CHAPTER XI.

Debate in the House of Lords on the Court-Martial Bill--Lord Mansfield--Proposal to examine the Members of the Court-Martial--Their Examination--Bill debated and dropped in the House of Lords--Result of the Proceedings in Parliament--Intended Petition for Mercy from the City not proceeded with--Execution of Admiral Byng--Reflections on his behaviour--Rochester Election--Death of Archbishop Herring--Abolition of the Office of Wine-Licences--Intrigues to dismiss Mr. Pitt, and form a new Ministry--The Duke of Cumberland goes to Hanover to command the Army.

March 1st.--The Lords read the Bill. Lord Mansfield treated Keppel’s behaviour as weak and inconsistent: made a panegyric on the twelfth Article, which he said had restored discipline: censured the House of Commons for precipitate proceedings; and went indecently into the question of the Admiral’s behaviour; for which he was called to order by Lord Denbigh, who told him, that to evade the pressing arguments that called for the Bill, he had endeavoured cruelly to raise indignation against the prisoner, who might receive benefit from the scruples of his Judges; whose scruples and request were alone the objects before the House. The Chief Justice replied, he did not intend to oppose the whole Bill--but he must ask, who they were that demanded it? What! a month[81] after sentence!--was what they had to say within the oath of secrecy? Indeed, he had always been against the oath; he never approved judging in a mask. He had heard of a case where a _majority_ voted that a sentence should be _unanimous_. He said the proviso, empowering only the willing to speak, was partial. If _all_ should say they meaned error of judgment, the Admiral ought to be acquitted. If the sentence was iniquitous, it ought to be annulled. But it was cruel to fix this examination on the King: the Lords ought to step between the Crown and the people. The sentence, he said, could only be annulled by Parliament. A Bill might be necessary, but one totally different from this. He proposed to have the members of the Court-Martial called to the bar of the House; and he concluded with no humane observations, nor more to the Bill than his former speech, that there had been times when a sea-officer had blown up his ship, rather than be taken, or retreat.

As I would by no means blend in one censure the behaviour of the two lawyers, Mansfield and Hardwicke, I will here say a few words on the former. He took a severe part against the persecuted Admiral--why, I pretend not to determine. As the death of Mr. Byng tended no ways to his interest, as he had no guilt to expiate by the blood of another, and as friendship infuses humanity, but not cruelty, one should not suppose that Lord Mansfield acted on personal motives, or from a desire of screening Newcastle. I will not even suppose that a propensity to thwarting Pitt dictated his asperity. He saw his country undone; might think Mr. Byng had hastened its fate; might feel a national resentment; might think severity necessary; and as it is observed that timorous natures, like those of women, are generally cruel, Lord Mansfield might easily slide into rigour on this as he did on other occasions, when he was not personally afraid.

Lord Temple gave much the same account that I have given, of his own behaviour, as first Lord of the Admiralty; he read the letter from the Court-Martial, and thought that their anxiety must have proceeded from having meant error of judgment.

Lord Halifax spoke strongly for the Bill, and urged that it was founded on justice and humanity; condemned the sentence, and said, _it appealed from itself_. That if the Judges of that Court had thought the Admiral really guilty, they had been most guilty to write such a letter. As that could not be the case, could their Lordships avoid wishing to have the bottom of such a strange transaction known? He excused the Court-Martial for having stayed so long between their letter and any farther step, because they waited to see what effect, and concluded the effect they promised themselves would follow from their letter. That the sentence could not be annulled without this Bill, nor explained without it, for had it been possible for any man, Lord Mansfield would have made sense of it.

Lord Hardwicke pleaded against the Bill, upon the single supposition that they were to tell the opinions of each other. He desired that all of them might be ordered to attend, and asked whether these scruples had not flowed from solicitations, and from being tampered with by the Admiral’s friends--and he, who said he wished to inquire whether they had not been tampered with by the Admiral’s _friends_--proposed--what? that they should not attend _till_ Thursday--it was then Tuesday.

Lord Granville replied, that they would not speak even there, till their mouths were legally opened. That he had always disapproved the oath of secrecy; and now particularly, when his Majesty and the House of Commons were willing that the oath should be set aside, who could refuse it?

The Duke of Newcastle, as usual, echoed his oracle, and wished to have all the lights that could be had in twenty-four hours. The Duke of Bedford asked what objection there was to hearing them the very next day? There could but two questions be asked of them: “Were they willing to speak?” “Had they anything to say?” Lord Halifax pressed for the next day. Lord Temple defended them from private influence, and proved that their present behaviour was entirely consonant to their sentence and letter. When they found that all the difficulties on their minds, which they had hinted at in their letter, had no effect, could they do otherwise than apply to the Legislature to be empowered to set forth their difficulties at large? Lord Sandwich owned, that if he did not think the Bill necessary, he would oppose it, because he was astonished to find that an unprecedented message to the Commons was pleaded as a reason for the acquiescence of the Lords.

Lord Hardwicke caught up that argument, and said the Royal Message ought not to be pleaded there, since it had not been _vouchsafed_ to _that_ House. I hesitate to repeat the latter part of his speech. Will it not be thought that the part I took in this affair influenced me to misrepresent a man, to whose intrigues and authority I cannot help imputing in great measure the Admiral’s catastrophe? Who, when I paint a shrewd old lawyer, as weakly or audaciously betraying his own dark purposes in so solemn an assembly, but will suspect that I forged an event which seems so strongly to prove all that I have charged on him? In answer to these doubts, I can only say, that _this_ was one of the events on which I formed my opinion; that it is strictly true; and that I would not venture to report it, unless it had passed in so solemn and public a place as the House of Lords, where all who there were present heard, and could not but avow that I speak truth--in short, Lord Hardwicke, as a reason for deferring to hear _till Thursday_ the members of the Court-Martial, pleaded that there was an Irish cause depending before the House, which was appointed for the next day, (Wednesday.) If ever the least public business that pressed, had not made all law-suits give way, this might have been at least a precedented reason. But what was the Bill in question? Certainly in the then situation of affairs of as critical importance, and of as much expectation as had ever engaged the attention of the public; and to want to postpone it to an obscure Irish cause! Could good-nature in person forbear to surmise, that this demand of an intervening day was, could only be made, to gain time to tamper with the witnesses? Good-nature at least, would allow, that who suspects such men as Geary of being tampered with by the poor and powerless relations of a criminal, might be suspected of a disposition to _tamper_, when he had power,[82] and only wanted time; which too he had the confidence to demand--I say confidence, for Lord Hardwicke said authoritatively, “_I adhere to Thursday_.” Alas! he did not know how much he could do in half the time.

Lord Denbigh asked with indignation, “does that noble Lord put in competition with the honour of his country a cause of Irish bankruptcy?” And the Duke of Devonshire begged that the Court-Martial might be heard on the morrow, because some of them were under sailing orders. Lord Hardwicke, unmoved, said, “the Bill will not be before you to-morrow: the officers in question must be examined separately.” Lord Temple replied, that the wind might change by Thursday, and that some of them were going on expeditions of the utmost consequence to this country. He begged their retardment might not be laid at his door. He repeated the urgency of their sailing. The Duke of Bedford desired then to have the orders of the House reversed, and to have the second reading of the Bill fixed for the morrow. Lord Hardwicke (who, if I have suspected him wrongfully, was at least conscientiously impatient to do justice on those Irish bankrupts) persisted; and maintained that the orders could not be reversed, unless every Lord present consented. Have I dared to forge all this? The rest of the Lords, who did seem to think that winds and that fleets sailing in their country’s cause were of more instant importance than a case of Irish bankruptcy, prevailed even on the late scrupulous Chancellor to postpone private justice for _one day_, and the Court-Martial were ordered to attend the next.

March 2nd.--The day opened with a complaint preferred by Lord Sandwich against the publisher of a newspaper, who had printed the oath of secrecy with false additions. Lord Mansfield took on himself the management of the examination. To combat his ability and Hardwicke’s acrimony, the unhappy Admiral had no friend among the Lords but the Earl of Halifax; honest and well-disposed, but no match for the art of the one, or the overbearingness of the other, and on too good terms with both to oppose them in a manner to do any service; and Lord Temple, circumscribed both in interest and abilities from being thoroughly useful. The Chief Justice acquainted the House that the questions he proposed to put to the members of the Court-Martial were, “Whether they knew any matter previous to the sentence, which would show it to be unjust, or procured by any unlawful means? and, whether they thought themselves restrained by their oath from disclosing such matter?” Lord Temple said, “Everybody would be at liberty to ask any other questions;” and Lord Halifax said, “They would not be confined to those of Lord Mansfield.”

Admiral Smith, the President of the Court, was then called; a grey-headed man, of comely and respectable appearance; but of no capacity, of no quickness to comprehend the chicanery of such a partial examination. He, and the greater part of his comrades, were awed too with the presence of the great persons before whom they were brought. Moore, and one or two others, were neither awed nor haggled with their inquisitors. Lord Morton caused the twelfth Article to be read; and would have asked Admiral Smith, whether he then thought, or ever did think, that Article applicable to error of judgment? The impropriety of the question, and the intemperate warmth of the Lord who put it, when he was checked by Lord Talbot, broke in on the solemnity of the scene, and disturbed it. Lord Temple observed, that Smith had already answered the Earl’s question by stating in their letter the words, _even by error of judgment_. Lord Hardwicke said, that letter was not an oath, _and hoped would be out of the question_; yet he owned the interrogatory was most improper. Lord Temple insisted that they were under the virtue of their oath till the sentence was pronounced, and they were dissolved as a Court.

