but when duly sharing power with other classes, and admitting the just claims of talent, they prevailed over every rival and adverse interest; and,-whatever party was in power,-were still the rulers of the state. In a society comprising so many classes as that of England, the highest are willingly accepted as governors, when their personal qualities are not unequal to their position. They excite less jealousy than abler men of inferior social pretensions, who climb to power. Born and nurtured to influence, they have studied how to maintain it. That they have maintained it so well, against the encroachments of wealth,-an expanding society, and popular influences, is mainly due to their progressive policy. As they have been ready to advance with their age, the people have been content to acknowledge them as leaders but had they endeavoured to stem the tide of public opinion, they would have been swept aside, while men from other classes advanced to power. 167 CHAPTER III THE PREROGATIVES OF THE CROWN, DURING THE MINORITY OR IN. CAPACITY OF THE SOVEREIGN.-ILLNESS AND REGENCY OF GEORGE THE THIRD.-LATER REGENCY ACTS. Preroga We have seen the prerogatives of the crown wielded in the plenitude of kingly power. Let us now turn aside for awhile, and view them tives of the as they lay inert in the powerless hands of abeyance. a stricken king. crowr. in The melancholy illnesses of George III., at different periods of his reign, involved political considerations of the highest importance,-affecting the prerogatives of the crown, the rights of the royal family, the duties of ministers, and the authority of Parliament. of George The king was seized by the first of these attacks in 1765. Though a young man, in the full First illness vigour of life, he exhibited those symptoms III. in 1765. of mental disorder, which were afterwards more seriously developed. But the knowledge of this melancholy circumstance was confined to his own family, and personal attendants.' This illness, however, had been in other respects so alarming, that it led the king to consider the necessity of providing for a Grenville Papers, iii. 122; Adolphus, Hist., i. 175, n.; Quar terly Review, lxvi. 240, by Mr. Croker. regency, in case of his death. The laws of England recognise no incapacity in the sovereign, by reason of nonage; and have made no provision for the guardianship of a king, or for the government of his kingdom, during his minority. Yet the common sense of every age has revolted against the anomaly of suffering the country to be practically governed by an infant king. Hence special provision has been made for each occasion, according to the age and consanguinity of the surviving relatives of the minor; and as such provision involves not only the care of an infant, but the government of the realm, the sanction of Parliament has necessarily been required, as well as that of the king. Regency Act of 1751. By the Regency Act of 1751, passed after the death of Frederick Prince of Wales, the Princess Dowager of Wales had been appointed regent, in the event of the demise of George II. before the Prince of Wales, or any other of her children succeeding to the throne, had attained the age of eighteen years. This act also nominated the council of regency: but empowered the king to add four other members to the council, by instruments under his sign manual, to be opened after his death. But this precedent deferred too much to the judgment of Parliament, and left too little to the discretion of the king himself, to be In judgment of law, the king, as king, cannot be said to be a minor; for when the royall bodie politique of the king doth meete with the naturall capacity in one person, the whole bodie shall have the qualitie of the royall politique, which is the greater and more worthy, and wherein is no minoritie.'-Co. Litt., 43. 224 Geo. II. c. 24; Walpole's Mem. Geo. III., ii. c. 102. acceptable to George III. He desired to reserve to himself the testamentary disposition of his prerogatives, and to leave nothing to Parliament but the formal recognition of his power. of a regency, The original scheme of the regency, as proposed by the king, in 1765, was as strange as The king's some of the incidents connected with its first scheme further progress. He had formed it with- 1765. out any communication with his ministers, who consequently received it with distrust, as the work of Lord Bute and the king's friends, of whom they were sensitively jealous. The scheme itself was one to invite suspicion. It was obviously proper, that the appointment of a regent should be expressly made by Parliament. If the king had the nomination, there could be no certainty that any regent would be appointed: he might become incapable, and die intestate, as it were; and this contingency was the more probable, as the king's mind had recently been affected. But his Majesty proposed that Parliament should confer upon him the unconditional right of appointing any person as regent, whom he should select. Mr. Grenville pressed him to name the regent in his speech, but was unable to persuade him to adopt that suggestion. There can be little doubt that the king intended that the queen should be regent; but he was believed to be dying of consumption,3 and was still supposed to be under the influence of his mother. Hence ministers I Walpole's Mem., ii. 99, 104; Rockingham Mem., i. 183. • Grenville Papers (Diary), iii. 126, 129. • Walpole's Mem., ii. 98. the mini feared lest the princess might eventually be ap. pointed regent, and Lord Bute admitted to the council of regency. Some even went so far as to conceive the possibility of Lord Bute's nomination Modified by to the regency itself. It was ultimately sters. arranged, however, that the king should nominate the regent, but that his choice should be restricted to the queen and any other person of the royal family usually resident in England;" and the scheme of the regency was proposed to Parliament upon that basis.3 The king's speech. On the 24th of April, 1765, the king came down to Parliament and made a speech to both Houses, recommending to their consideration the expediency of enabling him to appoint, 'from time to time, by instrument in writing, under his sign-manual, either the queen, or any other person of his royal family, usually residing in Great Britain, to be the guardian of his successor, and the regent of these kingdoms, until such successor shall attain the age of eighteen years,'-subject to restrictions similar to those contained in the Regency Act, 24 Geo. II.,—and of providing for a council of regency. A joint address was immediately agreed upon by both Houses,-ultra-loyal, according to the fashion of the time,-approaching Walpole Mem., ii. 101, 104. 2 Cabinet Minute, 5th April; Grenville Papers, iii. 15, 16. Lord John Russell says that the ministers unwisely introduced the bill without naming the regent, or placing any limit on the king's nomination.' Introd. to 3rd vol. of Bdford Corr., xxxix. This was not precisely the fact, as will be seen from the text; but ministers were equally blameable for not insisting that the queen alone should be the regent |