1

not likely to unite,-of men who had supported the late ministry, and of the leaders of the parliamentary opposition,— or, as Mr. Fox expressed it, it consisted of two parts, one belonging to the king, the other to the public.' Such men could not be expected to act cordially together: but they aimed their blow at the influence of the crown, by passing the contractors' bill, the revenue officers' bill, and a bill for the reduction of offices. They also suffered the former policy of the court to be stigmatised, by expunging from the journals of the House of Commons, the obnoxious resolutions which had affirmed the disability of Wilkes. A ministry promoting such measures as these, was naturally viewed with distrust and ill-will by the court. So hard was the struggle between them, that the surly chancellor, Lord Thurlow,-who had retained his office by the express desire of the king, and voted against all the measures of the government,— . affirmed that Lord Rockingham was bringing things to a pass where either his head or the king's must go, in order to settle which of them is to govern the country.' The king was described by his Tory friends as a prisoner in the hands of his ministers, and represented in the caricatures of the day, as being put in fetters by his gaolers. In the same spirit, ministers were termed the 'Regency,'

3

6

Fox Mem., i. 292; Lord John Russell's Life of Fox, i. 284, et seq. Lord John Russell says: 'It must be owned that the composition of the Rockingham ministry was a masterpiece of royal skill.'-Ibid. 285; Wraxall's Mem., iii. 10-18. Fox Mem., 1. 294.

2 See Chapter VI.

Rockingham Mem., ii. 466.

as if they had assumed to exercise the royal authority. In a few months, however, this ministry, was on the point of breaking up, in consequence of differences of opinion and personal jealousies, when the death of Lord Rockingham dissolved it.

Lord Shel

burne's ministry. 1st July, 1782.

6

Mr. Fox and his friends retired, and Lord Shelburne, who had represented the king in the late cabinet, was placed at the head of the new administration; while Mr. William Pitt now first entered office, though little more than twenty-three years of age, as Chancellor of the Exchequer.' The secession of the popular party restored the king's confidence in his ministers, who now attempted to govern by his influence, and to maintain their position against a formidable combination of parties. Horace Walpole represents Lord Shelburne as trusting to maintain himself entirely by the king; " and such was the state of parties that, in truth, he had little else to rely upon. In avowing this influence, he artfully defended it, in the spirit of the king's friends, by retorting upon the great Whig families. He would never consent, he said, that the king of England should be a king of the Mahrattas; for among the Mahrattas the custom is, it seems, for a certain number of great lords to elect a Peishwah, who is thus the creature of the aristocracy, and is vested with the plenitude of power, while their king is, in fact, nothing more than a royal pageant.' 3

6

2 Fox Mem., ii. 11.

Tomline's Life of Pitt, i. 86. Parl. Hist., xxii. 1003. Many original memorials of Lord Shel burne are to be found in his Life, by Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice.

alition.'

By breaking up parties, the king had hoped to secure his independence and to enlarge Combinanis own influence; but now he was startled tion of parties against by a result which he had not anticipated. the king. 'Divide et impera' had been his maxim, and to a certain extent it had succeeded. Separation of parties had enfeebled their opposition to his government; but now their sudden combination overthrew it. When the preliminary articles of peace with America were laid before Parliament, the 'The ooparties of Lord North and Mr. Fox,-so long opposed to each other, and whose political hostility had been embittered by the most acrimonious disputes,-formed a Coalition,' 17th and and outvoted the government, in the 1783. House of Commons. Overborne by numbers, the minister resigned; and the king alone confronted this powerful coalition. The struggle which ensued was one of the most critical in our modern constitutional history. The royal prerogatives on the one side, and the powers of Parliament on the other, were more strained than at any time since the Revolution. But the issue illustrated the paramount influence of the crown.

21st Feb.,

The leaders of the coalition naturally expected to succeed to power; but the king was resolved to resist their pretensions. He sought Mr. Pitt's assistance to form a government; and with such a minister, would have braved the united forces of the opposition. But that sagacious statesman,

Lord Auckland's Corr., i. 9, 4

though not yet twenty-four years of age,' had taken an accurate survey of the state of parties, and of public opinion; and seeing that it was not yet the time for putting himself in the front of the battle, he resisted the solicitations of his Majesty, and the advice of his friends, in order to await a more fitting opportunity of serving his sovereign.2 In vain did the king endeavour once more to disunite the coalition, by making separate proposals to Lord North and the Duke of Portland. The new confederacy was not to be shaken,-and the king found himself at its mercy. It was long, however, before he would submit. He wrote to Lord Weymouth 'to desire his support against his new tyrants; 93 and told the Lord Advocate that sooner than yield he would go to Hanover, and had even prevailed upon the queen to consent.' From this resolution he was probably dissuaded by the rough counsels of Lord Thurlow. Your Majesty may go,' said he, 'nothing is more easy: but you may not find it so easy to return, when your Majesty becomes tired of staying there.' It was not until the country had been for seventeen days without a government, that the king agreed to Lord North's scheme of a coalition ministry. But further difficulties were raised; and at length the House of Commons interposed.

23rd March, 1783.

After several debates,-in one of which Mr. Fox accused the king's secret friends of breaking off the negotiation,-the House ad

Mr. Pitt was born 28th May, 1759.

2 Tomline's Life of Pitt, i. 140; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, i. 103-111; Letters of the King to Mr. Pitt, Ibid., App. ii. iii. Fox Mem., ii. 42 (Horace Walpole).

dressed his Majesty to form an administration entitled to the confidence of his people.' The address was graciously answered; but still no ministry was formed. Again the king pressed Mr. Pitt to become his premier, who again firmly and finally refused.'

24th

March.

ministry,

At length, after an extraordinary interval of thirty-seven days, Coalition from the 24th February to the 2nd April, 1783. the coalition ministry was completed under the Duke of Portland.2

Efforts of

the coali

tion to restrain the

king's in

fluence.

Such are the vicissitudes of political life, that Lord North, who for years had been the compliant and obsequious minister of the king, was now forcing his way into office, in alliance with Mr. Fox, the king's most dreaded opponent, and lately his own. While the king was yet holding them at bay, the new friends were concerting measures for restraining his future influence. As no one had submitted to that influence so readily as Lord North, we cannot intrude into their secret conferences without a smile. Fox insisted that the king should not be suffered to be his own minister, to which Lord North replied: If you mean there should not be a government by departments, I agree with you. I think it a very bad system. There should be one man, or

Mr.

'Tomline's Life of Pitt, i. 150; Letter to the King, 25th March, 1783; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, i. App. ii.; Wraxall's Mem., iii. 337, 353, 374, &c.

2 The king availed himself of his freedom from ministerial restraint, to fill up the vacant see of Canterbury. The translation of Dr. Moore, Bishop of Bangor, was completed on the very day on which the coalition ministry was finally installed.-Wraxail's Mem iii. 349.