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 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 satisfaction of seeing his own principles carried out by hands far abler than his own. In prosecutions of the press, and the repression of democratic movements at home2, the minister was, perhaps, as zealous as the king: in 1 See Lord J. Russell's Intr. to vol. iii. of Bedford Corr., pp. 1.-lxii. 2 See Chapter IX., Press and Liberty of Opinion. The king's continued activity. The influ- carrying on war to crush democracy abroad, the king was more zealous than his minister. They laboured strenuously together in support of monarchy all over the world; and respected too little the constitutional liberties of their own people. Nor did the king relax his accustomed activity in public affairs. From the close of the American war until the breaking out of hostilities with France, his pleasure was taken by the Secretary-at-War upon every commission granted in the army; and throughout Mr. Pitt's administration, every act of the executive was submitted to him, for his judgment and approval.2 We find him combating the opinions of his cabinet concerning foreign affairs, in elaborate papers: criticising the policy of government measures,-commenting upon debates and divisions in Parliament: praising ministers, and censuring the opposition: approving taxes: discussing amendments to bills: settling the appointment and dismissal of officers, the grant of peerages, and the preferment of bishops.3 With his own hand he struck the name of Mr. Fox, from the list of privy-councillors.* And if, during the administration of Mr. Pitt, the king's independent exercise of influence was somewhat less active, the power of the crown itself,as wielded jointly by himself and his minister,— was greater than at any former period. The king and his minister were now absolute. A war is gene 1 See Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, ii. 73; Ibid., App. xvii. xxvii. xxx.; iii., App. ii. iii. xxi. 2 Mr. Wynn, 14th April, 1812; Hans. Deb., xxii. 334. On recovering from his illness, Feb. 23rd, 1789, the king writes, "I must decline entering into a pressure of business, and, indeed, for the rest of my life, shall expect others to fulfil the duties of their employments, rally favourable to authority, by bringing together the people and the government, in a common cause and combined exertions. The French war, notwithstanding its heavy burthens and numerous failures, was popular on account of the principles it was supposed to represent; and the vast expenditure, if it distressed the people, multiplied the patronage of the crown,-afforded a rich harvest for contractors,—and made the fortunes of farmers and manufacturers, by raising the price of every description of produce. The "moneyed classes" rallied round the war minister,-bought seats in Parliament with their sudden gains,-ranged themselves in a strong phalanx behind their leader,—cheered his speeches, and voted for him in every division. Their zeal was rewarded with peerages, baronetcies, patronage, and all the good things which an inordinate expenditure enabled him to dispense. For years, opposition in Parliament to a minister thus supported, was an idle form; and if beyond its walls, the voice of complaint was raised, the arm of the law was strong and swift to silence it.1 To oppose the minister, had become high treason to the state. However great the king's confidence in a minister so powerful as Mr. Pitt, whenever their views of policy differed, his Majesty's resolution was as inflexible as ever. Nor were his ministers secure from the exercise against his of his personal influence against them, when he was pleased to use it. The first measure on which Mr. Pitt was likely to encounter objections from the king, was that for parliamentary reform. Having pledged himself to the principles of such a measure, while in opposition, he was determined not to be unfaithful to them now. But before he ventured to bring forward his plan, he prudently submitted it to the king, and depre1. See Chapter IX., Press and Liberty of Opinion. The king still pre pared to use his in fluence ministers. Preponderating of the crown. cated the opposition of the court. Writing, on the 20th March, 1785, the king said, Mr. Pitt's "letter expressed that there is but one issue of the business he could look upon as fatal, that is, the possibility of the measure being rejected by the weight of those who are supposed to be connected with the government. Mr. Pitt must recollect that, though I have ever thought it unfortunate that he had early engaged himself in this measure, he ought to lay his thoughts before the House; that out of personal regard to him I would avoid giving any opinion to any one on the opening of the door to parliamentary reform, except to him; therefore I am certain Mr. Pitt cannot suspect my having influenced any one on the occasion. If others choose, for base ends, to impute such a conduct to me, I must bear it as former false suggestions." 1 He proceeded to say that every man ought to vote according to his own opinion; and warned Mr. Pitt that "there are questions men will not, by friendship, be biassed to adopt." This incident is significant. Mr. Pitt apprehended the exertion of the influence of the crown to defeat his measure. The king was aware of the suspicions attaching to himself: but while promising not to interfere, he could not refrain from intimating that the measure would be defeated, as indeed it was, without his interference. The extent to which the preponderating influence influence of the crown was recognised during this period, is exemplified by the political relations of parties to his Majesty and to the Prince of Wales, on the occasion of the king's illness in 1788.2 At that time, ministers enjoyed the entire confidence of the king, and commanded an irresistible majority in Par Tomline's Life of Pitt, ii. 40. 2 Infra, p. 146. liament; yet was it well understood by both parties, that the first act of the Regent would be to dismiss his father's ministers, and take into his councils the leaders of the opposition. Thus even the party which protested against the influence of the crown was quite prepared to use it, and by its aid to brave a hostile majority in Parliament, as Mr. Pitt had successfully done, a few years before. fall. At length Mr. Pitt's fall, like his rise, was due to the Mr. Pitt's king's personal will; and was brought about in the same way as many previous political events, by irresponsible councils. There is reason to believe that Mr. Pitt's unbending temper,-increased in stubbornness by his longcontinued supremacy in Parliament, and in the cabinet, -had become distasteful to the king." His Majesty loved power at least as much as his minister, and was tenacious of his authority, even over those in whom he had confidence. Mr. Pitt's power had nearly overshadowed his own; and there were not wanting opinions among friends of the king, and rivals of the statesman, that the latter had "an overweening ambition, great and opiniative presumption, and perhaps not quite constitutional ideas with regard to the respect and attention due to the crown.' "3 1801. While this feeling existed in regard to Mr. Pitt, Catholic his Majesty was greatly agitated by events which at Question, once aroused his sensitive jealousy of councils to which he had not been admitted, and his conscientious scruples. Mr. Pitt and his colleagues thought it necessary to inaugurate the Union of Ireland, by concessions to 1 Tomline's Life of Pitt, ii. 480. 2 27th Feb., 1801. "I was told this evening, by Pelham, that his Majesty had for a long time since been dissatisfied with Pitt's, and particularly with Lord Grenville's 'authoritative manners' towards Malmesbury Corr., iv. 24. See 3 Malmesbury Corr., iv. 35. |