CHAPTER IV.

Indulgence to Murray revoked--Changes in the Establishment of the young Prince of Wales--Bubb Doddington--Chief Justice Willes--Dr. Lee--Promotions and resignations--The Naturalization Bill thrown out--Character of William Pitt, first Earl of Chatham, and of Mr. Henry Fox--New Appointments in the Household of Prince George--Breach of privilege--Lord Middlesex appointed Master of the Horse to the Princess--The Duke of Cumberland and the Regency--The Pelhams espouse the interests of the Princess--Resentment of the Duke of Cumberland--General Anstruther’s Cause.

April 2d.--Mr. Cooke moved in a very thin House, and late in the day, to have Mr. Murray taken into the custody of the Serjeant at Arms, on account of his bad health. It was agreed to, and ordered that the Speaker should give permission to whomever he thought proper to visit him.

Lord Lincoln was made Auditor of the Exchequer, in the room of the Earl of Orford,[86] who was just dead. Mr. Pelham had affected to be willing to retire with this post, which is at least eight thousand pounds a year, and a sinecure for life. The King desired him not to take it himself, and that dutiful Minister obeyed; that is, he held it in the name of Lord Lincoln,[87] who was his nephew and son-in-law, adopted heir to the Duke of Newcastle, and the mimic of his fulsome fondnesses and follies, but with more honour and more pride. As the Duke, his uncle, was a political weathercock, he was a political weatherglass; his quicksilver being always up at insolence, or down at despair. Lyttelton asked to be Cofferer, if Lord Lincoln resigned it. Mr. Pelham told him that, from his and Pitt’s behaviour this winter, the King would do nothing for him.

3rd.--Palmer the deputy Serjeant-at-arms, reported to the House that Dr. Lamont, who the day before had represented Murray as ill of the jail distemper, told him that the prisoner had been in a sweat, and must not be removed; besides, that there was danger of the motion causing a return of his vomiting; and that on acquainting Mr. Murray with the indulgence of the House, he replied, “He would not come out of Newgate, and that it was mean and paltry in that puppy, his brother, or any of his friends to petition for his enlargement.” The House sent for Dr. Lamont, examined him again, and then voted a total revocation of the preceding indulgence.

4th.--The King went again to see the Princess, and settled with her the new Governor and Preceptors for the children. Lord North[88] had lately been entrusted with the care of Prince George, with the promise of an Earldom; an amiable worthy man, of no great genius, unless compared with his successor. The Pelhams, who had now laid a plan of perpetuating that power, which by so many accidents had dropped into their hands, determined to beset the young Prince entirely with their own creatures. Lord North was removed to make way for Lord Harcourt,[89] who wanted a Governor himself, as much as the Duke of Newcastle was likely to do by parting with Stone, who was to be the real engine of their policy, while Lord Harcourt, who was civil and sheepish, did not threaten them with traversing their scheme, or teaching the young Prince other arts than what he knew himself--hunting and drinking. Stone,[90] lately grown a personal favourite with the King during the journeys to Hanover, was a dark, proud man, very able and very mercenary. The other Preceptor was Hayter, Bishop of Norwich, a sensible, well-bred man, natural son of Blackbourn, the jolly old Archbishop of York, who had all the manners of a man of quality, though he had been a Buccaneer and was a Clergyman; but he retained nothing of his first profession except his seraglio. Lord Hartington had been offered the government of the Prince, but declined it.

The late Prince’s debts, which were supposed very great, were extremely denied, and concealed as carefully as they would have been vaunted by those who had laid that foundation of their future advancement, if he had lived to be King. The Hanoverians, who were said to have lent him considerable sums, took care not to be the most clamorous for repayment. All who had flattered themselves with rising in his reign, by being so insignificant at present as to have no other support, were extremely disappointed at losing their only prospect. Some Peerages were still-born, more First-ministerships, and sundry regiments and inferior posts. Drax, his Secretary, who could not write his own name; Lord Baltimore, who, with a great deal of mistaken knowledge, could not spell; and Sir William Irby, the Princess’s Polonius, were to be Barons. Doddington,[91] it is said, had actually kissed his hand for the reversion of a Dukedom. This man, with great knowledge of business, much wit, and great parts, had, by mere absurdity of judgment, and a disposition to finesse, thrown himself out of all estimation, and out of all the great views which his large fortune and abilities could not have failed to promote, if he had but preserved the least shadow of steadiness. He had two or three times alternately gone all lengths of flattery with Sir Robert Walpole and the Prince of Wales. The latter and he had met again at last in a necessary connexion, for no party would have anything to do with either.[92]

Lord Chief Justice Willes was designed for Chancellor. He had been raised by Sir Robert Walpole, though always brow-beaten by haughty Yorke, and hated by the Pelhams, for that very attachment to their own patron. As Willes’s nature was more open, he returned their aversion with little reserve. He was not wont to disguise any of his passions. That for gaming was notorious; for women, unbounded. There was a remarkable story current of a grave person’s coming to reprove the scandal he gave, and to tell him that the world talked of one of his maid servants being with child. Willes said, “What is that to me?” The monitor answered, “Oh! but they say that it is by your Lordship.” “And what is that to you?” He had great quickness of wit, and a merit that would atone for many foibles, his severity to, and discouragement of that pest of society, Attorneys: hence his Court was deserted by them; and all the business they could transport, carried into the Chancery, where Yorke’s filial piety would not refuse an asylum to his father’s profession.

