practice. He obtained no inconsiderable share of business in the 9 345 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 Flet- cher Norton. I will give an instance of this, much talked of when I first attended the courts. Mr. Thurlow had to argue against the execution of a power in a marriage settlement : he took three objec- tions ; 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 opi- nion of the court, two or three days after- wards, he did it in these words : " 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 after- wards for several years in the Court of King's Bench, a King's Counsel, almost without business. Soon after he had begun 346 to obtain some degree of practice at the bar, he was put into the House of Com- mons for the Borough of Tarn worth, by Lord Weymouth. 1 have been told, that he was at first heard with very little atten- tion : I saw him afterwards the most pow- erful and the most useful lawyer ever pos- sessed by a minister in that House. He was made Chancellor in 1778 : when the Coalition came into power in the spring of 1783, Mr. Fox deprived him of the Great Seal. . He accompanied this deprivation with circumstances of harshness, which always surprised me : harshness was not congenial to the natural disposition of Mr. Fox ; and there was no personal en- mity 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 deprived of the Great Seal, he and Mr. Pitt had not lived on pleasant terms. I never could discover the cause of this. I recollect 347 Lord Thurlow's having once said to me, " When Mr. Pitt first became Prime Mi- nister, 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." JSvery one knows, that intercourse with Lord North was peculiarly pleasant. 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 authorises him to treat Mr. Pitt with hu- meur. 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 King took the Great Seal from Lord Thurlow, and never concerned him- self 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 recollect 348 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. (Note 27.) 849 CHAR XIX. On tJte Consequences of a King of Great Britain being a German Sovereign. A HE Brunswick family was selected to wear the Crown of England, as the best means of securing us from the return of popery and despotism. The establishment of this family, on the 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 be- lieve he has given us a correct character of him. He tells us, that he was a dull Ger- man gentleman. That he neither under- stood, nor concerned himself about the interests of England ; but that he was well acquainted with the interests of Han- over. One of his first acts, after his ac- 350 cession, was to prevail on the British Parli- ament to purchase for him the Duchies of Bremen and Verden, from the King of Denmark, for the sum of 250,0001. 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 pretence of right, would not be able to keep them. It was, there- fore, a purchase of stolen goods from a thief, who, if we had not purchased, must have abandoned them. It was impolitic : for it rendered 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 guaranteed. I believe the pretence for calling on England 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 deprived of, even if the King of Denmark had kept the territories. During this reign, we were involved in all the mysteries of German politics. We engaged in a war with Spain in 1718, in support of the views of 351 the Emperor of Germany. It was a sub- ject in which Great Britain was wholly un- interested. 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 expression gentleman, might be left out ; for he was sometimes coarse and brutal. The war of 1741 had origin- ated in a dispute with Spain. It might have been begun for British interests : it was continued in consequence of German connexions. 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 Germany. 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 the}- 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 in character as truly a Ger- man 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 enlargement of his Majesty's German do- minions 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 ac- quisitions during the reign of George III. have been more extensive and more im- portant. 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 Minden and principality of East Friesland, have been added to his German 353 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 Osnaburgh, the King, his father, had some right to the acquisition of that Bishopric. But this is a mistake : Os- naburg and Hilde'sheim have both been obtained by acts of injustice. During the thirty years' war, which preceded the treaty of Munster, in 1648, every Protestant Prince in Germany took possession of the dominions of those ecclesiastical princes whom he was able to oppress. I believe, that during that period, the elector of Bran- denburg obtained possession of thirteen ecclesiastical sovereignties, and by the Treaty of Munster he got them annexed to his dominions. A prince of the House of Brunswick Lunenburg had acquired pos- session of the Bishopric of Osnaburg, and wished to have it allotted to him as a tem- poral fief. The Roman Catholic powers saw that it was necessary to resist the views which the Protestant Princes had formed VOL. i A A 354 of secularizing 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 Lutheran ; that the Catholic Bishop should be elected by the chapter, and the Lu- theran 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 nomin- ating the Bishop, and the whole Bishopric secularized in favour of the Elector of Hanover. Those sovereigns who engaged in the crusade against French principles were I have no doubt, as they professed, enemies to the violation of established rights ; or, to use a fashionable expression, they were enemies to the violation of la legitimiifr. Yet, some how or other, it has so happened, that there is scarcely one German Prince, who has been a party in this crusade, who has not violated the rights of his weaker neighbour for his own im- mediate benefit. 