Final triumph of the minis ters. Reflections on this struggle. his advisers with those which characterised the unfortu- While this contest was being carried on in Parliament, the contending parties were not idle out of doors. The king, who rushed into it with so much boldness, had not been prepared for the alarming demonstrations of Parliament. If the minister of his choice had now been driven from power, he would have been prostrate before the Coalition. This danger was at first imminent; and the king awaited it with dismay. Defeat in such a contest would have been humiliating and disgraceful. Believing that he could be "no longer of utility to this country, nor could with honour continue in this island," he repeated his threats of retiring to Hanover, rather than submit 1 Parl. Hist., xxiv. 736, to what he deemed the destruction of his kingly power.' From such extremities, however, he was relieved by the declining numbers of his opponents, and the increasing influence and popularity of his own cause. The Coalition, though powerful in Parliament, by means of a combination of parties, had never been popular in the country. While in power they had been exposed to continual obloquy, which was redoubled after their dismissal. The new ministers and the court party, taking advantage of this feeling, represented Mr. Fox's India Bill as an audacious attempt to interfere with the prerogatives of the Crown, and its authors as enemies of the king and constitution. The loyalty of the people was aroused, and they soon ranged themselves on the side of the king and his ministers. Addresses and other demonstrations of popular sympathy were received from all parts of the country; and the king was thus encouraged to maintain a firm attitude in front of his opponents.2 The tactics of the two parties in Parliament, and the conduct of their leaders, were also calculated to convert public opinion to the king's side. Too much exasperated to act with caution, the Opposition ruined their cause by factious extravagance and precipitancy. They were resolved to take the king's cabinet by storm, and without pause or parley struck incessantly at the door. Their very dread of a dissolution, which they so loudly condemned, showed little confidence in popular support. Instead of making common cause with the people, they lowered their contention to a party struggle. Constitutionally the king 1 Tomline's Life of Pitt, i. 271, 341, 396. Writing to Mr. Pitt, 22nd Feb., in reference to his answer to the address of the 20th, the king said: "I trust that while the answer is drawn up with civility, it will be a clear support of my own rights, which the addresses from all parts of the kingdom show me the people feel essential to their liberties." Tomline's Life of Pitt, i. 457. had a right to dismiss his ministers, and to appeal to the people to support his new administration. The Opposition endeavoured to restrain him in the exercise of this right, and to coerce him by a majority of the existing House of Commons. They had overstepped the constitutional limits of their power; and the assaults directed against prerogative, recoiled upon themselves. On the other side, Mr. Pitt as minister relied upon the prerogative of the king to appoint him, the duty of Parliament to consider his measures,—and his own right to advise the king to dissolve Parliament, if those measures were obstructed. The tact, judgment, courage, and commanding talents of Mr. Pitt inspired his party with confidence, and secured popularity for his cause; while, by maintaining a defensive attitude, he offered no diversion to the factious tactics of his opponents. His accession to office had been immediately marked by the defection of several members from the Opposition,a circumstance always calculated upon by a minister in those times, and was soon followed by the forbearance of others, who were not prepared to participate in the violent measures of their leaders. The influence of the court and Government was strenuously exerted in making converts; and the growing popularity of their cause discouraged the less zealous of their opponents. Mr. Pitt had waited patiently while the majorities against him in Parliament were falling away, and public opinion was declaring itself, more and more, in his favour. The results of the dissolution now revealed the judgment with which he had conducted his cause, and chosen his time for appealing to the people. Every preparation had been made for using the influence of "The precedent of 1784 establishes this rule of conduct: that if the ministers chosen by the Crown do not possess the confi the Crown at the elections,—the king himself took the deepest personal interest in the success of the ministerial candidates1; and Mr. Pitt's popularity was at its height, when Parliament was dissolved. His enemies were everywhere put to the rout, at the hustings. To support Mr. Pitt was the sole pledge of the popular candidates. Upwards of one hundred and sixty of his late opponents lost their seats2; and on the assembling of the new Parliament, he could scarcely reckon his majorities.3 The minister was popular in the country, all-powerful in Parliament, and had the entire confidence of the court. If such was the success of the minister, what was the triumph of the king! He had expelled one ministry, and retained another, in defiance of the House of Commons. The people had pressed forward loyally to his support; and by their aid he had overborne all opposition to his will. He now possessed a strong government, and a minister in whom he confided; and he enjoyed once more power, freedom, and popularity. Not only had he overcome and ruined a party which he hated; but he had established the ascendency of the Crown, which henceforth, for nearly fifty years, continued to prevail over every other power in the state. upon the Such results, however, were not without danger. Its results Already the king was too prone to exercise his power; future poand the encouragement he had received, was likely to exalt his views of prerogative. But he had now a minister dence of the House of Commons, they may advise an appeal to the people, with whom rests the ultimate decision. This course has been followed in 1807, in 1831, in 1834, and in 1841. In 1807 and 1831, the Crown was enabled, as in 1784, to obtain the confidence of the New House of Commons. In 1834 and 1841, the decision was adverse to the existing ministry."- Lord John licy of the state. Relations of Mr. Pitt who with higher abilities and larger views of state policy - — had a will even stronger than his own. Throughout his reign, it had been the tendency of the king's personal administration to favour men whose chief merit was their subservience to his own views, instead of leaving the country to be governed, - as a free state should be governed, by its ablest and most popular statesmen.1 He had only had one other minister of the same lofty pretensions, Lord Chatham; and now, while trusting that statesman's son,sharing his councils, and approving his policy,-he yielded to his superior intellect. Yet were the Royal predilections not without influence on the minister. Reared in the Whig school, Mr. Pitt soon deserted the principles, as he had been severed from the connexions, of that party. He had been raised to power by royal favour,-maintained in it by prerogative, and he was now in the ascendant, by having made common cause with the Crown. Hence he naturally leant towards prerogative, and Tory principles of government. His contests with his great antagonist, Mr. Fox, and the Whig party, still further alienated him from the principles of his youth. Until the French Revolution, however, his policy was wise and liberal: but from that time his rule became arbitrary, and opposed to public liberty. And such were his talents, and such the temper of the times, that he was able to make even arbitrary principles popular. During his long administration the people were converted to Tory principles, and encouraged the king and the minister to repress liberty of thought, and to wage war against opinion. If the king was no longer his own minister,―as in the time of Lord North,--he had the satis 1 See Lord J. Russell's Introd. Correspondence, pp. 1.—lxii. to vol. iii. of the Duke of Bedford's |