Jan. 30, 1822.My dear Duke,I omitted in my account of the King's speech a paragraph stating that the estimates have been framed with every possible attention to economy, and expressing satisfaction at the reduction which it had been found possible to make upon the general expenditure, particularly on the navy and military services. This amounts to 1,500,000l.; but there is 450,000l.of temporary charge to be added for the veteran battalions to Ireland. I am myself much inclined to agree with your view, and to think that with the present superabundance of capital in the market, the advance of five millions to the agricultural interest in Exchequer Bills at four per cent. interest can do little. It may have the effect of producing a general lowering of the interest on mortgages, and if this should succeed, it would indeed be a material advantage, and would also collaterally tend to raise the stocks and to enable us to save a million and a half by paying off the Five per cents.Still I am myself very anxious for a reduction of taxation, but it is true that it is very difficult to determine to what articles this should be preferably applied for the relief of the land. Windows would probably be the most direct, and yet that would apply more efficaciously to the towns than to the country. It has been already seen how very little relief was produced by the reduction of the malt duty.Every day's account from Ireland is worse and worse. There is more appearance of organization and connexion; nor have we as yet a clue to any of the directors of it.I know nothing about Bloomfield, or of what is going on at Brighton.You will be amused to hear that from secret and private sources we have reason to believe that Lord C—— has by this time made himself master of the military chest of thearmy, containing 500,000 dollars, and has sailed to establish himselfindependentlyon the isthmus. Will not this make a good novel for some future Walter Scott?To-day the plan for issuing Exchequer Bills to the landed interest seems to be nearly dropped, and to be changed into a general proposition for increasing circulation by borrowing four millions from the Bank. Still I am convinced that we must come to the reduction of taxation as the only measure of relief which will be comprehensible.Ever yours,C. W. W.
Jan. 30, 1822.
My dear Duke,
I omitted in my account of the King's speech a paragraph stating that the estimates have been framed with every possible attention to economy, and expressing satisfaction at the reduction which it had been found possible to make upon the general expenditure, particularly on the navy and military services. This amounts to 1,500,000l.; but there is 450,000l.of temporary charge to be added for the veteran battalions to Ireland. I am myself much inclined to agree with your view, and to think that with the present superabundance of capital in the market, the advance of five millions to the agricultural interest in Exchequer Bills at four per cent. interest can do little. It may have the effect of producing a general lowering of the interest on mortgages, and if this should succeed, it would indeed be a material advantage, and would also collaterally tend to raise the stocks and to enable us to save a million and a half by paying off the Five per cents.
Still I am myself very anxious for a reduction of taxation, but it is true that it is very difficult to determine to what articles this should be preferably applied for the relief of the land. Windows would probably be the most direct, and yet that would apply more efficaciously to the towns than to the country. It has been already seen how very little relief was produced by the reduction of the malt duty.
Every day's account from Ireland is worse and worse. There is more appearance of organization and connexion; nor have we as yet a clue to any of the directors of it.
I know nothing about Bloomfield, or of what is going on at Brighton.
You will be amused to hear that from secret and private sources we have reason to believe that Lord C—— has by this time made himself master of the military chest of thearmy, containing 500,000 dollars, and has sailed to establish himselfindependentlyon the isthmus. Will not this make a good novel for some future Walter Scott?
To-day the plan for issuing Exchequer Bills to the landed interest seems to be nearly dropped, and to be changed into a general proposition for increasing circulation by borrowing four millions from the Bank. Still I am convinced that we must come to the reduction of taxation as the only measure of relief which will be comprehensible.
Ever yours,
C. W. W.
Parliament was opened on the 5th of February by the King in person; but before the Parliamentary campaign was commenced, some anxiety was felt by the friends of the newly-appointed envoy to Switzerland, in consequence of a threatened opposition to his appointment from the Whigs and Radicals. This portion of the House of Commons affected to treat the recent coalition as a matter of very little importance,—nevertheless, it was believed that they would gladly seize upon any opening for an attack upon the Government and their new friends; and it was imagined that the disappointment which had followed from the expectations excited by the overtures of the Court last year, would give an additional stimulus to their hostility.