355 The British Nation saw with pleasure the probability 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 connexion with Hanover. For as the King's German do- minions are male fiefs, the Princess Char- lotte was not capable of succeeding to them. Our hopes were that time disap- pointed. We now flatter ourselves with a similar hope, from the succession of the daughter of his late Royal Highness the Duke of Kent and Strathern. Should she succeed to the throne, we may have the good fortune 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 advantages which we have obtained from their suc- cession to the Crown of Great Britain. The support of that family on the throne of Great Britain has preserved us from A A 2 356 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 Pro- testants; I mean papal power considered politically. It was to that power that James IL was bigotedly devoted. Had he succeeded in establishing it, despotism must have followed. But every Englishman must feel the advantage which his country would derive, from possessing the Bruns- wick family 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 protected either by Russia or by Austria. If Great Britain is interested in its defence, she be- comes thereby to a certain degree sub- servient to the views of Russia or Austria ; a subserviency which every Englishman must regret. 3- w 5i CHAP. 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 na- tion. I believe, that I am correct in this assertion. He has been reproached with having burnt the will of his father ; Mr. Walpole, in his Reminiscences, gives a de- tailed account of Archbishop Wake's having produced the will at the Council table j of the King's having 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 conduct. The will was really waste paper: for by the A A 3 358 common law, a King of England can dis- pose of no property by will. All his property, whether real or personal, is vested in him in his corporate capacity, and de- volves on his successor. During the reign of Queen Anne a circumstance happened, which made it necessary that this question should be dis- cussed. King William 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 belonged 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 several lawyers who concurred in it. " We the undersigned declare, that we hold it for undoubted law, that jewels, and other personal property of that nature, have ever been by the law of England denominated catalla, Anglice 359 chattels. We also declare, that by the same law of England, jewels and other personal chattels of that nature, which have been purchased by the 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 or her will ; but that they belong solely to that person who is successor to the Crown ; and this law has been established by the opinion of lawyers, and has been ever ap- proved and observed ; and this we well know to be the law, from our own experi- ence, 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 re- cords 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 A A 4 360 named persons, on the 24th December, 1708, Old Style, before me, Tho. Trevor" In the year 1800, I had further occa- sion to consider this subject. Towards the close of the session, Sir John Mit- ford,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 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 appearance 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 sug- gested two points for his consideration. First, " whether the King's personal pro- perty, which was the expression used in the bill, was not too large and too inde- finite ; and I wished him- to consider, 9 361 secondly, whether he intended that, if the King should die without having made a will, his personal property should be dis- tributed to his next of kin, according to the statutes of distribution." In conse- quence 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 certain funds ; and enacting, that in case his Ma- jesty made no will, his personal property should descend according to the course of the common law ; that is to say, to his suc- cessor. I believe I was the only member who made any objections to this bill. I cannot, therefore, say, that it was discussed in the House ; but the objections, which I had taken, made it necessary for me to examine the subject. His late Majesty, King George III., had acted by his grandfather's 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 362 William Duke of Cumberland, son of George II., had applied to the late Mr. Booth, as to the practicability of his re- covering 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. Booths opinion. He complied with my request. Mr. Booth's opinion 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 expression, " that a King of England has, by the common law, no power of be- queathing personal property." 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 fur- nished me with copies of two codicils to the will of the King's English property. I had read in Bub Dodington's Memoirs, the late Earl of Chatham's notion as to the immense personal property of George 363 II. When I read it I thought the sug- gestion 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 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 le- gacies, assigning as a reason, that his per- sonal property was greatly diminished by the expenses of the German war. This codicil contained many very pathetic ex- pressions, 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 Elector of Hanover is re- strained 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 moderate legacy, which he was entitled to under the codicil. George II. had always publicly kept a mistress ; most certainly with the know- ledge of the Queen ; and it was generally believed that his mistresses