Active inter in the meas ures of gov Though George III. and Mr. Grenville differed as to their relative powers, they were but too well est of the king agreed in their policy. Both were arbitrary in their views, impatient of opposition, and resolute ernment. in the exercise of authority. The chief claims of the Grenville ministry to distinction were its arbitrary proceedings against Wilkes, which the king encouraged and approved, and the first taxation of America, which he himself suggested. In the policy of proscription, which had disgraced the late administration, the king was even more forward than his ministers. Earl Temple's friendship for Wilkes was punished by the erasure of his name from the list of privy councillors, and by dismissal from the lord-lieutenancy of his county. General Conway, Colonel Barré, and Colonel A'Court were, for their votes in Parliament, deprived of their military commands, and Lord Shelburne of his office of aide-de-camp to his Majesty. of the privi liament. 2 3 The privileges of Parliament were systematically violated His violation by the king. In order to guard against the arleges of Par- bitrary interference of the Crown in its proceedings, Parliament had established, for centuries, the constitutional doctrine that the king should not hear or give credit to reports of its debates, and that no member should suffer molestation for his speaking or reasoning. Yet, during the proceedings of the Commons against Wilkes, the king obtained from Mr. Grenville the most minute and circumstantial reports. Not only did he watch the progress of every debate, and the result of each division, but he kept member a jealous eye upon the opinions and votes of and expressed his personal resentment against all who did not support the government. It was he who first proposed the dismissal of General Conway, "both from his civil and military commissions:" it was he who insisted on the re 1 Wraxall's Mem., ii. 111. 2 May 7th, 1763; Grenville Papers, ii. 55. every 3 Chatham Correspondence, ii. 275; Walp. Mem., ii. 65. moval of Mr. Fitzherbert from the Board of Trade, and of all placemen who took a different view of parliamentary privilege from that adopted by the court. Mr. Grenville endeavored to moderate the king's severity: he desired to postpone such violent measures till the proceedings against Wilkes should be concluded; 2 and, in the mean time, opened communications with General Conway in the hope of averting his dismissal. But at length the blow was struck, and General Conway was dismissed not only from his office of Groom of the Bedchamber, but from the command of his regiment of dragoons. Mr. Calcraft was also deprived of the office of Deputy Muster-Master. The king himself was, throughout, the chief promoter of this policy of proscription. 4 To commit General Conway or Colonel Barré to prison, as James I. had committed Sir Edwin Sandys, and as Charles I. had committed Selden and other leading members of the House of Commons, could not now have been attempted. Nor was the ill-omened venture of Charles I. against the five members likely to be repeated; but the king was violating the same principles of constitutional government as his arbitrary predecessors. He punished, as far as he was able, those who had incurred his displeasure, for their conduct in Parliament; and denied them the protection which they 1 Grenville Papers, ii. 162, 165, 166 (letters from the king to Mr. Grenville, 16th, 23d, and 24th Nov., 1763); ibid., 223, 228-9. 2 Ibid., 224, 229, 230, 266, 267, 484 (Diary, 16th, 25th, and 30th Nov.; 2d Dec., 1763; 19th Jan., 1764). 8 Ibid., 231-233. 4 Grenville Papers, ii. 296. "Mr. Grenville never would admit the dis tinction between civil and military appointments." — Grenville Papers, ii. 234, 507. It has been stated that General Conway voted once only against the ministry on General Warrants, having supported them in the contest with Wilkes (History of a Late Minority, 291; Rockingham Mem., i. 178); out this was not the case. Mr. Grenville in his Diary, Nov. 15th, 1763, speaks of Mr. Conway's vote both times with the minority.— Grenville Papers, ii. 223. 5 Ibid., 231. Ibid., 297; Walp. Mem., i. 403; Rockingham Mem., i. 178. claimed from privilege, and the laws of their country. Yet the Commons submitted to this violation of their freedom, with scarcely a murmur.1 Public dis The riots and popular discontents of this period ought to have convinced the king that his statesmanship contents. was not successful. He had already sacrificed his popularity to an ill-regulated love of power. But he continued to direct every measure of the government, whether of legislation, of administration, or of patronage; and by means of the faithful reports of his minister, he constantly assisted, as it were, in the deliberations of Parliament.2 Grenville In 1765, differences again arose between the king and the Grenville ministry. They had justly offended him King's differ ences with the by their mismanagement of the Regency Bill,3ministry. they had disputed with him on questions of patronage and expenditure, they had wearied him with long arguments in the closet; and, in the month of May, having completely lost his Majesty's confidence, he intimated to them his intention of dispensing with their services. But the king, after vain negotiations with Mr. Pitt through the Duke of Cumberland, finding himself unable to form another administration, was again compelled to retain them in office. They had suspected the secret influence of Lord Bute in thwarting their counsels; and to him they attributed their dismissal.5 The first condition, therefore, on which they 1 Parl. Hist., xvi. 1765. 