MR. HENRY WILLIAMS WYNN TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
St. James's Square, Feb. 1822.My dear Duke,I am sorry to hear that you have such authentic accounts of the attack onme. I have still reason to believe that none will be made till the general one on the Civil List. Charles has had a conversation with Lord Londonderry, who says that he is perfectly ready to meet any attack, both as to the time the mission had been vacant, and as to the expediency of having a person there with my rank. With respect to the first, he says that as soon as Canning left Switzerland, he took the King's pleasure as to Lord Clanwilliam's appointment, which was approved, but that in consequence of Hamilton's illness, he was appointed,ad interim, Under Secretary of State, and that he liked the business so much, that he now wishes to hold the situation permanently. With respect to the expediency of appointing a Minister, he defends it on the plea of all the great powers having a representative there with that rank, and that in case of disturbances in Italy, it might be a very important post. In point of expense, I find that it will be more considerable than Munich, Stuttgard, or Frankfort. Lord Londonderry thanked Charles for my offer, but said that he did not see any necessity for accepting it, and that it would be of bad consequences, as showing weakness at the first start. Duncannon told Phillimore that they were not making any whip for the first days.Many thanks for your box, respecting which I have sent to inquire. I kiss hands on Monday, after which I will call in Pall Mall, in hopes of finding you arrived.Ever yours affectionately,H. Williams Wynn.
St. James's Square, Feb. 1822.
My dear Duke,
I am sorry to hear that you have such authentic accounts of the attack onme. I have still reason to believe that none will be made till the general one on the Civil List. Charles has had a conversation with Lord Londonderry, who says that he is perfectly ready to meet any attack, both as to the time the mission had been vacant, and as to the expediency of having a person there with my rank. With respect to the first, he says that as soon as Canning left Switzerland, he took the King's pleasure as to Lord Clanwilliam's appointment, which was approved, but that in consequence of Hamilton's illness, he was appointed,ad interim, Under Secretary of State, and that he liked the business so much, that he now wishes to hold the situation permanently. With respect to the expediency of appointing a Minister, he defends it on the plea of all the great powers having a representative there with that rank, and that in case of disturbances in Italy, it might be a very important post. In point of expense, I find that it will be more considerable than Munich, Stuttgard, or Frankfort. Lord Londonderry thanked Charles for my offer, but said that he did not see any necessity for accepting it, and that it would be of bad consequences, as showing weakness at the first start. Duncannon told Phillimore that they were not making any whip for the first days.
Many thanks for your box, respecting which I have sent to inquire. I kiss hands on Monday, after which I will call in Pall Mall, in hopes of finding you arrived.
Ever yours affectionately,
H. Williams Wynn.
The references to the late Dean of Westminster, to be found in the two following letters, are not without interest. The Duke of Buckingham was anxious to engage him as a travelling companion in a tour he was about to undertake, in which he proposed to avail himself of every opportunity for adding to his knowledge of geology.
LORD GRENVILLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
Dropmore, Feb. 17, 1822.My friend Buckland is so far from being a quiz in a buzz wig, that he is, I think, one of the men I should most choose for anagreeable companion in a post-chaise. Whether he is prepared to undertake so formidable an expedition as you speak of, I should have some doubt, and the rather because he has usually some project of his own for spending the long vacation abroad in the prosecution of his inquiries. I can, however, have no difficulty in asking him the question, and at all events I should be glad of the opportunity of making him known to you, because I am sure you cannot but like him.I have been reading Lord Londonderry's speech, which, as far as I understand his figures, seems to me more satisfactory than I had hoped. The great question is—will it satisfy the country gentlemen, without whom he cannot go on, and will they, on this ground, make a real and firm stand in his behalf? Of that of course I cannot pretend to judge, nor perhaps is it easy to say who can.Government have certainly, under all the circumstances, acted wisely in taking the present moment for reducing the Five per cents. quite down to Four, though it is obvious they might have made rather a better bargain by a little further delay. So far is well, and I think the Malt Tax is, on the whole, the best they could have chosen, though I am not sure whether the Window Tax would not have given more general relief. His million for next year (assuming Ireland to be tranquillized), I also fully understand and approve.But pray explain to me if you can (for from the newspaper I can make nothing of it), from what quarter his 500,000l.in each year, for the four preceding years, is to come? Observe he states it (if saidCourierbe correct), as something independent of, and in addition to, the future reduction of Four per cents. down to Three.If by the conjuration of what is calledborrowing of the community, in order to keep up the nominal Sinking Fund, he means to apply the five millions annual surplus atsimpleinterest, and not atcompound, he ought in the first place to say so distinctly, for whether right or wrong (about which much might be said), it is, at least, a more complete departure than any yet made from the original principle of the Sinking Fund. I do not say it would be necessarily wrong becausenew, but it would beso newthat it ought to be brought distinctly under view.But I suspect this cannot be his meaning, both from his relying so much on the necessity of keeping up Pitt's measure, and also from his expressly stating the larger amount of this sinking fund of five millions in proportion to debt when compared with Pitt's original million in proportion to the debt of 1786. The fallacy of such a comparison would be monstrous, if the one was a fund working at compound interest, and the other be meant to work only at simple interest. Besides, even if this were to be done, the annual interest set free by the 5,000,000l.annually applied would, at four per cent. be 200,000l., not 500,000l.So I am at a loss to make it out, and perhaps after all it is only the blunder of the newspaper reporter. If you can explain it to me pray do.Lord L—— takes no notice of the successive falling in of the army and navy half-pay and pensions, which, if the present amount be as he states it, 5,000,000l., cannot be put at less than from 100,000l.to 150,000l.to put in in each year. I suppose he was afraid of the old joke against Sir George Yonge, who was said to have expressed a hope that the half-pay officers would die off fast, and be thusprovided for.Ever most affectionately yours,G.