The Council forgetting that it was the Duke’s birth-day, appointed the 15th for the Prince’s funeral, but changed it to the 13th, when it was performed with the usual state.

Dr. Lee[93] was made Treasurer to the Princess, against the inclination of the Pelhams; but the Duke of Newcastle soon began to pay such court to him, and he to be so pleased with it, that they were satisfied. He was a man of great integrity, and had preserved it through all the late changes. His election to be Chairman of the Committee of Privileges and Elections was the first instance of Sir Robert Walpole’s declining power; he had been made a Lord of the Admiralty by Lord Granville and Lord Bath, and had resigned with the former, notwithstanding great offers from his antagonists. The Prince had designed him for Chancellor of the Exchequer, a post for which he was little qualified; for though he was a speaker of great weight in Parliament, which was set off with a solemn harmonious voice, and something severe in his style, his business of civilian had confined him to too narrow a sphere for the extensive knowledge of men that is requisite to a Prime Minister.

16th.--Lord Waldegrave[94] was made Warden of the Stannaries in the room of T---- P----, a bad man; never was ill-nature so dull as his, never dullness so vain. Lord Waldegrave on the contrary, had complaisance enough to have covered folly or ill-nature, though in him it only concealed a very good understanding, and made his good-nature the less observed. He was a personal favourite of the King, who had long wished for an opportunity to serve him. Potter resigned his employment of Secretary to the Princess, which was restored to Cresset, who was her chief favourite, and related to the Royal Family by a Duchess of Zelle,[95] who had come from somewhere in the provinces of France. Scott was continued a Sub-preceptor.

The Naturalization Bill was thrown out at nine o’clock at night on the third reading, by 129 to 116. The Duke of Bedford’s people had staid away; the Wiltshire members, the Welsh, and the Tories to a man were against it. Pitt and Fox had again some sparring: people could not help smiling to see Cæsar and Pompey squabbling, when they had nothing to say.

Pitt[96] was undoubtedly one of the greatest masters of ornamental eloquence. His language was amazingly fine and flowing; his voice admirable; his action most expressive; his figure genteel and commanding. Bitter satire was his forte: when he attempted ridicule, which was very seldom, he succeeded happily; when he attempted to reason, poorly. But where he chiefly shone, was in exposing his own conduct: having waded through the most notorious apostasy in politics, he treated it with an impudent confidence, that made all reflections upon him poor and spiritless, when worded by any other man. Out of the House of Commons he was far from being this shining character. His conversation was affected and unnatural, his manner not engaging, nor his talents adapted to a country, where Ministers must court, if they would be courted.

Fox,[97] with a great hesitation in his elocution, and a barrenness of expression, had conquered these impediments and the prejudices they had raised against his speaking, by a vehemence of reasoning, and closeness of argument, that beat all the orators of the time. His spirit, his steadiness, and humanity procured him strong attachments, which the more jealous he grew of Pitt, the more he cultivated. Fox always spoke to the question, Pitt to the passions: Fox, to carry the question; Pitt, to raise himself: Fox pointed out, Pitt lashed the errors of his antagonists: Pitt’s talents were likely to make him soonest, Fox’s to keep him First Minister longest.

17th.--The Earls of Harcourt and Hertford moved an Address of Condolence to the Princess in the House of Lords; Lord Downe in the Commons.

18th.--Lord Sussex, Lord Robert Bertie, and Lord Downe were appointed Lords of the Bedchamber to Prince George; Peachy, Digby, and Schutz, Grooms. Old John Selwyn[98] (who had succeeded to the confidence of Lord Townshend, Sir Robert Walpole, and Mr. Pelham, as they succeeded one another in power, and had already laid a foundation with Mr. Fox) was appointed Treasurer to the Prince, as he and his son were already to the Duke and Princesses. He was a shrewd silent man, humane, and reckoned very honest--he might be so--if he was, he did great honour to the cause, for he had made his court and his fortune with as much dexterity as those who reckon virtue the greatest impediment to worldly success.

Anstruther’s affair came on. George Townshend moved to address the King to enforce the sentence of the Privy Council, and oblige him to make compensation to those he had oppressed and despoiled. Mitchell opposed the Motion; Pitt spoke well in behalf of it, and it was agreed to without a division; and the further consideration deferred to the Wednesday following.