were chosen by the Queen. I believe Mr. Walpole is right when he says, that the Queen was the woman who had the strongest hold of his affections. I recollect a circumstance mentioned to me by my father, which is a proof of this assertion. The morning after the King's death, my father and Sir Ed- ward Wilmot, who were the only two King's physicians then in town, received an order to be present at the opening of the body, and to report their opinion as to the causes of his Majesty's death. v 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 365 which the body of Queen Caroline was placed, had been constructed in a similar manner ; and his Majesty directed, 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 exactly observed. George IL, while Electoral Prince of Hanover, had served in the Duke of Marl- borough's army, and had given distinguish- ed proofs of personal courage : but I be- lieve that this was the only military quali- fication 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 imitating the various caterwaulings 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 uncommon ta- lent which his friend possessed, and had 366 pressed his Majesty to allow him to place this gentleman behind his chair, one day at dinner, that he might himself judge of his extraordinary power of imitation. The King at last consented : 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. 1 ' If this may not be men- tioned as a proof of the King's good taste, it may 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, " She was a woman of lively, pretty parts. Her death was re- gretted 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 alludes to an opinion, which some people entertained, that she wished to set aside Frederick Prince of Wales, and place William Duke of Cumberland on the throne. She was remarked for insincerity. It was a common saying among the cour- tiers, that they wished his Majesty had less sincerity, and her Majesty more. She seems 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 Robert had the saga- city to discover, that the wife had more in- fluence than the mistress. He often ex- ulted on his superior judgment on this oc- casion ; and used to say, in language some- what coarse, " I took the right sow by the ear." The Queen knew enough of the King's disposition to be sensible, that he 368 >did not choose to part with his money ; and as she never wished to displease his Majesty, Mr. Walpole tells us, that she obtained money from his father without the King's knowledge. I have no doubt that this account was true ; but she had proba- bly other ways of supplying herelf. 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 recommended. Mr. Walpole says, that lady Sundon's influence with Queen Caroline arose, from her being possessed of the secret of her Majesty's being afflicted with a navel rup- ture. I doubt the accuracy of Mr. Wai- pole's opinion on this subject. Before her death the circumstance was generally known. Dr. Sands, a man midwife, sug- gested, 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 circumstances 369 communicated to him by medical men* I have heard him say, that Dr. Mead en- tered a most positive protest against the experiment ; and my father added, that any man a who was acquainted with ana- tomy, must have known that the proposed remedy could by no possibility be of ser- vice, 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 secret must have been abandoned : for the courtiers both male and female were assembled in the antichamber waiting the event. The in- testine 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 operation had succeeded. As soon as the two physicians came out of the Queen's chamber, and VOL. i. B B 370 announced their success, the old Duke of Newcastle, who was among those who waited in the antichamber, ran up to Dr. Sands and hugged him, exclaiming, " You dear creature, the nation can never sufficiently reward you for having saved the life of the most valuable woman in the world !" 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. 371 CHAP. XXI. Reflections on an intended Mamage be- tween Frederick 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 marry Lady Diana Spencer, the grand-daughter 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 pre- vented the design from being carried into effect. If this marriage had taken place, would it have been beneficial or injurious to Great Rritain ? I have already taken notice of the mis- chiefs, which have ensued from Frederick Prince of Wales having married a Princess of Saxe Gotha. It was natural, that this German Princess should wish that her husband should possess the same sort of B B 2 372 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 Jady, he would have degraded himself by thus forming an inferior con- nection ; 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, therefore, by the laws of Germany the marriage would have been a mesalliance, and the children would not have been entitled to succeed to the Electorate of Hanover. But would not this have been a benefit to Great Britain ? We have de- rived many advantages from the Bruns- wick family having been placed on the throne of Great Britain ; but the posses- sion 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 373 sacrificed to the interests of the Elector of Hanover. Of the six wives of Henry VIII., foui were the daughters of his English sub- jects ; 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 with less respect on that ac- count. They were related by blood to many of their subjects ; but this circum- stance never occasioned any prejudice to the country. The House of Brunswick has possessed 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 Ger- many ; and with the exception of the Duke of Sussex, whose health rendered such an education impracticable, they have been educated in the same manner as the younger sons of other German Princes ; that is to say, as German mili- tary. But