Lord Mansfield then asked the President, whether he knew any matter previous to the sentence which would show it to be unjust. He answered, “Indeed I do not.” Lord Mansfield--“If it was given through any undue practice?” Admiral Smith--“Indeed I do not.” Lord Halifax then asked him, if he desired to have the Bill? He replied, “I have no desire for myself. _It will not be disagreeable to me, if it will be a relief to the consciences of any of my brethren._” Lord Halifax asked him farther, whether he could reveal anything relative to the sentence, that was necessary for the King to know, and to incline him to mercy? The Admiral said, “Indeed I have not, farther than what I wrote at that time to Lord Lyttelton, signifying that we were willing to attend, to give our reasons for signing that letter.” Lord Lyttelton said, “He had returned that letter to the Admiral, that he might read it there.” Lord Hardwicke asked, whether he thought himself restrained by his oath from mentioning those reasons? He answered, “The application for mercy was unanimous. I think I am at liberty to give the reasons why I requested that mercy.” Nobody chose to ask him those reasons--the friends of Mr. Byng, one must suppose, lest it should interfere with the necessity of the Bill. His enemies did not desire to know themselves, or that anybody else should.

Admiral Holbourn was then called, and to the two former questions of Lord Mansfield, and to the two of Lord Halifax, answered bluntly, “No.”

The next that appeared was Admiral Norris; a most weak man, who after resisting, from the friends of Mr. Byng, great solicitations to interpose in time in favour of the prisoner, to whom he was believed the best disposed, (except Moore, the greatest professor of tenderness to Mr. Byng’s family,) had at last sunk under great inquietudes of remorse; and had pressed most earnestly for parliamentary relief. If in effect he overturned all the consequences of that compunction, he was to be pitied more than blamed. Struck with awe of the tribunal before which he appeared, he showed how little qualified he had been for a Judge, when so terrified at superior Judges. He lost all comprehension, understood no questions that were asked, nor knew how or when to apply the very answers he came prepared to give. When Lord Mansfield put his question to him, whether he knew anything previous that would show the sentence to be unjust, he replied, that he desired to be excused from answering while under the oath of secrecy. Lord Mansfield said, to what did he apprehend his oath went? had he anything to tell, if released from the sanction of it? Lord Fortescue objected, that nobody had a right to ask him his reasons for desiring to be absolved from his oath; and Lord Ravensworth said, an answer in the affirmative would look like accusing himself--indeed it was difficult to know how the Court-Martial could complain of what they had done or submitted to, without accusing themselves in the heaviest manner. Lord Hardwicke declared, if this question was not answered, that he would vote against the Bill. “And why,” said he, “are these excuses made for Mr. Norris? he does not make them for himself. Ask him in the very words of the Bill.” It was evident that Norris thought, that in order to obtain the Bill he must not give the least satisfaction on any question. Accordingly, when questioned if he knew anything that would show the sentence to be unjust? he replied, “No.” If he knew anything of undue practices? still he answered “No.” Yet when Lord Halifax asked him, whether he was desirous the Bill should pass? he replied, “Yes.” Lord Halifax--“If he knew anything that was necessary for the King to know, and that would incline him to mercy?” He begged leave not to answer, and withdrew. The contradiction in this behaviour must be left to the comment of the reader. The only observation I would make, not only on Norris, but on his associates, (I speak not of those who evidently were influenced,) is this. If, as they all said, they knew nothing unjust, why did they solicit to be released from an oath of secrecy, under the lock of which they had no secret? Is it not more probable that they were ashamed of what they had done, and neither knew how to bear or avow it?

Admiral Broderick was short and steady in negatives to all the questions. Holmes as explicit, saying he knew nothing to incline the King to mercy but the sentence and their letter. Lord Halifax then informed the Lords, that Norris had recollected himself, and desired to return to the bar. Lord Cholmondeley and Lord Stamford objected to it, but even Lord Hardwicke could not close with such rigour, though he declared against repeating the like indulgence. Norris returning, and being asked if he knew anything proper for his Majesty to know, and that might incline him to mercy, replied, “_At the time that I said I desired the Act might pass, I thought we should have an opportunity of explaining our reasons for signing the sentence._” These words, though obscure, and by no means adequate to what was expected from his desire of being reheard, seemed to imply that he had been drawn into the harshness of the sentence from some arguments of the improbability that it would be carried into execution. This in the utmost candour I own; it was what all the advocates for rigour insisted was the case: though the defence in truth is but a sorry one, for what can exceed the weakness of condemning a man, whom one thinks innocent, upon the supposition that he will afterwards escape?

Geary, the accommodating Geary, the repenter of his repentance, came next; answered _No_, to Lord Mansfield’s questions, like the rest: to Lord Halifax’s, whether desirous of the Bill, replied _No_, but have no objections to it, if it will be to the satisfaction of anybody; and that he knew nothing for mercy but the sentence and letter. “Could you,” said Lord Fortescue, “if the Act should pass, explain the sentence better?” “My oath of secrecy,” said Geary, “will not let me say more.” Captain Boyce gave his three noes to the questions. So did Moore to Lord Mansfield’s. When asked by Lord Halifax, if desirous of the Bill? he said, “I am very desirous of it, that I may be absolved from my oath; I have been under concern when I took it--I don’t mean on this point.” To the other question relative to the King and mercy, he said, “I don’t think myself at liberty to answer while bound by my oath.” To Lord Fortescue, whether, if absolved, he could better explain the sentence and letter? he replied in these equivocal words, “I could give better reasons for my signing.” Simko, Douglas, and Bentley, were unanimous in negatives to all the questions. Then Keppel appeared. Being asked if he knew anything unjust?--after long silence and consideration, he replied, _No_. Whether the sentence was obtained through undue practices? _No._ Whether desirous of the Bill? “Yes, undoubtedly.” Whether he knew anything necessary for the knowledge of the King, and conducive to mercy? Keppel: “I cannot answer that, without particularizing my vote and opinion.” Lord Halifax asked him whether he thought his particular reasons had been asked now? He replied, _No_. He retired. If Keppel had had no more to tell, than that he had been drawn into the harsher measure by the probability of the gentler preponderating at last, he had in truth been much misunderstood: his regret had worn all the appearance of remorse. How he came to appear so calm and so indifferent at the last moment, in which either regret or remorse could hope to have any effect, I pretend not to decide. Such as showed any compunction of any sort I would excuse to the utmost. Those who determined _no_ compunction should operate, and those who, like Moore and Geary, abandoned their contrition to make their court, I desire not to absolve. The former were gratified, the latter were rewarded. Dennis was the last who appeared, and took care to have no more tenderness before the Lords than he had exerted in the House of Commons.

Lord Temple then desired that the Court-Martial might be absolved from their attendance; and that the depositions might be read over. When finished, he said (what indeed in his situation he could not well help saying, considering how few questions had been put, except the captious ones of Lord Mansfield, and how little satisfaction had been obtained, and that even Keppel himself had not said half so much as he had said in the House of Commons,) Lord Temple, I say, after congratulating the King and nation on the temper that had been observed, said, the discussion might produce an opinion that the sentence was just: he had had doubts, but now they were all removed: yet he would ask, whether still it were not better to indulge the conscientious with the Bill, especially as it would clear all doubts in others?

Lord Marchmont and Lord Hardwicke objected warmly to that proposal, and treated the House of Commons with the highest scorn. The former said, he had the utmost contempt for the Bill, and hoped their Lordships would set their mark on all who had traduced the Court-Martial, whose very countenances had shown their breasts. He begged the House no further to load his Majesty, but to reject the Bill. Lord Halifax acknowledged, that all who read the preamble, must have concluded that they had something material to divulge: yet not one had produced any one circumstance. For himself, he was never ashamed to retract, when the ground had gone from him. Yet he thought they still must have had reasons for their extraordinary behaviour, and wished for the Bill to clear up that wonderful sentence and letter. But Lord Hardwicke authoritatively put an end to the Debate; said the recital to the preamble had been false; that they had sworn there had been no undue practice, and that it appeared upon what no grounds the House of Commons had proceeded; which he hoped would tend to ease the mind of his Majesty. He proposed, and it was ordered, that the whole examination should be printed.

The affair having concluded in this extraordinary manner, the friends of Mr. Byng could no longer expect any mercy. If he could be brought to the verge of death after such a sentence and such a recommendation from his Judges; if the remorse of those Judges could only interpose; undoubtedly their retracting all distress of conscience, and upholding their sentence in a firmer manner than when they first pronounced it, could neither give the King a new handle to pardon, nor any hopes to the Admiral’s well-wishers. They despaired, though they ceased not to solicit. Of the Court-Martial,[83] it must be remembered, that Norris, who had faltered, was never after employed--that Keppel was--that Moore had immediately assigned to him the most profitable station during the war.