Sir John Molesworth and Sir Robert Burdett, two Tory members, complained to the House of having been carried by a Constable to St. Martin’s roundhouse as they were walking home, and kept there all night. At five in the morning, Carne, the High Constable, who had been very active against Lord Trentham, offered to release them on promise of their taking no revenge, which they refused. The Constable was taken into custody, and Carne too, after a short debate, the Whigs being very zealous to vindicate the honour of the Tory members against a Tory High Constable. He was released the next day.

Bathurst[99] and Joddrell were continued Attorney and Solicitor to the Princess. Bathurst was an unpleasant, but sometimes a good speaker. Joddrell was a very rising man, but died soon after, and was succeeded by Henley, who was a lawyer in vogue, but his abilities did not figure in proportion to the impudence of his ill-nature. Douglas and Boone (in the room of Sir John Cust, who was soon after restored on the death of Douglas) were named to the Green Cloth, and Bloodworth had the sole direction of the Stables. The King offered the Princess a Master of the Horse, but told her it must be a Nobleman, and there was one to whom he had an objection: This was Lord Middlesex.[100] She desired none; if she had been disposed to contend, it would not have been of all men in favour of the Lord in question. His figure, which was handsome, had all the reserve of his family, and all the dignity of his ancestors. He was a poet, too, because they had been poets. As little as he came near them in this talent, it was what he most resembled them in, and in what he best supported their honour. His passion was the direction of operas, in which he had not only wasted immense sums, but had stood lawsuits in Westminster Hall with some of those poor devils for their salaries. The Duke of Dorset had often paid his debts, but never could work upon his affections; and he had at last carried his disobedience so far, in complaisance to, and in imitation of the Prince, as to oppose his father in his own boroughs. That Duke,[101] with the greatest dignity in his appearance, was in private the greatest lover of low humour and buffoonery. He had early lost the hearts of the Whigs by some indirect connexions with Lord Oxford in the end of Queen Anne’s reign; and he was never thought to have wanted a tendency to power, in whatever hands it was, or was likely to be lodged.

The people had idly imagined that advantage would be made of the youth of the Prince’s children to raise the Duke to the Throne. Nobody had doubted but he must be Protector if the King should die during their minority. All the precedents ran in his favour, except two Acts which had never taken place, made in the reign of King Henry the Eighth, for appointing Anne Boleyn and Jane Seymour Regents during the eventual minorities of their respective children. No woman had ever yet been Regent in a minority. Even the Black Prince’s widow, though of the most distinguished virtue and character, though an English woman, and of the Blood Royal of England herself, was passed over, and her son regented by his uncles. The King, who never thought of disturbing the right order of succession, and who grew a little jealous of the Duke the moment he had lost his other son, had, immediately on the Prince’s death, proposed to have the future Regency settled by Parliament.

The Duke of Bedford, though connected with, and wishing well to the Duke, and upon no terms with the Princess, had the honesty to be the first man that declared for her being Regent. The Pelhams took care not to disagree with him on this article. The Duke[102] had broke entirely with the Duke of Newcastle towards the end of the war, when Lord Sandwich having been ordered to communicate a new plan to Count Kaunitz, had desired to be excused, but the orders being repeated, he had obeyed artfully. The Duke thought him in the wrong, and had received his consent to say everything that might reconcile him to the Duke of Newcastle, but that he thought himself in the wrong. The Duke of Newcastle had neither accepted nor refused the Duke’s mediation, who was not apt to pardon slighter offences than contempt. He loved indiscriminate submission; flattery did not come up to his ideas of obedience, and consequently he overlooked it: but the least opposition he never forgave. With the most heroic bravery, he had all the severity that levels valour to cowardice, and seemed to love war for itself, without feeling the passions that it gratifies.

It is certain that his martial genius did not proceed from love of glory, nor much from ambition. Glory he despised, saying, “That when he was most popular, the satisfaction was allayed, by thinking on Admiral Vernon!”[103] and he had taken every step to make himself unpopular both with the people and the Army; and thought it so much beneath his rank to have any share in the Ministry, that he would not be of the Cabinet Council, and even when desired to attend their consultations for the Expedition to Port L’Orient, he would not vouchsafe to give his opinion, but confined himself to answering their questions. His strongest principle was the dignity of the Blood Royal, and his maxim to bear anything from his brother if he had lived to be King, rather than set an example of disobedience to the royal authority. These prejudices and this pride were the swellings of his heart and temper, not the errors of his head, for his understanding was strong, judicious, and penetrating, though incapable of resisting partialities and piques, of which he was susceptible from the slightest merit, or most trifling offence. He was as angry at an Officer’s transgressing the minutest precept of the military rubric as at deserting his post, and was as intent on establishing the form of spatter-dashes, or the pattern of cockades, as on taking a town, or securing an advantageous situation.