2 Grenville Papers, iii. 4-15, 21-37. The king's communications were sometimes sufficiently peremptory. Writing May 21st, 1765, he says: “Mr. Grenville, I am surprised that you are not yet come, when you know it was my orders to be attended this evening. I expect you, therefore, to come the moment you receive this." - Grenville Papers, iii. 40. 8 See infra, p. 144. 4 Walp. Mem., ii. 161. 5 So great was the jealousy of Mr. Grenville and the Duke of Bedford of the influence of Lord Bute in 1764, that they were anxious to insist upon his remaining in the country, though he said he was tired of it, and had daughters to marry, and other business. Mr. Grenville's Diary, 16th and 28th Jan., 1764; Grenville Papers, ii. 483, 488, conserted to remain in office, was that Lord Bute should not be suffered to interfere in his Majesty's councils "in any manner or shape whatever." To this the king pledged himself, and though suspicions of a secret correspondence with Lord Bute were still entertained, there is every reason for believing that he adhered to his promise. Indeed, he had already acquired so much confidence in his own aptitude for business, that he no longer relied upon the counsels of his favorite. He was able to rule alone; and wanted instruments, rather than advisers. The second condition was the dismissal of Mr. Stuart Mackenzie, Lord Bute's brother, from the office of Privy Seal in Scotland, and from the management of the affairs of that country. In this, too, the king yielded, though sorely against his will, as he had promised the office for life. Meanwhile the breach between the king and his ministers became still wider. They had been forced 1 Minute of Cabinet, 22d May, 1765; Grenville Papers, iii. 41; ib., 184; Adolphus, i. 170. 2" At eleven o'clock at night the king sent for Mr. Grenville, and told him he had considered upon the proposals made to him: he did promise and declare to them that Lord Bute should never, directly nor indirectly, have anything to do with his business, nor give advice upon anything whatever." Diary; Grenville Papers, iii. 185. 8 Mem. of C. J. Fox, i. 65-68, 111; Mr. Mackintosh to Earl Temple, Aug. 80th, 1765, Grenville Papers, iii. 81. Wraxall's Mem., ii. 73, &c. Mr. Grenville was still so suspicious of Lord Bute's influence, that being told in November, 1765, by Mr. Jenkinson, that Lord Bute had only seen the king twice during his illness in the spring, he says in his diary: "Which fact Mr. Grenville could not be brought to believe. He owned, however, to Mr. Grenville that the intercourse in writing between his Majesty and Lord Bute always continued, telling him that he knew the king wrote to him a journal every day of what passed, and as minute a one as if, said he, 'your boy at school was directed by you to write his journal to you.'”. Grenville Papers, iii. 220. It was not until Dec. 1768, that Mr. Grenville seems to have been persuaded that Lord Bute's influence was lost. He then concurred in the prevailing opinion of "the king being grown indifferent to him, but the princess being in the same sentiments towards him as before."— Diary ; Grenville Papers, iv. 408. 4 Bedford Corresp., iii. 264. 5 Walp. Geo. III., ii. 175; Grenville Papers, iii. 185. He was afterwards restored in 1766 by the Earl of Chatham. — Ib., 362. - upon him by necessity; they knew that he was plotting their speedy overthrow, and protested against the intrigues by which their influence was counteracted. The Duke of Bedford besought the king "to permit his authority and his favor to go together; "1 and these remonstrances were represented by the king's friends as insolent and overbearing.1 An outcry was raised against the ministers that they "desired to enslave the king," who was now determined to make any sacrifices to get rid of them. Negotiations with the Whigs. The negotiations for a new ministry were again conducted on behalf of the king, by his uncle the Duke of Cumberland. Such was the popular hatred of Lord Bute and his countrymen, that the Duke's former severities against the Scotch, which had gained for him the name of "the Butcher," were now a claim to popular favor The rebellious Scots had been treated as they deserved; and he who had already chastised them, was not the man to favor their pretensions at court. These negotiations were protracted for seven weeks, while July, 1765. the country was virtually without a government." Mr. Pitt was again impracticable: the further continuance of the Grenville ministry could not be endured; and, at length, the king was reduced to the necessity of surrendering himself once more to the very men whom he most dreaded. Rockingham ministry. The Marquess of Rockingham, the leader of the obnoxious Whig aristocracy, the statesman whom he had recently removed from his lieutenancy, - the king was now obliged to accept as Premier; and General Conway, whom he had deprived of his regiment, became a Secretary of State, and leader of the House of Commons. The policy of proscription was, for a time at least, reversed 1 12th June, 1765; Bedford Correspondence, iii. Introd., pp. xliii. xlv. 286; Grenville Papers, iii. 194. 2 Junius, Letter xxiii.; Burke's Works, ii. 156; Walp. Geo. III., ii. 182 ; Bedford Corresp., iii. 286. 3 Walp. Mem., ii. 192 |