Memoirs of the Court and Cabinets of George the Third. Richard Temple-Grenvillelle
implied an act of the House to debate, and, if to debate, to decide upon. So idle is genius! I see through the motive power: if Parliament has a right to confer power, it has a right to say what sort of power. So far Fox's penetration reached, and so he boldly denied the major of the proposition; and then, in a puzzle for consistency of popular attachment to good old rights of the Lords and Commons, and his subscription to the pillar at Runnymede, run into the contradiction of admitting the major in shape of recognitions. It is impossible yet to foresee what tergiversation will take place, or how many will sacrifice their principles to the rising sun; forgetting that apostacy to honest principles requires that there should be a transcendancy of merit of another sort – namely, of great ability to be useful to make that apostacy acceptable or the object of remuneration. Hating the traitor and loving the treason, is a state maxim to be remembered by those whose treason is scarcely ever to be regarded while themselves are the objects of civil contempt. Yet some hold a language of doubt. One or two, whom I will not yet name, I told if they had not made up an opinion, they had better ask their constituents for one. It seems to me, that the business must close in a resort to the sense of the nation. In what shape such resort may possibly, I think not probably, be made, is serious indeed. But the violence of the faction of Fox portends every evil. Perhaps, however, and most likely, the resort to a new election, may give us time to grow cool, and close matters there. Adieu, for the day.
Ever, my dear Lord, in truth and affection,
Your devoted friend and servant,
Wm. Young.
LORD BULKELEY TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.
Stanhope Street, Dec. 11th, 1788.
My dear Lord,
The scene here is a very busy one, and I never was so interested in any public measures in my life as in the support of Mr. Pitt and the King at this moment, looking upon it as my duty to do all in my power to stem the torrent of profligacy which the Opposition and their King seem determined to hazard with the good sense, decency, and character of the country. I really do see such things, and hear of such doings, that my tolerant spirit cannot forgive, and if you had not very good information of them, I should think myself bound to treat you with them. The Nevilles, Fortescues, Jemmy, and the General, being in town, we make a very strong corps together; and we are sent to White's every night to gain intelligence for our ladies, who are not a little animated in favour of the good cause. Charles Fox and Pitt were at issue yesterday in the House, when the former advanced the most extraordinary doctrines, considering his former opinions in the Whig Club and in Parliament on constitutional points. I hope the nation will see what lengths he is capable of going when it answers his purposes. I do not hear of many rats running as yet, except the Duke of Queensbury, Lord Brudenell, and W. Gerrard, Hamilton, and Sir Robert Smyth, but probably some more dirty dogs will follow them. The Chancellor seems very sour and crusty, and certainly does not like Pitt, but I cannot believe he will do otherwise than right on this momentous occasion.
We sat yesterday till eight, in the Lords, and thought Lord Camden imprudent in touching upon what had passed in the Commons the day before, as it gave the Opposition an excuse for being violent; it, however, had one good effect, that the Chancellor opened enough of his sentiments to show that he means to stand by his colleagues. His speech was not long, but one of the finest I ever heard, and made so strong an impression, that we gave him a merry "Hear, hear," which you know is not very frequent in the House of Lords. I think we shall carry the question of restrictions very powerfully in the Lords, as I hear of no rats but the Duke of Queensbury, the Duke of St. Albans, and Lord Rodney. In the Commons, a great deal will depend on the state of the King's health at the time the question comes on, and on the previous activity of Pitt and his two secretaries, in talking a little to dubious friends, which they have not time nor inclination to do, notwithstanding so much depends upon it.
Adieu, my dear Lord. Our joint and kindest love and remembrance attend you both.
Yours ever, &c.
Pray order your secretary to send me word of the number and income of the tide-waiters' offices which you can spare me, as I have dependants enough if they are as highly paid in Ireland as in England. In the meantime I give you the name of John Thomas, for one of them. Did you ever promote one Alexander Gammach, tide-waiter at Belfast? Pray do before you quit Ireland.
MR. W. W. GRENVILLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.
Whitehall, Dec. 11th, 1788.
My dear Brother,
You will, no doubt, be as much surprised as I was, to find that the notion of the Prince of Wales's right was brought forward yesterday by Fox in the House of Commons. It was a matter of no less astonishment to many of his own friends, who were by no means prepared for the assertion of such a doctrine. One should lose oneself in conjecture, by attempting to find out what motive can have induced him to take exactly the most unpopular ground on which their side of the question can be rested. I was not in the House; but I find there was an impression on our friends, that in his second speech he had rather seemed desirous of stating the proposition less strongly.
Our present idea is, that it will be right, in consequence of this debate, that nothing should be moved on the first day (which, I think, cannot be till Wednesday) beyond the abstract proposition, as maintained by Pitt; namely, that in every case of suspension or interruption of the personal exercise of the royal authority, otherwise than by death, the care of making provision for the emergency rests with the two Houses of Parliament. These are not the words, but the substance. A stronger question we cannot desire.
12th. – I intended to have sent this off to you yesterday; but was kept in the House of Lords till it was too late. You will see by the papers, better than I can pretend to retail it, what passed there. The doctrine, as stated by Lord Loughborough, was not quite so strong as Fox's; but is sufficiently so, to be reprobated by every lawyer in the country. Even Erskine says openly, that he cannot go this length.
The idea is, and some words which Fox dropped yesterday in the House of Lords seem to confirm it, that whenever the report of our Committee of Precedents is made, which will probably be to-day, or, at latest, to-morrow, he intends to explain away his assertion, into the mere statement, that the Prince has such pretensions to a Regency as Parliament cannot overlook. Be this as it may, we are determined to state the right distinctly, by a resolution of the House, before we proceed to any other measures.
Fortescue has this instant been with me, to say that he has heard a report, said to come from a considerable Oppositionist, that they have resolved, in consequence of the examinations and particularly Willis's, to accede to the proposed restrictions, for a short time, reserving to themselves the right of contending for more, should the continuance of the King's illness appear to give grounds to expect that it will be permanent. I do not think this by any means impossible, because the question will clearly go against them in the present moment; and this appearance of moderation may give them grounds at a more distant period. It is difficult, however, to conceive that they can make up their minds to wait so long without a greater struggle.
Only think of Fox's want of judgment, to bring himself and them into such a scrape as he has done, by maintaining a doctrine of higher Tory principle than could have been found anywhere, since Sir Robert Sawyer's speeches.
I enclose the examination of the physicians before our Committee. I am sorry to say, that the examination before the Lords is infinitely less decent and respectful, and goes into a variety of particulars, which, I am sure it will shock you to read, as it did me to hear them.
Ever most affectionately yours,
W. W. G.
I do not know in what manner what Thurlow said about Ireland will be represented in the papers, not having seen them. It was so enveloped, that I, who heard it, could form no notion what his opinion is. In the debate in the House of Commons, I mean, for your sake, to state my principles on that subject distinctly.
Sir William Young, in the next letter, reports what was done on Pitt's motion for the Committee.
SIR WILLIAM YOUNG TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.
House of Commons, Friday, Half-past