this is an education not likely to produce those sentiments, which are B B 3 374 suited to an English Prince. Let me sup- pose 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 sur- rounded the throne with nobles interested to guard its rights : his sons would not have been viewed as men drawing main- tenance from the public purse ; as un- necessary, 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 difference which at this time exists between a younger son of the King, and a nobleman of large landed 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 375 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 fa- milies from consanguinity. Let it, however, be remembered, that it would be an influ- ence perfectly consistent with the princi- ples 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 men- tioned, rather than by the possession of great sinecure employments. Under the Plantagenet dynasty, many of our noble families were allied to the crown. Be- tween 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, B B 4 376 that any inconvenience ever arose from these alliances. On the deposition of Richard II. it is scarcely possible, that the title of Mortimer could have been for- gotten ; for he had been publicly recognized as the heir and successor to the crown but a little while before. Henry IV. did not choose to define exactly by what title he claimed the crown. He was, by his mo- ther's side, the heir of the Earls of Lan- caster, who were descended from a bro- ther of King Edward I. Mr. Hume takes notice of a report that had been propa- gated, that this brother of Edward I. was really the elder brother ; and that he had been postponed in the line of succession by his parents, on account of some personal deformity. Whether such report ever had existed before the accession of Henry IV., or whether it was ever much credited, cannot now be ascertained. 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 explana- tion. If the principles, avowed at the Re- volution iii 1688, had been fully recog- 377 nized on the deposition of Richard 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 though him ; and therefore, after Queen Mary's death, Wil- liam III. was preferred, in the succession, to the Princess Anne of Denmark. The same principle was observed in the act of settle- ment, when the Rrunswick family, de- scended from a daughter of James I., was called to the succession before the nearer heirs, descended from Henrietta, Duchess of Orleans, daughter of Charles I. Nor is the principle 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 declaratory of the common law. I am also aware, that though the Scottish 378 Parliament used the word " forfeited," the English Parliament only said, that the King had " abdicated.'* But the word abdicated was certainly used as synony- mous 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 accurately set- tled. And although discontented nobles sometimes set up the title of Mortimer, during the reign of Henry IV., -yet, if the mental derangement of Henry VI., inhe- rited most probably from his maternal grandfather, had not given occasion to the title of Mortimer being brought forward, the same principle of law, which was adopted in 1688, would have been held to have been the law on the deposition of Richard II. ; viz. that a King, whose con- duct has induced a forfeiture of royalty, has forfeited, not for himself alone, but for all who claim the succession as heirs to him. (Note 28.) But the dispute between the houses of York and Lancaster did not result from the numerous alliances of the royal family. It was a question, as to the 379 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 com- mon law of England, a King can do no wrong. I admit this doctrine in its fullest extent ; it is the doctrine of liberty, not of despotism. The meaning of the principle is, that 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 Conquest, we have four instances of Kings who have suffered for their conduct : viz. Edward II., Rich- ard II. , Charles L, 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 justified, except on this principle, that they were punishable 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 380 right of those who were in the line of suc- cession to him was extinguished by the King's misconduct, upon what principle was the Princess Anne of Denmark post- poned in the order of succession to Wil- liam III. ? 381 CHAP. XXIL On the Consequences produced by the personal Character of George IIL GEORGE III. is now no more. This circumstance authorizes us to review his character with the same freedom, as we may that of any of those Monarchs who have preceded him. I have already men- tioned 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 opinion of his cha- racter ; in which, however, the event has shown, that they have been totally mis- 382 taken. They thought, that he was a weak man, and that we should probably have a reign of favouritism. These ideas were en- tertained 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 dex- terity in his choice of the means to ob- tain those objects. So far from his life having been a reign of favouritism, he does not appear ever to have entertained kindness for any minister whom he employed, except for the Earl of Bute : and after he found, that this nobleman wanted the courage necessary for his pur- poses, 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 sovereignty should be exercised in Great Britain in a manner different from that in which she had seen it exercised at 383 her father's court. In Saxe Gotha, sovereignty is property : in Great Britain it is magistracy. In Saxe Gotha, the Sovereign's personal wishes and opinions are to be obeyed, and he is his own minister ; in Great Britain, the Sovereign is to choose for his ministers those, whom he thinks most qualified to advise measures beneficial to the country. If he does not approve of the measures they recommend, he