I hasten to the conclusion of the tragedy: a few intervening incidents I shall resume afterwards.

The 14th of March was appointed for execution. Yet one more unexpected event seemed to promise another interruption. The city of London had all along assumed that unamiable department of a free government, inconsiderate clamour for punishment. But as a mob is always the first engine of severity, so it is generally the foremost, often the sole body, that melts and feels compassion when it is too late. Their favourite spectacle is a brave sufferer. This time they anticipated tenderness. On the 9th, at eleven at night, four Tory Aldermen went to Dickinson, the Lord Mayor, to desire he would summon a Common Council, intending to promote a petition to the King to spare the Admiral. The motion was imputed to Mr. Pitt. The magistrate, as unfeelingly formal as if he had been the first magistrate in the kingdom, replied, it was too late; he would be at home till noon of the next day. On the morrow they sent to him not to dismiss his officers, but he heard no more, though they continued squabbling among themselves till two in the morning. Thus the last chance was lost. Had the first midnight emotion been seized, it might have spread happily--at least the King could not have pleaded his promise of severity pledged to the city. I hesitate even to mention what I will not explain, as I cannot prove my suspicion: but I was eye-witness to a secret and particular conference between Dickinson and another man, who, I have but too much reason to think, had a black commission.

The fatal morning arrived, but was by no means met by the Admiral with reluctance. The whole tenour of his behaviour had been cheerful, steady, dignified, sensible. While he felt like a victim, he acted like a hero. Indeed, he was the only man whom his enemies had had no power to bend to their purposes. He always received with indignation any proposal from his friends of practising an escape; an advantage he scorned to lend to clamour. Of his fate he talked with indifference; and neither shunned to hear the requisite dispositions, nor affected parade in them. For the last fortnight he constantly declared that he would not suffer a handkerchief over his face, that it might be seen whether he betrayed the least symptom of fear; and when the minute arrived, adhered to his purpose. He took an easy leave of his friends, detained the officers not a moment, went directly to the deck, and placed himself in a chair with neither ceremony nor lightness. Some of the more humane officers represented to him, that his face being uncovered, might throw reluctance into the executioners; and besought him to suffer a handkerchief. He replied, with the same unconcern, “If it will frighten _them_, let it be done: they would not frighten me.” His eyes were bound; they shot, and he fell at once.[84]

It has often been remarked that whoever dies in public, dies well. Perhaps those, who, trembling most, maintain a dignity in their fate, are the bravest: resolution on reflection is real courage. It is less condemnable, than a melancholy vain-glory, when some men are ostentatious at their death. But surely a man who can adjust the circumstances of his execution beforehand; who can say, “Thus I will do, and thus;” who can sustain the determined part, and throws in no unnecessary pomp, that man does not fear--can it be probable he ever did fear? I say nothing of Mr. Byng’s duels; cowards have ventured life for reputation: I say nothing of his having been a warm persecutor of Admiral Matthews: cowards, like other guilty persons, are often severe against failings, which they hope to conceal in themselves by condemning in others: it was the uniformity of Mr. Byng’s behaviour from the outset of his persecution to his catastrophe, from whence I conclude that he was aspersed as unjustly, as I am sure that he was devoted maliciously, and put to death contrary to all equity and precedent.[85]

I have perhaps dwelt too long on his story--let me be excused: I could not say too much in behalf of a man, whose sufferings, with whatever kind intention, I unhappily protracted!

The cousinhood intended to supply Byng’s seat at Rochester, with Dr. Hay of their own Admiralty, whom Fox had jostled out of Parliament. The King, by suggestion from the same quarter, told Lord Temple, “That Rochester was a borough of the Crown, not of the Admiralty; nor did he like Hay or any of their Admiralty; they had endeavoured to represent his justice as cruelty; he would have Admiral Smith chosen there.” The subject was artfully selected, a relation of their own. Lord Temple, with more calmness and decency than he often condescended to employ in the Cabinet, contested it long: and at last said, he would not obstruct his Majesty’s service and commands--but he would be no borough-jobber, he would have nothing to do with it, nor would he pay the price of blood by bringing into Parliament the President of that Court that had condemned Admiral Byng. As the measure was taken to get rid of Mr. Pitt and his friends, it was hoped they would resign on this obstacle, which might pass for a private affair: but they were too wise to be the dupes. The Duke of Devonshire was ordered to recommend Admiral Smith to Rochester, but the poor man was shocked both at succeeding a person he had sentenced, and at being chosen for a stumbling-block to his friends. He said he had not sufficient estate for a qualification; and declined. Admiral Townshend, the gaoler of Byng, had no scruples, and was elected.

On the 8th of this month, advice was received that a French army of one hundred and four thousand men, commanded by the Comte de Clermont and Marshal D’Etrées, were marched to the Lower Rhine.

A slight event that, by displaying the Duke’s moderation, indicated his having views at that time which it was worth his while, by curbing his natural temper, to gratify, may be fitly mentioned. Colonel Forbes, a man of parts and spirit, had long lain under his displeasure, being suspected of having writ some severe pamphlets against him. They were, in truth, the compositions of one Douglas. Forbes, during the preceding summer, had ingratiated himself with the Duke of Bedford in the camp at Blandford, where his Grace had been reading Bladen’s Cæsar and Bland’s Military Discipline, and playing at being a General, for he was always eager about what he was least fit for. He immediately undertook to reconcile Forbes to the Duke,[86] who would not listen to him. Richbell’s regiment falling vacant in Ireland, the Lord-Lieutenant gave himself no farther trouble to obtain the favour of the Duke for Forbes, but carried a warrant ready drawn to the King, who signed it, and Forbes had the regiment. The Duke bore it without a murmur.

On the 13th, died Dr. Herring, Archbishop of Canterbury, a very amiable man, to whom no fault was objected; though perhaps the gentleness of his principles, his great merit, was thought one. During the Rebellion he had taken up arms to defend from oppression _that_ religion, which he abhorred making an instrument of oppression. He was succeeded by Dr. Hutton, Archbishop of York, a finer gentleman, except where money was in question. The Duke of Newcastle, to pay court to Leicester-house, had promised York to Dr. Thomas, of Peterborough, the Prince’s Preceptor: but though he had been raised by the King himself, his Majesty (to thwart the Princess, who had indulged the Bishop in no weight with her son, and was consequently indifferent about him) refused to confirm the grant, and bestowed the Archbishopric on Gilbert of Salisbury, who had formerly shed courtly tears in a sermon on the Queen. Gilbert was composed of that common mixture, ignorance, meanness, and arrogance. Having once pronounced that Dr. King ought to be expelled from Oxford for disaffection, the latter said he would consent to expulsion, provided Gilbert would propose it in convocation--the motion must have been in Latin. Thomas was permitted to succeed to Salisbury. On the news of Gilbert’s promotion, they rung the bells at York backwards, in detestation of him. He opened a great table there, and in six months they thought him the most Christian Prelate that had ever sat in that see.

18th.--Legge opened the new taxes, and particularly proposed to abolish the Commissioners of Wine-Licences, which office he would incorporate with that of the Stamps. Among those Commissioners was one Harris, a dependent and intimate of Fox, who broke out on this occasion in the most imprudent manner--“Was this the beginning of reformation? why was it not carried farther? why not abolish one of the Secretaries of the Treasury? why did Mr. Legge himself receive double salary as Lord of the Treasury?” He himself would have been content with half the pay of Secretary of State. Sir Robert Walpole had never destroyed the offices and influence of the Crown. He taxed Hardinge with being author of this scheme. Legge replied, yes, it _was_ the beginning of reformation; and if others would, he himself would serve for nothing. Beckford said _principiis obsta_; he liked better to begin with small things than great, because from the former there might be hopes--but he knew, he saw, why Mr. Fox was averse from demolishing the influence of the Crown. Of all things he should disapprove any diminution of the salaries of great officers, in order to carry on the war, for then he was sure there would soon be a peace. Pitt was very ill, and could not attend.

I hinted that it was determined to dismiss Mr. Pitt and his friends, or provoke them to resign. I shall now explain that measure, which opens a new scene.