The misfortunes[104] the nation had suffered from his inexperience while he commanded in Flanders had been amply atoned by his defeating the Rebels in Scotland; but that victory made him in the end more unpopular than all his defeats; for the Scotch, the Jacobites, and his brother’s jealousy never rested till they had propagated such stories of his tyranny and severity, as entirely lost him the hearts of the nation. He bore that hatred mildly, and said, “That so far from resenting it (though he did not know, since he came from Flanders, that he had deserved either praise or blame) he should always with gratitude remember the behaviour of the English, who received him with transports after the battle of Laffelt, instead of impeaching him.” It is said, that after the loss of that day, an English captive telling a French Officer, that they had been very near taking the Duke prisoner, the Frenchman replied, “We took care of that; he does us more service at the head of your Army.” General Legonier,[105] who, by an action of the most desperate gallantry, had prevented the total destruction of our troops in that battle, and almost made Marshal Saxe doubt of his victory, was never kindly treated by the Duke afterwards. Hawley,[106] his executioner, who had been beat at Falkirk by his own arrogance and obstinacy, was always in his favour. He despised money, fame, and politics; loved gaming, women, and his own favourites, and yet had not one sociable virtue.

The Pelhams taking advantage of this national antipathy to the Duke; of their own superiority in Parliament, which was now enforced by the greatest part of the late Prince’s faction; and of a Hanoverian regulation, by which the nearest male relation must be Administrator of that Electorate during a minority, and consequently the Duke’s presence necessary there, even if the King of Prussia should not pretend to the Government in case of his absence, yet as so formidable a neighbour would be too dangerous to an infant Elector, an apprehension that they well knew would easily make its way into the King’s breast, where hatred and fear of his nephew were already sufficiently implanted; by these arts and insinuations they worked upon the King to nominate the Princess, Regent, with a Council; and the Lord Chancellor was deputed from the King to communicate the plan to the Duke. He went in a great fright: the Duke read the scheme, and asked if he must send an answer. The Chancellor hesitated, and did not make a direct reply. However, the Duke desired “He would return his duty and thanks to the King for the communication of the plan of Regency;” and said, “For the part allotted to me, I shall submit to it, because he commands it, be that Regency what it will!” The Duke bad Mr. Fox tell Mr. Pelham this answer, and remember the word _submit_; adding, “It was a material word; the Chancellor will remember it, however he reports it.”

The Duke felt the force of this treatment in the most sensible manner, and lamented himself in moving terms with his intimates, wishing “the name of William could be blotted out of the English annals;” and saying, “He now felt his own insignificance, when even Mr. Pelham would dare to use him thus!”

From this moment he openly declared his resentment to the two brothers, and professed being ready to connect with, nay, to forgive any man, who would oppose them, even Lord Granville, who was not at all unwilling to overset their power, though till that could be done conveniently, he thought it as well to unite with them. Lord Granville had, during his short and precipitate Ministry, offended the Duke, not only by negotiating a match for him with the King of Denmark’s sister, to favour some of the King’s German views, but had treated him roughly enough, on his expressing an aversion to that marriage, and had told him, he must be taught his duty to his father. The Duke consulted Sir Robert Walpole, then retired from business, how to avoid this wedding. Sir Robert advised him to seem willing to consent, provided the King would immediately make him a large settlement. The Duke took the advice, and had no reason to repent it. The King would not part with his money, as Sir Robert Walpole had foreseen, even to purchase advantages for Hanover.

A mortification of a slighter sort followed soon after the Regency Bill, that showed the Duke in what light he had appeared at his brother’s Court. Prince George making him a visit, asked to see his apartment, where there are few ornaments but arms. The Duke is neither curious nor magnificent. To amuse the boy, he took down a sword and drew it. The young Prince turned pale and trembled, and thought his uncle was going to murder him. The Duke was extremely shocked, and complained to the Princess of the impressions that had been instilled into the child against him.

23rd--Mr. Pelham proposed some further restrictions on the sale of Gin; slight ones indeed for so enormous an evil! They were ratified.

24th.--General Anstruther’s cause came on, and several witnesses attended, according to the orders of the House. Sir Henry Erskine moved to call in Brigadier Ofarel. Sir William Yonge objected to it, saying, “He knew that what he was going to propose would be disagreeable both to the gentleman who had brought the charge, and to the gentleman accused; but that it concerned the honour of the whole House, and therefore he must first desire to know of the gentlemen of the Law, whether the crimes specified were not comprehended within the pardon of the late Act of Grace.” Sir Henry Erskine protested that he had no vindictive motive, but that he must desire to have his cause heard; and asked whether the Act of Grace was not known, or had not been mentioned before, that now he was prepared to prove his accusation, he was to be put off in this injurious manner? General Anstruther agreed with him in desiring to have the cause heard, which he affirmed was a malicious, false, and scandalous accusation, particularly in charging him with subornation of witnesses, of which, he said, none could be guilty but they who charged it on others.