may remove his ministers and appoint others ; but whatever mea- sures are carried into effect, the advisers ought not only to be responsible, but dis- tinctly known and recognized as the advisers. This is not an opinion, which has been only theoretically adopted by those who have treated of the English Constitution ; it has been explicitly declared in Parliament. A statute once existed, enacting, that every measure recommended by the Privy Council should be signed by those Privy Counsellors who advised it. This law sufficiently declared the principles of our Constitution. It completely negatived the idea of the King being his * own minister. But ministers 384 did not choose to have their names so "openly exposed, and the act was repealed. The sentiment, which the Princess Dowager had most anxiously impressed on the King's mind was this, 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 Dowager 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 exercised by the Pelham party over George II. The conduct of that party to her late husband and herself had excited her resentment ; and this resent- ment mingled itself with her political aversion. The wisli to be his own minister, and to exercise his power per- sonally, 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 interval, in which this sen- timent was suspended. The miseries 8 385 occasioned by his reign have all flowed from this source. Like other Monarchs, he was desirous of power. But it was not the desire of becoming a military con- queror, or even of extending his dominions. It was little more than the desire of ap- pearing great in the eyes of his 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 commencement exhibited a struggle be- tween the King's personal wishes, and the opinions of his ostensible 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 in- strument, 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 estab- lishment of the double cabinet ; viz. secret advisers, and ostensible ministers. VOL. i. c c 386 The measure of taxing our American Colonies by the vote of a British Par- liament, was brought forward while Mr. Grenville was the ostensible minister. Whether this measure proceeded from the interior cabinet, or from the ostensible minister, 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 op- posed it were to be ranked as disloyal, and as his enemies ; from this language I eing held long after the death of Mr. Grenville, when his influence must have ceased, men are induced to suspect, 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 beginning of that gentleman's administration it was manifestly his object to increase the public revenue. If the only 387 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 explain 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 hun- dred thousand pounds a-year by the Stamp Act. If revenue alone was his object, it is scarcely credible, that he could have over- looked 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 recom- c c 2 388 mended the Stamp Act. Power and patronage influenced their wishes. I do not pretend to know who were the real advisers of the Stamp Act. Perhaps here- after it may be ascertained. The King dismissed George Grenville, because he found him not sufficiently subservient to his views ; he dismissed the Marquis of Buckingham, 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 mi- nistry, the Earl of Chatham was taken ill ; his illness was of very long continuance, and of such a nature as to preclude him from all intercourse with others on any public business. During this interval 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 Ame- rican Colonies found themselves reduced 389 to the alternative of unconditional submis- sion, or explicit and avowed resistance : they chose the latter. While the King was pursuing this object of reviving the dispute with America, he seems to have employed that maxim of the politician, Divide 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 inter- course, he obtained your confidence, pro- cured from you your opinion of different public characters, and then availed himself of this knowledge to sow dissension." The war began in 1775, and was con- tinued 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 osten- sible 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 Shelburne, the c c 3 minister who had made the peace. The Earl of Shelburne would not submit to the affront: he resigned, and the King found himself 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 ; " Whe- ther it was not possible for him to con- ciliate the King ?" He replied, " No, it is impossible : no man can gain the King." And I believe Mr. Fox's answer was correct. The King must have seen, that Lord Thur- low was devoted to him ; yet he removed 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 regard for him ; but because Mr. Pitt was more necessary to his imme- diate 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 : 7 391 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 guidance of Mr. Burke. But the wrongheadedness, 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 osten- sible minister ; and the general election which followed his appointment completed the downfal of the Coalitionists. I have said, that Mr. Pitt consented to be the King's ostensible 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 generally known. The King had relied, that he could make Mr. Willliam Grenville minister, in case c c 4 392 he was compelled to separate himself from Mr. Pitt. Mr. Pitt determined to deprive the King of this great card. He there- fore suggested to his Majesty, that it was necessary that Mr. Grenville should be placed in the House of Lord. 