The French had made an irruption into Germany with a mighty Army, and threatened Hanover. The King had neither able Generals there nor Ministers on whom he could rely. The latter were Austrians in their hearts, with the additional incumbrance of possessing estates in the countries of the Empress. The Duke, since the accession of Mr. Pitt to the Administration, was become a favourite. The King readily vented his mortifications to his son, whom he knew would cheerfully be a confidant, of his aversion to the Princess and her faction. By the channel of the Duke and Princess Emily, Fox had insinuated innumerable prejudices and obstructions to the new Ministers. At this juncture the King cast his eyes on the Duke, as the sole resource for Hanover. His son had saved his Crown: he wished to owe the preservation of the dearer Electorate to him. The Duke was very averse to the charge. War with all its charms could not tempt him now. His many defeats by the French still ached. If to be clogged with orders from Pitt,--if to be obliged to communicate with him, and depend on him for supplies, command itself would lose its lustre. Even if successful, the popularity of Pitt would ravish half his laurels; should he miscarry, his misfortunes would all be imputed to himself. Fox snatched at this dilemma: he knew the King would pay any price to rescue Hanover, and suggested to the Duke to demand as a previous condition the dismission of Pitt;--could his Majesty hesitate between an unwelcome servant and a favourite dominion? The terms were granted, but were too soon performed. The King hurried away the Duke. His Royal Highness would not endure even for a fortnight to be accountable to Pitt; yet there had been no time to settle a new Administration. The inquiries still hung over the heads of the old Ministers, and though a whole Parliament of his own interposed their bucklers, Newcastle shuddered at the glimpse of an axe in the faint hand of a wearied rabble. Fox wished for power without the name of it; Newcastle for both. If his Grace would have united with him, Fox would have taken the Paymastership, with a Peerage for his wife, and a pension of 2000_l._ a year on Ireland for himself. But Newcastle could be pinned down to no terms: he advanced to Fox, retreated farther from him, would mention no conditions, nor agree to any. Lord Mansfield had early gone to Claremont and endeavoured to fix him to Fox; but as that Lord himself told the latter, Newcastle was governed by Lord Hardwicke, even by a letter. Fox would then have assumed the Government himself, could he have conjured together the slightest vision of a Ministry. He tried Lord Granville, he courted Devonshire, he offered the Treasury to Bedford; but, though nobody was more sanguine in the cause than the latter, yet as it was not easy to give Rigby an equivalent for Ireland, he took care to regulate his patron’s warmth within the pale of his own advantage.

In this strange uncertainty the day of the Duke’s departure was fixed; and fixed it was that Pitt and Lord Temple should be thrust out by any means. Pitt had behaved with as much veneration as his Majesty could expect; with as much as he was fond himself of receiving: surely he had even shown that German measures were not beyond the compass of his homage. But he had introduced eloquence into the closet. The King was a man of plain sense, and neither used ornament in discourse nor admired it; sometimes too the drift of his royal pleasure was too delicate to be conveyed but in hints. He liked to be served in essentials; it was better not to expatiate on them. Lord Temple was still more tiresome; and when his verboseness did not persuade, he quickened it with impertinence. On the affair of Mr. Byng he had even gone so far as to sketch out some parallel between the Monarch himself and the Admiral, in which the advantage did not lie on the side of the battle of Oudenarde.

The King resenting this and other instances in the strongest manner, Lord Temple sent him word by the Duke of Devonshire, that he could not serve him more, though he should not resign till a convenient opportunity; that he would not even have come out of his Majesty’s closet as a Minister, if it would not have distressed those with whom he was connected. Pitt himself kept in the outward room, saying, he no longer looked upon himself as a Minister; and attributing this storm solely to Fox, he bade Lord George Sackville, who was feeling about for a reconciliation between him and Newcastle, tell that Duke, that he was not so averse to him as his Grace had been told: let him judge by my actions, added he, if I have been averse to him.

The idea of the approaching change no sooner spread than it occasioned the greatest astonishment: indignation followed; ridicule kept up the indignation. The first jealousy was, that British troops would attend the Duke to Germany. Fox called on Legge in the House to disavow this, which he did; and the former declared that it had never existed even in the wish of his Royal Highness--(that measure indeed was reserved for Pitt!) George Townshend, to prevent the change by intimidating, called for more papers; but as Fox wished for nothing more than to dispatch the inquiries, after which he would be at liberty to appear again on the scene, he pressed to have them begin; and Townshend was forced to yield that they should commence on the 19th of April, the first day after the recess of Easter. Sir Francis Dashwood said, that day would interfere with the meeting at Newmarket, and proposed a later time. Fox said there would be a second meeting, with which a later day would equally clash. I blush to repeat these circumstances--was it a greater proof of the levity of our character, or of the little that was to be expected from the inquiries, when a senate sat weighing horse races against national resentment and justice--Newmarket against the fate of Minorca![87] George Townshend added some sharp words on the abuse published against Pitt. Fox said, he desired the liberty of the press might continue: nobody had suffered more from it than himself, yet he would not be for restraining it. Did Mr. Townshend object to cards and pictures?[88] George Grenville said, he knew when he accepted a place what tax he was to pay for it; yet said Fox, “_I_ have been most abused since out of place.”

FOOTNOTES:

[81] A lawyer, it seems, would establish prescription even against conscience!

[82] I say, _power_: Lord Hardwicke and Lord Anson were out of place--but were they out of power? Without hinting how soon they remounted to formal power, let it be remembered that at that moment, they commanded the House of Lords, and had a vast majority in the House of Commons.

[83] As some of them said in plain terms that they were satisfied with the sentence, in how many contradictions were they involved! By the very wording of the sentence, which expressed dissatisfaction; by the letter that accompanied it; by Admiral Smith’s letter to Sir R. Lyttelton, which said that they were all willing to appear before the Privy Council or the Parliament to explain their reasons!

[84] [The following extract from our Author’s Private Correspondence in MS. corroborates the account given in the text, and as it contains some further particulars, may be acceptable to the reader.--E.]

“March 17, 1757.--Admiral Byng’s tragedy was completed on Monday--a perfect tragedy--for there were variety of incidents, villainy, murder, and a hero. His sufferings, persecutions, aspersions, disturbances, nay, the revolutions of his fate, had not in the least unhinged his mind; his whole behaviour was natural and firm. A few days before, one of his friends standing by him, said, ‘Which of us is tallest?’ He replied, ‘Why this ceremony? I know what it means; let the man come and measure me for my coffin.’ He said, that being acquitted of cowardice, and being persuaded, on the coolest reflection, that he had acted for the best, and should act so again, he was not unwilling to suffer. He desired to be shot on the quarter-deck, not where common malefactors are:--came out at twelve--sat down in a chair, for he would not kneel, and refused to have his face covered, that his countenance might show whether he feared death; but being told that it might frighten his executioners, he submitted; gave the signal at once; received one shot through the head, another through the heart, and fell.”

[85] Many years after that tragedy was acted, I received a most authentic and shocking confirmation of the justice of my suspicions. October 21, 1783, being with her Royal Highness Princess Amelia at her villa at Gunnersbury, among many interesting anecdotes which I have set down in another place, she told me, that while Admiral Byng’s affair was depending, the Duchess of Newcastle sent Lady Sophia Egerton to her the Princess, to beg her to be _for_ the execution of Admiral Byng. “They thought,” added the Princess, “that unless he was put to death, Lord Anson could not be at the head of the Admiralty. Indeed,” continued the Princess, “I was already for it; the officers would never have fought, if he had not been executed.” I replied, that I thought his death most unjust, and the sentence a most absurd contradiction.

Lady Sophia Egerton was wife of a clergyman, afterwards Bishop of Durham. What a complication of horrors! women employed on a job for blood!

[As the author calls this accidental conversation at Gunnersbury, “a most _authentic_ confirmation of his suspicions,” the Editor was not at liberty to omit any part of the story; though the reader will probably think with him, that more importance is ascribed to mere gossip than it deserves.--E.]

[86] [The Duke of Cumberland.--E.]

[87] Indeed there was so little intended by the inquiries, that Legge himself, one of the new tribunes of the people, said, “Both sides will be trying which shall fling most dust in the eyes of the nation.”

[88] Townshend had been author of the first political caricatura card, with portraits of Newcastle and Fox.

APPENDIX.

APPENDIX.

A.

(_Vide page 147._)

These Armenian letters are apparently written in humble imitation of the Persian, but greatly inferior to them; they are calculated solely for the meridian of Ireland, and contain little else besides a few severe strictures on the politics and government of that kingdom, with a particular account of the late divisions there, and the persons chiefly concerned in them. As these are topics, which, however well treated, would scarce afford our readers any entertainment, an extract from this part of the performance would be unnecessary. The affairs of England are, however, now and then, introduced, and treated in these letters with the same freedom as those of Ireland. The following characters of two or three of our most celebrated orators are not ill drawn.

“When I was last in England,” says our Armenian, “curiosity led me to hear the Judicial, Parliamentary, and Ecclesiastical eloquence of that kingdom, in all which there are men very eminent. Among the foremost was a native of North Britain; he excelled in order and ornament, yet his ornaments were never studied, they flowed from his matter, and with such ease, that, though no man could speak more elegantly, it seemed that he could not speak less so. He was quick in distinguishing, of memory so tenacious that he could range the testimonies of thirty persons in different cells, and immediately call them forth with the same ease as if he took them from paper. As a judicial speaker, he seemed but little inferior in subtlety and elegance to the celebrated Greeks; in decency he was superior; in his narrations plain; in ranging his arguments, concealing his weakness, and displaying his strength, he had no rival; he concluded always strongly, sometimes with his best argument; with a short and weighty enumeration, when many arguments had been lightly dispersed through his oration; he could mix raillery, but seemed to avoid it, and hasten to serious arguments, as if he blamed himself for using others. His voice was clear and musical, to some it was too acute.”

“Charles Townshend, a young man, was at the same time in Parliamentary debate nervous, copious, and vehement; in order not most exact, but in sentiment strong, in expression animated; his figures were glaring, and his illustrations grand; a tide of matter and words bore his hearers with him, even when he digressed; and though there was something in his eloquence which calm judgment might prune, there was nothing which a warmed audience would not admire.”