The Attorney-General said, “He must enter his protest against complaints in these circumstances; that there were two very striking in this complaint; one, that the charge exhibited was of a private nature; the other, that the facts alleged were previous in time to the Act of Indemnity. That the House of Commons is not a Court of Appeal; that this ‘is’ a case of false imprisonment; that there are neither general nor particular words in the Act of Grace to except it; that no punishment can follow, even if the General should be convicted, and we should address for it. That the two Houses of Parliament can have no mental reservation to pardon for the King, and not for themselves; and, lastly, that the House of Commons is not a Court of Inquiry into the characters of its own members.” Sir Henry Erskine said, “That he supposed Anstruther had been apprised of this objection, or he would not have used such epithets on the charge, if he had believed the witnesses would be heard, who would prove the allegations; but that he yet could furnish crimes, from which the Act of Grace would not screen him.”

Lord George Sackville[107] said, “The Officers were concerned to have this affair inquired into; that if the General did not disculpate himself, could Officers with honour serve under him? that he was sensible of the difficulty of not being able to punish him; and therefore would give his negative to calling in Ofarel, but proposed to have Anstruther tried by a Board of General Officers.” Henley (the profession out-weighing the faction in him) declared the House could exercise no jurisdiction in this case, where the crimes were misdemeanours; and that even if both parties should consent to go before a Judge, he would be bound ex-officio to dismiss the complaint. Lord Strange,[108] a busy young Lord, very disinterested, often quick, as often injudicious, and not the less troublesome for either, proposed at least to declare, that the Act of Grace was the reason of not proceeding; and that if the House would take no cognizance of this affair, it might be heard by the Board of Officers. Nugent, too, was tender of infringing the Act of Grace, and sorry if he had been one to call improperly on Sir Harry to make the charge. He said, “He had been told that offences against the Mutiny Bill were to be pardoned only from the year 43, but that the crimes in question were antecedent to that era; if not, that the accused must plead the Act. That for himself he should vote for Lord George’s Motion.”

Anstruther said, “I plead nothing as to the Act of Grace, but desire the House to take it into their consideration.” Sir Richard Loyd, a lawyer, said, “This was a misdemeanour, and a pardoned one; that the prosecution of it now would affect numbers. An angry court would have acted so formerly; should a House of Commons act with such narrow microscopic eyes? We want no pardon; many of our constituents may. An Act of Grace does not merely take away punishment, but restores a criminal so fully, that to call a pardoned Rebel perjured, he would have an action. But it is said, we may inspect: for what end, if no consequence can follow? The Clergy took this up once, on the misbehaviour of one of their own body, from whom they would have taken orders, saying, they could not serve with him; but the King’s Bench deeming it a punishment, would not suffer it. In the reign of James II. a Mr. Bayne was sequestered by the House for his unworthiness; but was restored to his seat by an Act of Grace. If you have a mind to hear angry words for some hours, without doing anything, you certainly may, but his offence is neither against the Mutiny Bill, nor within the excepted term; nor can he, being included within the Act of Grace, wave the advantage of it.” He concluded, begging pardon of the House with a sneer, for endeavouring to stop an inquiry.

Mr. W. Pitt said that if he had wanted information upon the Act of Grace, he should have fully received it, though he had never thought of infringing that; but that he had been desirous of inquiring into the nature of the General’s tyranny, in order to new model the Mutiny Bill, if it were necessary. That he wanted to see the minutes of the Court-Martial for information, not for foundation of a criminal prosecution. That without the impediment of the Act of Grace, he should be against calling in Ofarel, as the business of the House was not to hear causes that are without our jurisdiction, but to find deficiencies in our laws, and remedies for them. That, if this infringed the liberty of two members, at least it was relative to what had happened before they were so. That he had perceived there was something in the dark, yet had not been the loudest to call for what others, whose situation was more connected with military matters, might know better. That to send this to a Board of Officers would be constituting the crime anew: that all he desired was, that Governors in our Plantations and Foreign Garrisons might know that the prosecution of this affair was stopped by the Act of Grace, and might tremble for the future. The hint towards the latter end of the speech was levelled at Fox, the Secretary at War, an employment that Pitt professed wishing to have preferably to Paymaster, though the latter ‘was’ so much more considerable in profit, as it would give him an introduction to the closet; the very reason why the King had refused it to him. Pitt was so much mortified at the King’s never speaking to him, that above a year before this the Pelhams had with great difficulty obtained a word to him at the levee.

Sir John Mordaunt, an Officer of gallantry, with some wit, said, he had early spoke his mind for hearing this cause, and had come determined to hear the witnesses, but had changed his opinion, because of the impropriety there would be of letting him continue a member if he was proved guilty, an objection that would hold equally against trying him by a Board of General Officers; a trial that he disliked, as to clear the reputation of soldiers, he wished to have them tried by any but Officers. That he saw the Crown would be under the same difficulties as the House, and therefore he agreed with Lord Strange’s motion for declaring the Act of Grace the impediment. Fazakerley, a tiresome Jacobite lawyer, was clear that he was comprized within the general pardon; and yet for the honour of the House was for doing something, and that something was to try him, that the King might not trust him any longer.