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 demand. Mr. William Grenville was removed to the house of Lords, and thus the King was deprived of the only man whom hecould 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 character. It was indus- triously propagated, that the moral cha- racter of a King was the circumstance the most to be attended to by his sub- jects. And when the King's eldest son grew up, the contrast between the father and the son was industriously and malevo- lently remarked by every courtier. This operated two ways. It raised the King's 393 character, and depressed that of him who was to be looked to as his successor. The Prince of Wales is now become our Sovereign ; 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 necessary for the Earl of Holdernesse to go abroad. On his return, sickliness had probably render- ed him peevish. He complained of the ascendancy which Mr. Jackson had ob- tained over the mind of the young Prince. Bishop Markham vindicated his assistant ; and the King availed himself of the dis- union to dismiss them all. I consider the removal of Mr. Jackson as a national cala- mity. I knew him well. He was a man of a master 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 394 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 fifteenth year when the Earl of Hol- dernesse, Bishop Markham, and Mr. Jack- son, 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 pos- sessed by those who had the care of him from his earliest years. But the men who succeeded were wholly unequal to the charge; and the Prince's education was terminated. The Princess Dowager of Wales had kept the King out of society. The pretence was the preservation of his morals. The King seems to have had the same ideas respecting the Prince of Wales; not recollecting, that, as his preceptors were removed, the remaining part of his education must depend on his companions. There was another circumstance in the King's conduct towards the Prince, equally 395 . unfortunate. When his Royal Highness came of age, an establishment was assigned to him far beyond what could be supported by the very moderate income which was allowed him. This occasioned him to con- tract 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 every where active in contrasting the regularity of the King's life with the indis- cretions of the Prince. On the establish- ment 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 charac- ter 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 pro- perty from the hour of his birth. When he came of age, the Prince was put in pos- session of the revenues of this Duchy. But the Prince obtained no part of that 396 revenue, which had been received from the Duchy during his minority. A different treatment was shown to the Duke of York. When he came of age, the whole revenue received 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 Par- liament to be passed, authorizing him to grant leases of the Prince's lands in Corn- wall for ninety-nine years, determinable upon lives ; for these leases the King re- ceived fines during the Prince's minority, to the amount I believe of about two hun- dred and fifty thousand pounds. What a difference would it have made to the Prince, if, when he came of age, estates in possession had been delivered up to him, instead of reversions expectant on leases for ninety-nine years, with small rents re- served. Even this sum of two hundred and fifty thousand pounds received by the King for the leases which he had granted, Chough obviously an inadequate compen- sation, was not paid over to the Prince. It may be said, perhaps, that the King re- ceived this power from Parliament. I ad- mit 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 es- tates. 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 Commons in the reign of Henry IV. Richard II. had granted away many of the estates of the Duchy of Cornwall. The House of Com- mons took notice of this, and sent up a bill to the House of Lords, requesting their concurrence in a bill for the restora- tion of these lands to Prince Henry, after- wards 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 offi- cers of the crown to commence suits against the possessors of these lands on be- half of the Prince : the address was com- plied with, and the lands were recovered for the Prince. In the suit subsequently instituted, in the reign of James I. by his 398 son Prince Henry, for lands part of the Duchy of Cornwall, which had been im- providently granted away by Queen Eliza- beth, though the proceedings were only in a court of law, the same doctrine seems to have been adopted ; viz. that the estates of the Prince of Wales were as much under the protection of Parliament as the de- mesnes of the crown. I am aware that it will be said, the Prince of Wales after- wards received 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 shame- fully inadequate. But what would have been the different situation of the Prince, if he had received even this sum in 1783, when he came of age, instead of receiving it in 1803 ? In mentioning the subject, one can scarcely refrain from contrasting 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 immedi- ate possession of all its revenues. He at the same time invested him for his life in 399 the Principality of Wales, and the Earl- dom of Chester, with the immediate pos- session of their revenues. The reason as- signed in our law-books for this conduct is, because the King's son coruscat patris ra- diis. Edward III. saw with pleasure the at- tention of his subjects attracted towards his son and future successor. German sen- timents prevented George III. from feeling this delight. Mr. Pitt was completely established in the situation 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 apprehensions were probably increased. The French Revolution burst forth in 1789. George III. saw the consequences which this Revolution was likely 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 princi- 400 pies, there will not be a King left in Eu- rope in a few years." But Mr. Pitt had sufficient control over the King to restrain him from embarking in war against France. It was not till the end of the year 1792 that Mr. Pitt's influence on this subject was over- ruled. At the close of that year, Mr. Burke prevailed on the great Whig families to de- clare 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 prin- ciples was commenced. 