« PreviousContinue »
that life is no more than a dramatic scene, in which the hero should preserve his consistency to the last, and that as you lived without virtue, you should die without repentance.”
Lord George considered it unmanly, ungentlemanly, and dishonourable in the duke, to accept of an appointment as deputy ranger of the Phønix Park, until his conduct in Germany had been fairly tried and defended: whereas the duke took possession of the emolument arising from it, sans ceremonie.
Junius must have been more than a common political enemy to the duke, or he would not have taken such infinite pains to collect a catalogue of the various indignities that had been offered to him : he writes to his printer more than once, to obtain for him the information, when the duke was flogged by Humphrey :not satisfied with this, he relates anecdotes of the duchess, which might easily have been obtained from Lord Chesterfield, with whom Lord George was on intimate terms. Another anecdote respecting the duke's chastisement evidently came from that quarter.
“ Mr. Heston Humphrey, a country attorney, horsewhipped the duke with equal justice, severity, and perseverance, on the course at Litchfield. Rigby and lord Trentha m*
* Characters well known to Lord George. See Lord Orford's Memoirs.
were also cudgelled in a most exemplary manner. This gave rise to the following story: • When the late King heard that Sir Edward Hawke had given the French a drubbing, his Majesty, who had never received that kind of chastisement, was pleased to ask Lord Chesterfield the meaning of the word. 'Sir,' says Lord Chesterfield, the meaning of the word—but here comes the Duke of Bedford, who is better able to explain it to your Majesty than I am.””
In confirmation that Lord George and Lord Chesterfield were personally acquainted, we need only refer to Mr. Stockdale's Memoirs, who relates the following anecdote.
“One day when I dined with Lord George at Chatham, an officer who was in
asked him what he thought of Lord Tyrawley as a bel esprit ? The first time,' replied he, that I heard him converse, I thought him very
interesting; the second time, very well ; and the third time very indifferent. That is not the way,' added he, with my Lord Chesterfield; he never flags.””
The allusion which Junius makes to Verres, contrasted with the Duke of Bedford; as well might Verres have returned to Sicily,” reminds us of Swift's satirical description of the Duke of Wharton's lord-lieutenancy under that character.
In the Gentleman's Magazine for September 1785, is the following paragraph, which is in accordance with the expression of Junius.
“ The late Lord Sackville, who was a man of extraordinary talents, wrote a beautiful eulogy on the late Princess of Orange, but which never graced the press. The genius, learning, and exalted virtues of the Princess, were the theme of his Lordship's all-powerful pen.
“ The above noble Lord, and his illustrious relation Lady Betty Germain, had the art of painting in words to a very eminent degree, and which afforded the finest ornaments in either poetry, history, or elocution. The very animated and beautiful imagery of Cicero, in which he paints the cruelty of Verres, is spoken of with rapture by her Ladyship in some of her letters to Dean Swift. It was in a letter to the above lady that Dean Swift styled Ireland the Isle of Saints.”
The Graftons next claim our attention. His hatred to this family continued unabated to the last. He considered the minister's brother, Lieutenant-colonel Fitzroy, as the primary cause of all his disgrace, and that the family had conspired against him for personal emolument. No epithet, no satire, no words, can express his utter abhorrence of this family. They are all stamped with ignominy.
“There are some hereditary strokes of character,” says Junius, “ by which a family may be as
clearly distinguished as by the blackest features of the human face.”
But it was the prime minister on whom Junius fastened like a vulture.
“ If there be not a fatality attending every measure you are concerned in, by what treachery or by what excess of folly has it happened, that those ungracious acts, which have distinguished your adminstration, and which I doubt not were entirely your own, should carry with them a strong appearance of personal interest and even of personal enmity, in a quarter where no such interest or enmity can be supposed to exist, without the highest injustice and the highest dishonour ?" -Letter VIII., 18 March, 1769.
“ If I were personally your enemy, I might pity and forgive you. You have every claim to compassion, that can arise from misery and distress; the condition you are reduced to, would disarm a private enemy of his resentment, and leave no consolation to the most vindictive spirit, but that such an object as you are, would disgrace the dignity of revenge. But in the relation you have borne to this country, you have no title to indulgence; and if I had followed the dictates of my own opinion, I never should have allowed you the respite of a moment. In your public character, you have injured every subject of the empire; and though an individual is not authorized to forgive the injuries done to so
ciety, he is called upon to assert his separate share in the public resentment. I submitted however to the judgement of men, more moderate, perhaps more candid than myself. For my own part; I do not pretend to understand those prudent forms of decorum, those gentle rules of discretion, which some men endeavour to unite with the conduct of the greatest and most hazardous affairs.” -Letter xxxvI., 14. Feb., 1770.
The former part of this personal remark alludes to the erasure of his name from the Privy Council list, which the Duke, in conjunction with Lord Chatham, advised the king immediately to enforce. The latter, to the disposal of his troops at Minden, where he considered his judgement equal to that of Prince Ferdinand, and which opinion he maintained on his trial.
Lord Chatham next claims our attention. This nobleman had attained the zenith of his power at the time of Lord George's trial, and sided with the King and Prince Ferdinand in contributing to his disgrace. His influence at Court continued, and although it may be matter of opinion at the present day, whether he used it impartially or not—it is evident that Junius watched him with a jealous eye, and freely commented on his public conduct.
“ The same measures, by which an abandoned profligate is advanced to power, must be observed