Mr. Pelham said, “That if he were for trying him by a Board of Officers, he should not be hindered by the Act of Grace, which had been originally his opinion as the properest way of carrying the cause before the King; but that it must now rest here, as all the lawyers were agreed on its being a violation of the general indemnity. That so far from desiring with Fazakerley that the King should remember it, he wished the whole case could be obliterated; and that this might go no further between the two persons, whom he begged to bury in oblivion their private resentments, as the House was obliged to do those of the public.” The Speaker took up this, observed on the harsh words that had passed, and desired they would be publicly reconciled. Sir Henry Erskine answered, “The General gave the offence.” The General replied, “I gave no offence: I said the accusation was false and malicious; does not my very denial of the charge say the same?” The Chair insisted on their engaging to carry this quarrel no further; to which Anstruther answered, “I shall take no further notice.” The Speaker said, “Do you give your honour?” Anstruther; “I do.” Sir Harry Erskine said pertly, “I thought he would have made an apology.” Sir William Yonge interrupted him, and told him, he must not enter into a discussion of what had passed; and the Chair insisted on Sir Harry’s giving the proper assurances; on which Sir Harry at last said dryly, “I give my honour in consequence.” Lord Strange then repeated his Motion for a declaration of the reasons of not proceeding.

Mr. Fox told him, “He was sorry to hear such a Motion after so wise a conclusion; and that it would be giving a reason for all, which was not the reason of many. That the accusation was nothing before reduced to writing; that he still thought it a frivolous affair; that it could not be said Sir Harry was unwilling to present the charge, as he had repeated the accusation day after day; that Anstruther could call it nothing but false or true; that he had frequently been intreated by the General to get the cause heard; and would now give him a word of comfort, that he had thought him much more guilty before the charge was presented--‘and’ now did not think him guilty of a thousandth part of what he had been accused. That as to the Motion, no vote ever passes for a single reason; that this would be introducing a new practice; and he concluded with asking whether the House would permit Anstruther to enter upon the Journals a complaint against the charge?” Sir Henry Erskine said to that, “That there were accusations in the answer as well as in the charge.” General Oglethorpe[109], of whom it was uncertain whether he was a Whig or a Jacobite, whether very brave or a coward, for he had fought several duels, and had run away in the Rebellion; very certain that he was a troublesome and tiresome speaker, though even that was now and then tempered with sense; took notice that if it were mentioned in the votes that the Act of Grace had been read apropos to this Debate, it would sufficiently explain without a further comment why the affair was dropped. Lord Strange owned himself content with this remark, and withdrew his Motion. The House adjourned at half an hour after eight.

FOOTNOTES:

[86] Robert Walpole, the second Earl of Orford, Auditor of the Exchequer, Master of the Fox-hounds, Ranger of Richmond New Park, and Knight of the Bath, died in March, 1751.

[87] Henry Clinton, Earl of Lincoln, Cofferer, and one of the Lords of the Bedchamber to the King. His mother was sister to the Duke of Newcastle and Mr. Pelham; and he married Mr. Pelham’s eldest daughter, and had the Duke of Newcastle’s estate entailed upon him. He was created a Knight of the Garter in 1752; became Duke of Newcastle in 1768, and died 1794.

[88] Francis Lord North and Guildford, one of the Lords of the Bedchamber to the Prince; created Earl of Guildford in 1752.

[89] Simon Lord Viscount Harcourt, one of the Lords of the Bedchamber to the King; created Earl in 1751.

[90] Andrew Stone, son of a banker, private secretary to the Duke of Newcastle. His younger brother had lately been raised to the Primacy of Ireland.

[91] George Bubb Doddington had distinguished himself early in business, and was at the Court of Spain very young with Sir Paul Methuen, who left him there to sign the treaty of Madrid. He flattered Sir Robert Walpole extravagantly, and wrote that epistle to him, from whence Pope quoted the famous line, where he calls him the bard,

In power a servant, out of power a friend.

However, being refused a Peerage, the great object of his ambition, he broke with the Minister, and attached himself to the Prince of Wales, but was undermined by Lyttelton. He renewed his connexions with Sir Robert Walpole, and was made a Lord of the Treasury; but deserted him again on his decline, and contributed greatly to carry the western elections in 1741, against the Court. He continued in Opposition during Lord Granville’s administration; but came into place again on the Coalition, and was Treasurer of the Navy. However, he again quitted the Court, and renewed his engagements with the Prince, and had a new place erected for him at Leicester House, that of Treasurer of the Chambers, for which, when he went to kiss hands at St. James’s, the King burst out a laughing in his face. The Prince’s family were exceedingly averse to receive him again amongst them, and treated him with great contempt, which made Nugent, but a little before the Prince’s death, tell the Princess, that he thought, considering Doddington was united with them, that he was too ill treated there. She replied with warmth, “However the Prince himself treats him, depend upon it he can never forgive him. He knows that even since his coming this last time into his service, he has said of the Prince, _Il a une telle tête, et un tel cœur, qu’on ne peut rien faire avec lui_.”--(Vide Appendix.)