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 Inqui- sition 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. Probably they are not so numerous as they were in 1815. They were then uncontrollable. They openly murdered General Ram el, the Commander of the King's forces in this town. I believe other generals in the service of Louis XVIII. 401 experienced the same fate in other parts of France. The Missionaries openly preach the necessity of restoring confiscated pro- perty to the church ; and their discourses have much influence on the common peo- ple. While it is known, that two such bo- dies of men are kept on foot, can it be be- lieved, 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 Na- tion will never consent to the re-establish- ment of old abuses. (Note 29.) The contest is begun in Spain : the army, the commercial interest, and men of learn- ing, are united in the demand of a Consti- tution, and the assembly of the Cortes. They are opposed by the King, the priest- hood, and a large proportion of the nobles. Most probably a free Constitution will ter- minate the contest. Kings and nobles ought to recollect, that the United States of America have now acquired that degree of importance, that the opinions of the in- habitants of that country must necessarily VOL. i. DP 402 influence the opinions of the inhabitants of Europe. The Spanish Colonies in America will probably soon form a Go- vernment similar to that of the United States. Let Kings and Nobles also recol- lect, that every effort, which has hitherto been made to stop French principles, has only contributed to strengthen their growth. During five months, in the years 1788-9, Royalty in Great Britain existed only in abeyance. This was a misfortune. Should along minority take place, before the House of Commons is made the representative of the intelligence and opulence of the coun- try, Oligarchy or Revolution will most pro- bably be our lot. There is another circum- stance which deserves the consideration of Kings. It has been generally supposed, that standing armies form the surest sup- port of royal power : but this is not always the case: the French Revolution was ef- fected by the army. If Spain succeeds in establishing a free Constitution, she will be indebted for it to her army. 1 have said, that George III. had not *2 403 the wisli to be a military conqueror. Some perhaps may think that the acquisitions in India prove this opinion to be erroneous. But let it be remembered, that the acquisi- tions in India were not the work of the King, or even of the British Nation. The civil and military servants of the India Company derived immediate wealth to themselves from every new conquest. They suggested, that the newly-acquired domi- nion would yield an increase 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 expence. The conquests in India are the acquisitions of a trading company, pirate et boutiquiere, 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 D D 2 404 reign his attention was drawn to his Ger- man sovereignty. His younger sons were sent to Germany, and educated like the sons of other German Princes. 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 embarassments. In his children George III. was peculiar- ly fortunate. For of fifteen, only two died in their infancy. Of the remaining thir- teen, every man in private life would have been proud. I will add but one reflection more. Few Kings have ever reigned, whose personal character and personal wishes have operated such important changes. 405 CHAP. XXIII. On the Three Kings of the Brunswick Race. THREE reigns of Princes of the Brunswick family have passed away. During the reign of George L, 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 Munster 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 infringe- ments of the rights of German Princes 406 which have since followed. The British Parliament paid two hundred and fitly thou- sand pounds for this acquisition. The loss of the friendship of Sweden, which was the consequence of this act of injustice, was an injury to the interests of Great Britain of much more importance. 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 1781, Sir George Byng, an English Ad- miral, destroyed the Spanish Fleet. The gallantry of this achievement was much applauded, but without 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 de- clared between Spain and Great Britain. The measure was adopted to promote the views of the House of Austria in Sicily. (Note 30.) 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 engaged in 407 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 Han- over as had been shown by his predeces- sors. As he had never been in Hanover, he did not feel that predilection, which is the result of early habits ; and he had been educated to dislike the German war, be- cause it was the measure of his grandfather. But he gradually became a German Prince. To that country he sent his younger sons for education. From that country their wives were to be brought ; and when the French Revolution broke out, the danger of its example affecting other Govern- ments, 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 Bri- tain, by the pressure of those taxes, which have been imposed to support his unneces- sary wars, has almost absorbed every other consideration. Yet the People of England have not abandoned the wish of being se- parated from Hanover. This led them to 408 see with pleasure the prospect of the suc- cession of the Princess Charlotte. In that hope they have been disappointed. Should the daughter of the late Duke of Kent suc- ceed to the Crown, their wishes may be re- alized. THE END. LONDON : Printed !>}' A. & R. Spottiswoodc, .\c\v-Slrc't-S(|iKirc. A 000035445