“There is an Ecclesiastic,[89] who was Preacher to an Academy of Law, whom I have heard with delight. He was grave, dignified, and elegant; his subjects, whether of things human or divine, he treated with becoming majesty. Thou hast seen him, Aza; he is a great and a good man, and true eloquence comes from such only; look through all experience, virtue produces eloquence, and adversity calls forth virtue.”

B.

[In a note to page 41 a reference is made to the correspondence of Mr. Fox with Lord Hartington, as printed in the Appendix to Lord Waldegrave’s Memoirs. The part, however, of the correspondence which is at variance with the statement in Lord Oxford’s text is not to be found in the extracts there printed; and it is therefore here subjoined, with some additional extracts from unpublished letters of the Duke of Newcastle and Mr. Fox, illustrative of the views of parties at that time.]

_Extract of a Letter from Mr. Fox (Secretary at War) to the Marquis of Hartington (Lord Lieutenant of Ireland), August 10, 1755._

... We have made a treaty with Hesse and another with Russia, to be followed with other subsidies, or these will be useless; and if followed by other subsidies, how can we find money to pay or place to assemble these troops? And, perhaps, I may add, members to vote them? For the Duke of Devonshire is so determinately against them, that I believe he will think it his duty to declare his opinion, and how far that may operate (most people, I find, being in their own minds of the same opinion) there is no saying. Legge did not sign the order for the Hessian money at the Treasury, and, I believe, makes no scruple of declaring his opinion. I have been more cautious in giving, I may say, in _forming_ mine; but have, by not signing it at the Cockpit, kept myself at liberty. Pitt’s and Egmont’s opinions, in this regard, I don’t know.

_Extract of a Letter from Ditto to Ditto, August 29, 1755._

... Your father is certainly against subsidies, and will, I think, be hardly kept from making his opinion, by some method or other, public, which will the less embarrass your Lordship, as I suppose whatever passes of this kind will be over before you can come here, make what haste you will. Lord Granville has had a conversation with the Duke of Newcastle, in which his Grace told him his scheme, which the other says is no scheme at all. You know Lord Granville talks the language Stone talked. It was one of my crimes,[90] in Lord Hillsborough’s garden, that Lord Granville was my friend, who was so much his, (that is) Pitt’s enemy. Well, the scheme is this: to gain Lord Egmont with Yonge’s place; to try, by Lord Chancellor, to gain Pitt; to trust to my acquiescence, from the influence H. R. H. has over me, and to carry every thing through, without parting (as Lord Granville expresses it) with the least emanation of his power to any body.

_Extract of a Letter from the Duke of Newcastle to the Marquis of Hartington, August 30, 1755._

... I took this opportunity, in concert with my Lord Chancellor, to lay before the King, in a very strong letter to my Lord Holderness, the necessity of forming forthwith a system for the House of Commons; that Mr. Pitt must make a material part of it; that if he would take a cordial and an active part, with other arrangements proposed, the King’s business might be done with ease; that otherwise _we_ could not answer for it. We therefore proposed to be authorized to assure Mr. Pitt of his Majesty’s countenance and gracious acceptance of his service, and that Mr. Pitt might be called to the Cabinet Council if he desired it. This authority _we_ have, though with evident marks of reluctance and resentment to Mr. Pitt. My Lord Chancellor has seen Mr. Pitt, and I am to have that honour next Tuesday. If nothing but the Secretary’s office will do, I am persuaded nothing will induce the King to consent to it; but if proper regard and confidence with his rank of the Cabinet Council, and I hope a proper, or at least a better, behaviour from the King towards him will do, that I should think might be brought about, and I dare say your Lordship thinks Mr. Pitt ought to be satisfied. We also advised the getting of Sir William Yonge’s place (which indeed is now vacant) for my Lord Egmont; that was most readily consented to, and I hope and believe my Lord Egmont will do well; and upon these conditions he will have it. Nothing is determined about the Chancellor of the Exchequer; your friend Legge would not countersign the Lords Justices’ warrant for the Hessian levy money. That is a new symptom of the Treasury Board, and not very complaisant for the First Commissioner. I wish your Lordship would find out some expedient for Legge: I would not willingly do anything to disoblige him, but his continuance at the Treasury cannot be agreeable to either of us. As Mr. Fox is already in the Cabinet Council, which was what he desired, and is now, in consequence of it, one of the Lords Justices; if Mr. Pitt will be satisfied with these marks of distinction, and some other arrangements can be made, which I hope will not create much difficulty, when the great ones are over, I should hope things might go on well in the House of Commons. Your Lordship sees I do not suffer my private resentments to have any effect on the public service: I must, however, be entire master at the Board where I am, and not put myself under the tutelage of anybody. I can go out, and _easily_; but not be a cipher in office.

_Extract of a Letter from Mr. Fox to the Marquis of Hartington, Sept. 1, 1755._

... The Duke of Newcastle has seen Egmont, who at first talked very high; but at length, “such was his submission to the Princess and duty to the King, that he believed he should accede to what was proposed;” but dropped that he should be unwilling to act offensively to Mr. Pitt. The Duke then asked if he might write to Hanover: Lord Egmont said he could not quite authorize his Grace to go so far yet, but desired a few days; which the Duke of Newcastle interprets to be to consult Pitt. His Grace is to see Pitt, but Legge says Pitt is in no disposition to be paid with such counters as his Grace has to give him. The Chancellor, too, has told him, as he did your father, though not so positively, that he knew of no subsidy but that of Hesse. I think he told your father that the Russian was not _done_ yet, (he must mean ratified, which is an equivocation;) but he told Pitt absolutely that he knew of no other but the Hessian, which was, to my knowledge, an absolute falsehood. The Duke of Newcastle told a friend of mine that he had an overture from me by Lord Granville, which is not true; but his Grace might, perhaps, from what Lord Granville said, conclude it came from me. My friend asked him why he did not close with me then? He answered, _the Duke_ would govern them; and likewise talked of his own family, as he calls it, (Lady C. Pelham and Lord Lincoln,) and he might have added, his expectations through Egmont, &c., at Leicester House. But all or either of them show how sincere at any time his professions have been.

_Extract of a Letter from Ditto to Ditto, Sept. 11, 1755._

... I hear Pitt declares against the Russian subsidy, which, I am told, is growing as unpopular as the excise.

_Extract of a Letter from Ditto to Ditto, Sept. 23, 1755._

... I have never declared my opinion of the subsidies till this morning to the King. His Majesty is in great distress: they have been obliged to tell him that the House of Commons could not go on without some authority within it; that almost every principal person there had declared against subsidies, and they could not name one who had declared for them. They had tried Pitt, Sir George Lee, and Egmont: that the two first and Legge had declared against them; that Egmont doubted and declined accepting the place; that in this situation they had spoken to me. Lord Grenville had spoke of me to him, but could not tell him my opinion.

I told his Majesty that he should, on this occasion, have my best service as a private soldier or as an officer, but I could not be both. I had a great deal of discourse, but he entered into no particular destination of me. He lamented the harm the Duke of Devonshire’s opinion would do him, and commended your Lordship exceedingly. I told the Duke of Newcastle (whom I saw by appointment with Lord Waldegrave, Saturday) that this was the last time I would ever come to see if we could agree. And so it is. Lord Granville says, if Legge won’t keep it (and to be sure he will not) I must be Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Duke of Newcastle says, that in that case we shall not agree a fortnight, and that it must not be. They quarrelled about it. I give readily into the Duke of Newcastle’s opinion. Nothing then remains but Secretary of State. How to make a vacancy I can’t tell, but there is nothing else. If this be done, I shall behave just as both you and they would have me; if not, I shall still be for the subsidies. It is my opinion. But I will be for them _out of place_; and in the act of vindicating the measure, declare war with the Minister. So you see that instead of the quiet state I thought of, I am brought, and indeed without my seeking, into such a one that I must (I hope you see with me the necessity) be within this week more, or within these six weeks less, than Secretary at War.

I forgot to tell you that Lincoln advises the Duke of Newcastle to agree with me, and even prefers me to the others, or to any measure but that of his uncle’s retiring quite, which he thinks best. The Attorney and Stone are of the same mind. I am sorry to tell you that it is certain the latter has lost his credit at Kew for being my friend. You know where that must point; to the Duke, who has not been once mentioned in the negotiation. I think _he_ must have been Pitt’s reason for discarding me, and yet that does not quite solve it.

_Extract of a Letter from Ditto to Ditto, Sept. 25, 1755._

... If you have not yet received my letter by last Tuesday’s post, it is not now worth reading. The matter is settled, and I am to be Secretary of State in the room of Sir Thomas Robinson, and in order to have the conduct of the House of Commons.

C.

(_Vide page 234._)

[As our author derived his information on Northern and German Courts, especially Dresden, from Sir Charles Hanbury Williams, of whose letters from abroad he speaks (p. 205, vol. i.) in terms of such high commendation, and has already given extracts in the Appendix, vol. i., a short account of that lively writer’s Embassies, taken in substance from the same author’s MS. notes, together with a farther specimen of his correspondence concerning the Court of Saxony, will not be misplaced here; at least they will afford some entertainment to the reader.]