Dropmore, Feb. 17, 1822.
My friend Buckland is so far from being a quiz in a buzz wig, that he is, I think, one of the men I should most choose for anagreeable companion in a post-chaise. Whether he is prepared to undertake so formidable an expedition as you speak of, I should have some doubt, and the rather because he has usually some project of his own for spending the long vacation abroad in the prosecution of his inquiries. I can, however, have no difficulty in asking him the question, and at all events I should be glad of the opportunity of making him known to you, because I am sure you cannot but like him.
I have been reading Lord Londonderry's speech, which, as far as I understand his figures, seems to me more satisfactory than I had hoped. The great question is—will it satisfy the country gentlemen, without whom he cannot go on, and will they, on this ground, make a real and firm stand in his behalf? Of that of course I cannot pretend to judge, nor perhaps is it easy to say who can.
Government have certainly, under all the circumstances, acted wisely in taking the present moment for reducing the Five per cents. quite down to Four, though it is obvious they might have made rather a better bargain by a little further delay. So far is well, and I think the Malt Tax is, on the whole, the best they could have chosen, though I am not sure whether the Window Tax would not have given more general relief. His million for next year (assuming Ireland to be tranquillized), I also fully understand and approve.
But pray explain to me if you can (for from the newspaper I can make nothing of it), from what quarter his 500,000l.in each year, for the four preceding years, is to come? Observe he states it (if saidCourierbe correct), as something independent of, and in addition to, the future reduction of Four per cents. down to Three.
If by the conjuration of what is calledborrowing of the community, in order to keep up the nominal Sinking Fund, he means to apply the five millions annual surplus atsimpleinterest, and not atcompound, he ought in the first place to say so distinctly, for whether right or wrong (about which much might be said), it is, at least, a more complete departure than any yet made from the original principle of the Sinking Fund. I do not say it would be necessarily wrong becausenew, but it would beso newthat it ought to be brought distinctly under view.
But I suspect this cannot be his meaning, both from his relying so much on the necessity of keeping up Pitt's measure, and also from his expressly stating the larger amount of this sinking fund of five millions in proportion to debt when compared with Pitt's original million in proportion to the debt of 1786. The fallacy of such a comparison would be monstrous, if the one was a fund working at compound interest, and the other be meant to work only at simple interest. Besides, even if this were to be done, the annual interest set free by the 5,000,000l.annually applied would, at four per cent. be 200,000l., not 500,000l.So I am at a loss to make it out, and perhaps after all it is only the blunder of the newspaper reporter. If you can explain it to me pray do.
Lord L—— takes no notice of the successive falling in of the army and navy half-pay and pensions, which, if the present amount be as he states it, 5,000,000l., cannot be put at less than from 100,000l.to 150,000l.to put in in each year. I suppose he was afraid of the old joke against Sir George Yonge, who was said to have expressed a hope that the half-pay officers would die off fast, and be thusprovided for.
Ever most affectionately yours,
G.
LORD GRENVILLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
Dropmore, Feb. 20, 1822.I enclose you Mr. Buckland's answer, which I think you may pretty nearly consider as an acceptance of your offer, and I really congratulate you upon it. He is full of information of all sorts, with lively spirits, and a most active mind and body, and will, I think, be as cheerful and amusing a companion as a man could have in such a tour. I trust you take a draughtsman with you, for without that yourcortégewill be very incomplete.I do not think Monday's discussion argues at all favourably for the Government, and Huskisson's loss will be most severely felt on the corn cause, if he is really so weak as to be driven from it by a little pelting in pamphlets and speeches. To my taste his speech read as much the best that was made on the former day. But I cannot for the life of me see what good the four millions are to do; nor can I understand, on the other side, Ricardo's fears of the harm they are to do.The Bank have acted with the same ignorance as has characterized them throughout. If they do not lend their gold to Government, they must lend it to individuals by lowering their discounts, and if they incur loss by either operation, I do not see who but they will suffer by it.Ever most affectionately yours,G.I see by the subsequent accounts in theCourier, that Government does plainly mean to apply the 5,000,000l.at simple, and not at compound interest, and I do not see why one should be sorry for it. But even so, I cannot work 200,000l.up to 500,000l.I suppose the rest is to come, and much more I am confident will come, from casual saving and increased revenue in each successive year.If I cared a farthing about my predictions, otherwise than as the facts are of public benefit, I should have great cause to be proud of all I have said from the first day of peace, as to the necessary rise of our revenue to follow from it, and that while all the world was croaking all round me on that subject.