[92] On the birth-day of the Prince of Wales, in 1759, Doddington standing in the circle, the Princess passed him without speaking; the Prince just spoke to him, but affected to cough, and walked on; the little Princes, less apprized of his history, and accustomed to see him there, talked a good deal to him. Charles Townshend, who stood behind and observed this scene, leaned forward, and in a half whisper, cried, “Doddington, you are d--d well with the youngest.”

[93] It was common for the Prince, after dinner, to toast to Dr. Lee’s being soon Chancellor of the Exchequer.

December 19th, 1758.--Yesterday morning, died suddenly, in his chair, at his house in St. James’s-square, the Right Hon. Sir George Lee, Knight, Doctor of Laws, Dean of the Arches, Judge of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, member of Parliament for Launceston, in Cornwall, and one of his Majesty’s Most Honourable Privy Council.

Sir George Lee was the fifth son of Sir Thomas Lee, of Hartwell, in Buckinghamshire, Bart., by Alice, daughter and heir of Mr. Hopkins, of London, merchant; and youngest brother to the late Lord Chief Justice Lee. He represented the borough of Brackley in the seventh, eighth, and ninth Parliaments of Great Britain, and on the 16th of December, 1741, was elected Chairman of the Committee of Elections in the honourable House of Commons by a majority of two only against Giles Earle, Esq.; and upon the change of the Ministry in March following, was appointed a Lord of the Admiralty, which vacating his seat in Parliament, he was in July following chosen for Devizes. In the tenth Parliament he served for Leskard, in Cornwall.

Upon the establishment of the Princess of Wales’s Household, he was in April, 1751, appointed Treasurer to her Royal Highness, which he resigned in the year 1757.

In December, 1751, on the decease of Dr. John Bettesworth, he was appointed, by Archbishop Herring, Dean of the Arches, and Judge of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, and in February following his Majesty was pleased to confer upon him the honour of Knighthood.

[94] James, Earl Waldegrave, one of the Lords of the Bedchamber.

[95] Eleonora D’Esmurs, daughter of Alexander D’Olbreuse, a private French gentleman, was married to George William, Duke of Zelle, father of Sophia Dorothea, wife of King George the First.

[96] William Pitt, younger brother of Thomas Pitt, of Boconnok, in Cornwall, was originally a Cornet of Horse, and broke by Sir R. Walpole at the time of the Excise, when his kinsman, Lord Cobham, lost his regiment for opposing that scheme. He was then made Groom of the Bedchamber to the Prince of Wales. The old Duchess of Marlborough left him ten thousand pounds, and her grandson, Mr. Spencer, entailed the Sunderland estate upon him after his own son. When Sir Robert Walpole resigned, and Mr. Pulteney was created an Earl, Mr. Pitt said, “He now knew his place in the House of Commons.” He continued in Opposition, and distinguished himself greatly against the Hanover troops, and personally against Lord Granville, till the fall of that Minister. On the coalition, he pretended to desire nothing for himself; but as soon as his junto were placed in good employments, he began opposing again, till in a very short time he was made Vice Treasurer of Ireland, and was designed for Secretary at War, which the King (at the instance of Lord Bath) refusing to make him, occasioned the revolution of three days in 1746; soon after which he was made Paymaster of the Forces on the death of Mr. Winnington, the King persisting in not letting him have any place that could give him the entrée of his closet.

[97] Henry Fox, only brother to Lord Ilchester, had been bred a Tory, and was voted, upon a petition, out of one of Sir Robert Walpole’s Parliaments; but being reconciled to the principles of the Court, by the friendship of his brother with Lord Hervey, to whom Mr. Fox was second in his duel with Mr. Pulteney, he was made Surveyor of the Works, and on Mr. Pelham succeeding to the head of the Treasury, Mr. Fox was made a Commissioner of that board, and was at this time Secretary at War.

[98] He had been Aide-de-camp to the Duke of Marlborough, and a Colonel of Foot, but was obliged to sell his regiment when his Patron was disgraced. On the accession of the Hanover family, he was made Comptroller of the Customs, then Groom of the Bedchamber to the present King, Treasurer to the Queen, and on the resignation of Sir Charles Hanbury Williams, Paymaster of the Marines. He died at the end of the year 1751.

[99] Henry, a younger son of Allen, Lord Bathurst.

[100] January 6, 1769.--Yesterday died at his house in St. James’s Street, his Grace Charles Sackville, Duke of Dorset, in the 58th year of his age. His Grace received the first rudiments of his education at Westminster School, in which he was introduced by the late celebrated Prior, and there gave strong indication of genius. The Duke afterwards visited France and Italy, with the latter of which countries he was particularly delighted, being accompanied by the late learned and very benevolent Mr. Spence, who cherished the love which his Grace naturally bore to the Polite Arts. At his return from his travels, he encouraged learning and learned men. The Duke was honoured with the esteem and affection of the late much-lamented Prince Frederick, and it was thought that his Grace would have made a very considerable figure in the State. He was skilled not only in the learned languages, but also in the modern. He had not the talent of speaking in public, so was not distinguished in the House of Commons; but he was a fine prose writer, of which (among other pieces) his Treatise concerning the Militia is a proof. Some few printed specimens of his poetry show his happy talent for that engaging art; and especially the manuscript pieces left behind him, which, it is hoped, will not be lost to the world. The Duke had laboured, during many years, under a complication of distempers, and was carried off in a fit. The excruciating pains with which he had been long afflicted made life uncomfortable; however, those who were acquainted with his former days, image to themselves the learned, the polite, and entertaining companion, whose affability was very attractive, as it threw off (in his presence) all distinction, that of superior merit excepted. But, alas! sickness, disgust, and disappointment, are apt to sour the sweetest dispositions.--(Public Journals.)