Sir Charles Hanbury Williams was appointed envoy to Dresden in 1747, was commissioned in July, 1749, along with Mr. Anstis, Garter at Arms, to carry the Blue Riband to the Margrave of Anspach; and on Mr. Fox waving, at the request of the King, his pretensions to the Treasurership of the Navy, was, with a view of gratifying that gentleman, who was his intimate friend, named Envoy Extraordinary at Berlin. He set out for that Court in May, 1750, and passed through Hanover when the King was there. From thence he was sent to the King of Poland, who was holding the Diet at Warsaw, to engage his vote for the Archduke Joseph to be King of the Romans. On this progress he wrote a celebrated letter to the Duke of Newcastle at Hanover, which was sent over to England and much admired, as his ministerial letters generally were. About this time he met the Ministers of the two Empresses of Germany and Russia; reconciled these two Princesses, and set out for Berlin, where he was very coldly received, and soon grew so offensive to the King, that he was, as he had predicted, recalled at his request, and sent back to Dresden in February, 1751. Sir Charles had detected the Saxon Minister at Berlin, in betraying his master’s and Russia’s secrets to the Court of Prussia; and had also exposed an artifice of the King of Prussia in making a Tartar, sent to release a countryman who had enlisted in the Prussian Army, pass for a Deputy or Minister for the disaffected in Russian Tartary. These circumstances, and his satirical tongue, and yet more[91] satirical pen, combined to exasperate the King of Prussia. It was, he said in his private letters, “in vain to contend with so mighty a Prince, and he became the sacrifice.” However, in 1753, he was sent to Vienna to demand the assistance of that Court in case Prussia should proceed to extremities after stopping the Silesian loan; and in his triple capacity of Minister, Courtier, and Poet, he composed the following distich on the Empress-Queen:

“Oh Regina orbis prima et pulcherrima! ridens Es Venus, incedens Juno, Minerva loquens.”

The general style of his poetry was far from being so complimentary; and that of his prose, though not so well known, and often too licentious for publication, was to the full as easy, lively, and humorous as his verse. After returning to England he was again appointed to Dresden, and attended the King of Poland to Warsaw, in 1754, where, upon espousing very warmly the interests of the Poniatowskys in an affair called the disposition of the Ostrog, he came to an open rupture with Count Bruhl. He shortly afterwards concluded a subsidiary treaty with Russia, and was named Ambassador to Petersburg in 1755. He returned to England in 1758, and died in 1759.

The following letter was written on his first arrival at Dresden, and before any quarrel with Count Bruhl. Though addressed to a private friend, it seems nearly a duplicate of his public dispatch. It is no unfavourable specimen of his correspondence, but is perhaps less enlivened by anecdote, as well as less disfigured by indecencies, than many of his epistolary compositions from Germany.

Dear Sir,

The short time that I have been abroad, would, in any other Court, have hardly been sufficient to have formed a judgment, or given a description of it; but this, where I am, is so easy to be understood, that an understanding as mean as mine may see into it as clearly in a month’s time as in ten years.

The King’s absolute and avowed hatred to all business, and his known love for idleness and low pleasures, such as operas, plays, masquerades, tilts and tournaments, balls, hunting, and shooting, prevent both him and his country from making that figure in Europe which this noble Electorate ought to do, and often has done. As to the King himself, he is very polite and well-bred, and his natural abilities far from bad ones. I have very often (much oftener than any Minister here) the honour of conversing with him, and I must say, that he talks better, and makes juster judgments on affairs than any other person I have met with in this Court: but he wont dwell long upon politics. ’Tis visible that he soon grows uneasy, and then you must change the discourse to the last stag that he hunted, the last opera that was acted, or the last picture that he has bought. Immediately, you perceive that his countenance clears up, and he talks on with pleasure. From these subjects ’tis easy to lead him back to any other you please, always taking care to observe his countenance, which is a very speaking one. He is seldom seen, when at Dresden, but at dinner. He always dines with company, and his buffoons make a great noise, and fight with one another during the whole repast, which is quite over by two o’clock; and then his Majesty retires to his own apartments, undresses totally, and then puts on his night-gown, in which he sits the rest of the day. Nobody must come to him at that time but Count Bruhl, Father Guerini, and the buffoon. He has had a great loss in the Electress of Bavaria being married, for she often came to him in the afternoon, and they have been surprised together in very indecent postures. The Queen knew this, and was furious about it. She complained of it to her Confessor; but the good Jesuit told her, that since things were so, it was much better that the King’s affections should remain in his own family, than be fixed upon a stranger, who might be a Lutheran, and do prejudice to their holy religion; and by this these holy casuists appeased her angry Majesty.

The whole Court is now gaping to see who will succeed the Electress, for his Majesty’s constitution requires somebody besides the Queen. The King is excessively fond of hunting, and ’tis reckoned that the game of all sorts (which is strictly preserved for him) do 50,000_l._ per annum of damage to this country. I have myself seen fifty stags a feeding in one corn-field; and to take care of all his game and forests, there are no less than 4000 persons in constant pay.

The expenses of this Court of every sort are in proportion with that of the chase. After this, Sir, you will not be surprised when I tell you, that the debts of this Electorate (all incurred since this King came into possession of it) are near four millions sterling, and that their credit is quite ruined; but the King will not hear of the expenses of the Court being lessened. He has no idea of the state of his country; but as he finds himself easy, he thinks and wishes his people to be so too. He is not beloved nor respected. His never heading his Army, and his precipitate flight from Dresden at the King of Prussia’s approach, did him more injury in the minds of the Saxons, than he will ever be able to retrieve.

Her Majesty the Queen is very devout, but not a bit the better for her devotions: she does nothing but commit small sins, and beg forgiveness for them. She is ugly beyond painting, and malicious beyond expression. Her violent hatred to the Empress-Queen, and her great love to all her enemies, make me rejoice that she has not the least influence at this Court. She has much impotent aversion to Count Bruhl: he hates her Majesty in return, but then he makes her feel his power. She meddles much in the lowest things, such as disgracing or restoring a buffoon to favour; disposing the parts of an opera, and giving the preference to such and such a dancer; and even this she never does by merit, but he or she that comes oftenest to mass has the best parts and the first rank. The Italians are much favoured here. They are divided into two parties, one of which is headed by Father Guerini, who first placed the colony here; the other, which is the most powerful, has the Faustina for its leader; and the two chiefs have by turns vented their complaints against each other to me, till I could hardly keep my countenance. But to return to her Majesty: I look upon her to be thoroughly in the French interests. She is not at all beloved, nor does she deserve it, for she does no good to anybody but converts, and very little to them.

I am next to speak of the Electoral Prince. You know, Sir, his person is bad, and his backbone so disjointed, that he cannot stand without two people to support him. The weakness of his body has hurt his mind. His parts, if he ever had any, are much decayed; but he is civil, good, and well-tempered. His education has been extremely bad; he knows nothing. He asked ’tother day at table, whether, though England were an island, one could not go there by land? Judge of the rest by this. When he walks, supported or rather dragged along by two people, his knees almost touch his stomach; and the Duchess of Courland (who is our good friend at this Court) told me that she saw him in bed on his wedding-night, and that he lay in the same posture there; so that she did not comprehend how matters could be accomplished. The Court, however, swear that (the marriage was then consummated). He is at present wholly devoted to his new bride, about whom I must say a little, having the happiness, by her permission, to see her very often.

She is far from being handsome or well made; but then she is infinitely agreeable in her manner, and very well-bred. She talks much, and is very entertaining. When she first came, she had flattered herself with hopes of succeeding the Electress, and attacked the King the first night, but without success. He seemed rather disgusted with her advances, and since that time she has not recovered the ground she then lost. All[92] this I have also from the Duchess of Courland. Before she came here she was reckoned to meddle much in politics, and to be in the French interests. She denies all this herself, and declares against women’s meddling in state affairs; but I will venture to prophesy, that if ever the Prince Electoral should outlive his father, she will govern this country most absolutely. Hitherto she is much liked and admired by all who come near her, for her address is very engaging, and not at all like the Queen’s.

The King has four younger sons, and three unmarried daughters. As to the Princesses I can say nothing of them, but that they are very young and very plain.

Prince Xavier is next to the Prince Royal, and has always been the Queen’s favourite, and she tried every way to persuade the Prince Electoral to go into orders that this Prince might succeed his father. His person is good, and I believe his natural parts are so too, but his education has been very unfortunate. He is sixteen years of age, and has hitherto been taught nothing but bodily exercises; and they do not seem to think in this country that a Prince wants any accomplishments who can dance, fence, ride at the ring, and shoot at the mark. This Prince has not yet learned common good manners, and is almost a stranger to common decency. The French Ambassador and I dined with him the other day, and the whole time we were at table he talked to the Pages behind him, and what he said to them was in German. Monsieur des Issarts was quite out of humour at the treatment he met with: I was only sorry for the Prince. But to end his character, those who are best acquainted with him tell me he is very proud and very malicious. ’Tis publicly known that he hates his elder brother; but his pride is much abated, and his spirits much sunk since the Electoral Prince’s marriage, which was a thing that he had been taught to believe never would happen. Still he flatters himself with the hope that if the King his father should die, he should succeed him in the Throne of Poland.

Prince Charles is next; he is a fine youth about thirteen; his person is good, and he has great quickness of parts; but as he labours under the misfortune of having the same wretched education as his brothers have had, ’tis impossible to say how he will turn out; and here I must observe, that the scarcity of men of ability is so great in this country, that out of four governors employed in the education of these Princes, there is not one who is a Saxon.

The two other Princes, Albert and Clement, are both so young, that I can say nothing about them.

Having now, Sir, gone through the Royal Family, I shall speak of their fine country, which I believe produces more to its sovereign than any other district of land of the same size in Europe. The last grant of the Diet of Saxony was between eight and nine millions of dollars (each dollar exactly three shillings and sixpence English money) per annum for nine years; yet ’tis likely that the whole may be anticipated and spent in five, and then the King calls a new Diet, and gets fresh supplies, so that ’tis not possible to say exactly what the King’s revenues are; but everybody must see that they are very large, and how the people will continue such payments begins to be a question. It is certain this country grows daily poorer, which is very visible by the decay of Leipsick fair. Everybody agrees that the last Easter fair was not half so good as it used to be; and this fair is the touchstone of the trade and money in this Electorate. The loss and expenses their own bad politics have drawn them into during this war have been very great; and the visit the King of Prussia made to Dresden was very expensive to this country; but above all, the visible decay of their linens and tinned iron manufactures (which England has been wise enough not to want any longer in such great quantities from foreign countries,) is a blow that is felt more severely than can be expressed. The Stier Bills, which are the funds here, and which always used to bear a premium, are now at 5 and 6 per cent. discount, and ’tis very difficult to negotiate them even at that price, though they carry 5 per cent. interest. I have been offered some, whose principal is due at Michaelmas, 1748, at 7 per cent. discount. This being so, you see that their credit is exhausted, and that they would hardly be able to borrow under 10 per cent.; and yet they must take up money, or their Army will mutiny, for their officers are most of ’em twelve or fifteen months in arrear. In the midst of all these difficulties the Court has squandered away above 200,000_l._ sterling at the late double marriages; given 100,000_l._ sterling for the Duke of Modena’s gallery of pictures; and Count Bruhl alone cannot spend so little as 60,000_l._ sterling a year. The pensions also that the King gives in Poland exceed the revenues he receives from thence by full 50,000_l._ per annum.

It is now necessary I should say something of the person to whom the King commits the entire care of this country. Count Bruhl is originally of a good family, but as he was a Page to the late King, so he had the education of a Page. His natural parts, without being very good, are certainly better than any other person’s I have hitherto conversed with at this Court. He was employed by the late King in high employments, but never touched the zenith of power till after the fall of Monsieur Sulkowsky, who was his predecessor in the present King’s favour. Sulkowsky lost it by absenting himself from the King’s person to make campaigns in Hungary and upon the Rhine. As Count Bruhl profited by this false step of Sulkowsky, he is resolved no person shall ever have such an advantage over him. He is never absent from the King’s person, and he pays the closest attention to every thing his Majesty says or does, though he himself is naturally very idle. His every day is passed in the following manner: he rises before six in the morning, then Father Guerini comes to him to talk upon business, and to read over whatever letters they receive, and then they send such of them as they please to the Privy Council; but if anybody comes in, business is laid aside, and he is very ready to talk upon indifferent matters. Afterwards he dresses, which takes up above an hour, and he is obliged to be with the King before nine. He stays with him till his Majesty goes to mass, which he does exactly at eleven; and then Count Bruhl goes to the Countess Moyenska, where he stays till twelve; from thence he goes either to dinner with the King, or to his own house, with a few of the lowest and worst people of this Court.

After dinner he undresses and goes to sleep till five, when Father Guerini comes and sits with him while he dresses, and at six he goes again to the King, with whom he stays till after seven; from thence he goes to some assembly, where he plays at cards very deep, the Countess Moyenska being always of the party, who plays very well, and wins considerable sums of the Count; rather before ten he sits down to supper, and from thence he goes to bed about twelve.

Now as everything of the kind, from the highest affairs of state down to operas and hunting, are all in Count Bruhl’s immediate care, I leave you to judge how his post is executed, by the time he takes to do business in. His expenses are immense. He keeps three hundred servants and as many horses. His house is in extreme bad taste and extravagance. He has, at least, a dozen country seats, where he is always building and altering, but which he never sees. It is said, and I believe it, that he takes money for everything the King disposes of in Poland, where they frequently have very great employments to bestow. Everybody here reckons that he is not sincere, but for my own part I have as yet no great reason to think so. He is very communicative to me, and very patient to hear whatever I have to say. He is certainly not an ill-natured man, having never done a hard or cruel thing to any person that I heard of since he has been in power. He is very vain, and a little flattery is absolutely necessary for those who intend being well with him; and my notion of the duty of a Foreign Minister is, that after serving his master to the utmost of his power and ability, he ought to make himself as agreeable as possible at the Court he is sent to. From this way of thinking, I have endeavoured to cultivate the King of Poland and his Minister as much as possible, because a time may come when my being well with this Court may be of some small service to the King my master.

Count Bruhl is polite, civil, and very ready to oblige, and, after the first ceremonies are over, without any forms. If he has any principle in politics, ’tis certainly favourable to the House of Austria. That, indeed, is not much, but it is more than any other person has that belongs to this Court, and whenever he falls we shall fall into worse hands. He has been very negligent of support at Court, having never, during his long Administration, made himself one friend of any great consequence. The clamours now against him are very high, for the two reasons of the fall of the Stier Bills, and the non-payment of the Army. The man that heads these complaints, and whom ’tis possible his Majesty may remember to have seen at Hanover, is one Count Linard, a Saxon, whom I take to be thoroughly in the French interests. He has but moderate parts, and very little literature, but in Saxon learning he is very deep. He rides, shoots, and dances better than anybody here, and by these accomplishments he has got himself into a good degree of the King’s favour, and flatters himself that whenever the Minister falls, he is the man that is to succeed him. I know he has been contriving to get a body of officers to throw themselves at the King’s feet to complain of Count Bruhl, and to demand their pay. By means of a spy that I had at Court I discovered this affair, and told Count Bruhl of it. He owned things were as I said, and added, that he did not expect nor deserve such usage from Count Linard; but two days afterwards he told me that my information was very true, and that he had taken such measures upon it as would perfectly secure him. I have since had the misfortune to lose my spy, who is fled for having got a woman with child, he being a married man, and adultery in this country is punished with death.

The next person I shall speak of is father Guerini, a Jesuit, who is more in the King’s favour than in any credit. He has been long in the service, and is now kept, like an old horse, for what he has formerly done. He is Count Bruhl’s absolute creature, and has his confidence. He is perpetually with the King and Queen, and constantly employed in making up some quarrel among the singers and dancers. If he ever had any parts, they were gone before I came; but he is a good, trifling old man, and, though a priest, has no ambition. He has twice refused a Cardinal’s hat; and the last time, which was not above half a year ago, the King pressed him to it very much, but in vain. I go to him very often; for he often comes out with things that he is trusted with, and which I am sure he ought not to tell.

The next person to Count Bruhl in business is one Heinnech, a low man, who once wore a livery, though he now wears the Blue Riband of Russia. He talks no French, and we converse in Latin; but Monsieur Heinnech has so quarrelled with all moods and tenses, numbers and cases, that it is with difficulty I understand him. If I guess right at what he says to me, he is very ignorant of the affairs I talk about. He is _Chef des finances_; and it is said that Count Bruhl and he know so many had things of each other with respect to the disposal of public money, that it is impossible they should ever quarrel. He is the Minister’s right hand for domestic affairs, as Mr. Saul is for foreign ones, who in that province does everything. He is also a very low man; but he has parts, quickness, and knowledge without the least appearance of fashion or manners of a gentleman. There is not a man in Saxony that does not detest him, except his patron, Count Bruhl, to whom he is certainly very useful. Heinnech went so far once as to propose in the Privy Council to hang him. He has very strange schemes in his head; he is certainly for the House of Austria, but in a manner peculiar to himself; _for he wishes to see that House strictly united with that of Bourbon, and believes that a[93] practicable business_. He is secretary to the Cabinet Council, in conjunction with Mr. Walter, who is a very honest knowing man, well-intentioned, and quite in the true system, but at present hardly employed at all, to our great misfortune.

These persons govern under Count Bruhl, as the Countess Moyenska does over him--

... orbi Jupiter imponit jura, sed illa Jovi.

She is thoroughly hated, having all had qualities that can unite in one person, among which pride, avarice, and revenge shine most conspicuous. She has certainly received money in large sums from France; but as that is received, and there is no immediate prospect of more, I think her violence against us seems to abate. I thought it my business to do all I could to be well with her, and I am now of all her parties. My reception, when I first went, was very cold; but I expected that, and persisted in going till I came to be very well received.