His Grace is succeeded in title and estate by the Hon. John Frederick Sackville (son of the late Lord John Philip Sackville, second son of Lionel Cranfield, first Duke of Dorset), and Knight of the Shire in the present Parliament for the county of Kent.

[101] Lionel Cranfield, first Duke of Dorset, had gone through most of the great posts, and was at this time Lord President, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Constable of Dover Castle, and Knight of the Garter.

He had voted once or twice with the Tory Ministry, when coming one day into the Kit Cat Club (it was about the time that the Portuguese had abandoned the Army of the Allies in Spain) Earl Berkeley, a boisterous zealous Whig seaman, cried out, “God d--n you, Sir, no Portuguese! I will keep company with no Portuguese!”--(Vide Appendix.)

[102] The Duke of Cumberland.

[103] Edward Vernon, a silly, noisy Admiral, who, towards the beginning of the war with Spain, was rash enough to engage to take Porto Bello with six ships only, and rash enough to accomplish his engagement; which made him so popular, that, notwithstanding his failing soon afterwards in an attempt upon Carthagena, and after that, more blameably upon Cuba, by his dissensions with General Wentworth, he was chosen into Parliament for several places, had his head painted on every Sign, and his birth-day kept twice in one year. Yet as his courage was much greater than his sense, his reputation was much greater than his courage. One should have thought that the lightness of his head would have buoyed up his heart in any extremity! He had withdrawn himself but very awkwardly from two or three private quarrels, and lost his public character with still greater infamy; for being out of humour with the Admiralty, he published a series of letters and instructions from that Board in the very heat of the Rebellion, by which he betrayed our spies--[It was believed that one of them was actually hanged in France, he being never heard of after this transaction]--and intelligence to the French, and was removed from all command with ignominy. He raised great wealth by the war, and by his economy, and was at last chosen one of the Directors of the New Herring Fisheries, which occasioned the following epigram:--

Long in the senate hath brave Vernon rail’d, And all mankind with bitter tongue assail’d; Sick of his noise, we wearied Heav’n with pray’r, In his own element to place the tar: The gods at length have yielded to our wish, And bad him rule o’er Billingsgate and fish.

October 31, 1757.--Sunday last, died at his seat, at Nacton, in Suffolk, Edward Vernon, Esq., member of Parliament for Ipswich, and elder brother of the Trinity-house. In the sixth and seventh Parliaments of Great Britain he represented the borough of Penryn, in the eighth the town of Portsmouth. On the 20th of July, 1739, he sailed from Portsmouth for the West Indies with nine men-of-war and a sloop; and on the 5th of November following sailed from Jamaica with the Burford, Hampton Court, Princess Louisa, Strafford, Norwich, and Sheerness; and on the 21st of the same month took the fort of Porto Bello; as also Gloria Castle, and Castle of St. Jeronimo, with five ships only (the Sheerness being then cruising off Carthagena), with the loss of only seven persons killed, and twelve wounded. In this expedition the principal engineer in the mining work was Captain (now Admiral) Knowles of the Diamond, assisted by Captain (now Admiral) Boscawen, who desired he might serve in this expedition as a Volunteer, his ship the Shoreham not being then fit for the sea. For this service the Admiral had the Thanks of both Houses of Parliament, was presented with the Freedom of the city of London in a gold box; and in the ninth Parliament of Great Britain, summoned to meet the 25th of June, 1741, was returned for the city of Rochester and borough of Ipswich, but made his election for Ipswich, which he also represented in the last, and in the present Parliament. After the affair of Porto Bello, he took Chagre, and continued in his Majesty’s service till the year 1748, when several matters which had passed between the Lords of the Admiralty and Mr. Vernon being laid before his Majesty, he was struck off the list of Flag Officers. (Public Journals.)

[104] He lost the battles of Fontenoy and Laffelt against Marshal Saxe, and all Flanders.

[105] Sir John Legonier was a French Protestant and Knight of the Bath.

[106] General Hawley was so severe, that he was called in the Army the Chief Justice.

[107] Youngest son to the Duke of Dorset, and Colonel of a regiment.

[108] Eldest son of the Earl of Derby.

[109] The great promoter of the Colony of Georgia, had been surprised and put to flight by a party of the Rebels at Clifton.