I shall now say a word or two of their Army. They aver that they have 44,000 men, but they really have but 33,000. To all appearance they are very fine ones, especially the Cavalry; but as I have already told you how ill they are paid, you must see that without a large sum to put them in motion, ’tis impossible they should act out of their own country. As to their generals, Count Rotosha and the Chevalier de Saxe, both natural sons of the late King of Poland, are at the head of the Army. They are not wanting in abilities and knowledge; but they are both the idlest and most inactive of all mankind, and both bitter enemies of the House of Austria, because they reckon they were sacrificed by Prince Charles at the battle of Keisersdorf. There is also in this service a Prince of Anhalt-Dessau, who was formerly in the King of Prussia’s, but who was discharged from thence upon suspicion of cowardice. He afterwards served as a volunteer in the armies of the Empress-Queen; but they would not give him any command at Vienna. At last the father, about a year and a half ago, brought him to Leipsick fair, presented and recommended him to the King of Poland, and begged he would make him a Lieutenant-General in his army. The King answered he would consider of it. Upon this the old Prince came out into the ante-chamber, and told everybody that the King had made his son Eugene a Lieutenant-General, and got his Commission immediately made out, which the good King, rather than have the trouble of a dispute, signed; and he is in this service.

There is another general here, a Frenchman, named D’Ollone, who was in the service of their Imperial Majesties; but being sent hither, about eight months ago, to regulate some differences about the Saxon troops, when they were in Bohemia, he talked so fast, and played so deep with Count Bruhl, that he thought him the greatest officer of the age, and at once offered to make him General of Foot (whereas he had been but Lieutenant-General under their Imperial Majesties.) This offer D’Ollone readily accepted, and entered into this service; but in a month’s time all D’Ollone’s talk was out, and he had won too much of Count Bruhl’s money: so he quickly grew out of favour, and was found to be a man of no parts or consequence. In short, both parties are heartily sick of their bargain. He curses the day he was taken, and they the day they took him.

I hope you will excuse my mentioning these two last stories; but I mean them more for entertainment than information, though they are both strictly true, and serve a little to illustrate the characters of the King of Poland and his First Minister.

I must now inform you of what I judge to be the views and wishes of this Court. The King of Poland most ardently desires to see a peace made. He loves peace so much, that I believe he is not much concerned about what sort of a one it may be; but till that happy hour arrives, their system here (if they have any system) is to observe an impracticable neutrality; and by the fear they have of offending anybody (which is the natural consequence of such a system), they take care to oblige nobody. The Court of Vienna is very much dissatisfied with their proceedings at Dresden; but the Ministry of Versailles are often full as discontented with the steps they take. Russia alone is the power to which the King pays real court. ’Tis by the Czarina only that the King keeps possession of the Throne of Poland: for his affairs in that kingdom are in so bad a situation, and his interest there so very low, that the Grand Marshal, the Grand Chancellor, and many other Poles of distinction that came here upon the late double marriages, told me, in my first week’s acquaintance with them, that if it was not for fear of Russia they would dethrone their King in half a year and choose another; for that he had broken through every promise that he had ever made them, and had not kept one tittle of the _pacta conventa_. The Ministry were so sensible that all this is true, that the Court goes into Poland early the next spring in order to manage that people, and to conciliate their minds to the House of Saxony; for the King has the succession of that Crown in his family much at heart; and this, if ever it does happen, must be brought about by Russia. After all this, judge of the weight the Court of Petersburgh must have with that of Dresden. For my part, I give it as an opinion, by which I will abide, and which I can prove by facts, that whenever there is a Minister at Dresden, sent by the Czarina with absolute instructions to act in concert with those of his Majesty and his Allies, Saxony must do whatever they please.

There is something unfortunate between this Court and that of Vienna. They never were perfectly well together for six weeks at a time. This King thinks that it was entirely owing to him that the Imperial dignity returned to the House of Austria, and that their Imperial Majesties can never do enough to repay that obligation. The Court of Vienna says, that she placed the Elector of Saxony on the Throne of Poland, (for doing which she has certainly since been a great sufferer,) without having any returns of gratitude from the Court of Dresden. ’Tis indeed true, that at a time when the Empress-Queen is fully employed, and unable to pay much attention to small things, this Court shows her very little regard. The Austrian Court sees this, and resents it tacitly very much. They have not yet thought fit to appoint anybody to succeed Esterhazy here, and they talked of sending only a Resident, at which this Court seems much offended. As to Prussia, this Court has not yet recovered the wounds nor the fright which it lately received from that quarter. With respect to France, their heads here were so turned with the marriage of the Dauphiness, that they are not yet quite settled. They are still pensioners to that Crown, but their treaty of subsidy expires next February. I flatter myself that it will not be renewed: nothing but poverty can make them do it.

I have asked Count Bruhl twenty times, how it was possible to rely in the least upon a power who would at any time sacrifice this country (because it is their interest so to do, which the French understand but too well), at a moment’s warning, to their hated and dreaded foe, the King of Prussia. But the real cause that lost the Allies this Court, and threw it into the arms of France, was Mr. Calhoen, who, when Minister from Holland, had orders from his masters to treat about the taking a body of Saxon troops into their pay. He did indeed make the proposition; but at the same time prevented the success of it, by telling Count Bruhl, that though, by his office, he was obliged to ask for a body of Saxon troops, yet, as a friend to the Court of Dresden, he could not help saying that he doubted whether they would be well or regularly paid for them. Thus did this perfidious Dutchman talk, and easily persuaded Count Bruhl (who thought of nothing but the money) to refuse the troops. The Minister from this Court to the States General is a Frenchman, and heartily in the interest of his country; and all his letters that come here are as partial to our enemies and as prejudicial to his Majesty and his Allies as possible; and indeed this whole Court is so thoroughly Frenchified, that upon the late successes of our fleets, and the late battle won by our Allies in Italy, I don’t think that I was congratulated by five people here, and those few that did wish me joy did it in a whisper. I can’t help mentioning one thing upon which this Court value themselves, and make a merit of to me. They say it is their influence over the King of the Two Sicilies (because he married their daughter), that has prevented his marching against our Allies in Lombardy; but such counters as these are never taken in payment.

Thus far I got Mr. Stephens to copy almost word for word a letter I wrote to Lord Chesterfield, by the same messenger that brings you this; and therefore it should not be shown to everybody; but I hope it will divert Lord Ilchester and the Duke of Marlborough. If it had been wrote to you in my own way, I could have made you laugh heartily. You observe that Monsieur Bruhl, like all First Ministers, keeps the lowest company. I wish I dared write all I could; but things are not yet ripe. The first opportunity, you shall have a packet of curiosities.

I am ever entirely yours,

C. HANBURY WILLIAMS.

* * *

Dresden, 27th August, 1745, N. S.

FOOTNOTES:

[89] Supposed to be Dr. Sherlock.

[90] This alludes to an interview between Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox, May 9, 1755. See Melcombe’s Diary, p. 319; and Mr. Fox’s Letter to Lord Hartington of May 13, 1755, in Appendix to Waldegrave.

[91] See Appendix, vol. i.

[92] It is perhaps more reasonable, and certainly more charitable, to suspect Sir Charles of credulity, and his female informant of malignity, than to believe the tales of incest and licentious effrontery reported in this letter. On the other hand, it must be acknowledged that the general state of manners in German Courts, in the middle of last century, by no means disprove such imputations.--E.

[93] This passage, written in 1747, is remarkable; for Mr. Saul’s “_scheme_” was proved to be “_practicable business_” in the course of a few years.--E.

END OF VOL. II.

T. C. Savill, Printer, 4, Chandos-street, Covent-garden.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE

Obvious typographical errors and punctuation errors have been corrected after careful comparison with other occurrences within the text and consultation of external sources.

Except for those changes noted below, all misspellings in the text, and inconsistent or archaic usage, have been retained: for example, everybody, every body; meantime, mean time; partizan; catched; meaned; honester; tragical; subtilty; Pensylvania; Massachusets.

Pg 18: ‘lived i na Court’ replaced by ‘lived in a Court’. Pg 22: ‘nor to be wiped’ replaced by ‘not to be wiped’. Pg 28: ‘to recal him’ replaced by ‘to recall him’. Pg 31: ‘his Aid-de-camp’ replaced by ‘his Aide-de-camp’. Pg 124: ‘forsesaw a war’ replaced by ‘foresaw a war’. Pg 140: ‘Edgcumbe, the one’ replaced by ‘Edgecombe, the one’. Pg 218: ‘inclined to pronouce’ replaced by ‘inclined to pronounce’. Pg 239: ‘Saxony, to faciliate’ replaced by ‘Saxony, to facilitate’. Pg 239: ‘reduced to recal’ replaced by ‘reduced to recall’. Pg 262: ‘Oct. 27.--The King’ replaced by ‘Oct. 27th.--The King’. Pg 298: ‘every the most’ replaced by ‘even the most’. Pg 304: ‘Feb. 7.--The younger’ replaced by ‘Feb. 7th.--The younger’. Pg 321: ‘was at at a loss’ replaced by ‘was at a loss’. Pg 374: ‘be expelled Oxford’ replaced by ‘be expelled from Oxford’.

Footnote [76]: ‘Ramilies proved’ replaced by ‘Ramillies proved’. Footnote [84]: ‘villany, murder’ replaced by ‘villainy, murder’.