Dropmore, Feb. 20, 1822.
I enclose you Mr. Buckland's answer, which I think you may pretty nearly consider as an acceptance of your offer, and I really congratulate you upon it. He is full of information of all sorts, with lively spirits, and a most active mind and body, and will, I think, be as cheerful and amusing a companion as a man could have in such a tour. I trust you take a draughtsman with you, for without that yourcortégewill be very incomplete.
I do not think Monday's discussion argues at all favourably for the Government, and Huskisson's loss will be most severely felt on the corn cause, if he is really so weak as to be driven from it by a little pelting in pamphlets and speeches. To my taste his speech read as much the best that was made on the former day. But I cannot for the life of me see what good the four millions are to do; nor can I understand, on the other side, Ricardo's fears of the harm they are to do.
The Bank have acted with the same ignorance as has characterized them throughout. If they do not lend their gold to Government, they must lend it to individuals by lowering their discounts, and if they incur loss by either operation, I do not see who but they will suffer by it.
Ever most affectionately yours,
G.
I see by the subsequent accounts in theCourier, that Government does plainly mean to apply the 5,000,000l.at simple, and not at compound interest, and I do not see why one should be sorry for it. But even so, I cannot work 200,000l.up to 500,000l.I suppose the rest is to come, and much more I am confident will come, from casual saving and increased revenue in each successive year.
If I cared a farthing about my predictions, otherwise than as the facts are of public benefit, I should have great cause to be proud of all I have said from the first day of peace, as to the necessary rise of our revenue to follow from it, and that while all the world was croaking all round me on that subject.
The threatened attack did not come off for some time; nevertheless a fair amount of political skirmishing took place in both Houses, and every great question was a wager of battle in which the contending parties exerted themselves to the utmost to overpower their adversaries. Catholic Emancipation was expected to be a severe contest, but the increasing disturbances in the sister kingdom caused the friends of Ireland much anxiety, and rendered a coercive policy inevitable. At this period the country gentlemen began to exhibit a diminution of ministerial support, which created considerable embarrassment.
THE RIGHT HON. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
My dear B——,I yesterday met the Chancellor in Cabinet, who immediately came to me, and expressed in the strongest manner the pain which he had felt at seeing sentiments attributed to him by Fyshe Palmer, in his speech at the Bedford meeting, which he never entertained, and which if he had, he trusts he never should have been fool enough to have so expressed.The joke is a very bad one, and was repeated to me when I came to town in January as Mackintosh's, probably with just as little foundation as it is now attributed to the Chancellor.Lord John's coarse and ungentlemanlike attack appeared to me very much to miss fire, and my reply was well received and listened to; but it is curious to see what common cause the newspaper reports make in hostility against me—wilfully altering, and even inserting things for which there was not the least foundation in my speech.TheTimescontained the only tolerable report, which was copied in theCourier, and even from that it would appear that, instead of being extremely clamorous and inattentive to Folkestone[80](so much that he was obliged repeatedly to stop, in order to procure silence), and then listening to what I said very favourably, the House had adopted a conduct exactly the reverse.Lord Londonderry is to-day to open a plan of providing for the annual charge of five millions now paid in half-pay, pensions, &c., by granting long annuities for forty-five years, by which means a saving of two millions annually is to be made, which is to repeal the salt tax and diminish the window-tax.Being myself no friend to the Sinking Fund, and anxious that the Government should have the credit of affording every practicable remission of taxation, I have no objection whatever to this; but I must say for those who support that system, it is somewhat ridiculous with one hand to expend five millions in relief of the burthens of posterity, and with the other to transpose a burthen from our own shoulders upon theirs.I am still myself sanguine in my hope of the continuance of peace, as I think it clear that both powers wish to avoid war, and that the Emperor Alexander is aware of the certainty that the flame once lighted must spread further.
My dear B——,
I yesterday met the Chancellor in Cabinet, who immediately came to me, and expressed in the strongest manner the pain which he had felt at seeing sentiments attributed to him by Fyshe Palmer, in his speech at the Bedford meeting, which he never entertained, and which if he had, he trusts he never should have been fool enough to have so expressed.
The joke is a very bad one, and was repeated to me when I came to town in January as Mackintosh's, probably with just as little foundation as it is now attributed to the Chancellor.
Lord John's coarse and ungentlemanlike attack appeared to me very much to miss fire, and my reply was well received and listened to; but it is curious to see what common cause the newspaper reports make in hostility against me—wilfully altering, and even inserting things for which there was not the least foundation in my speech.
TheTimescontained the only tolerable report, which was copied in theCourier, and even from that it would appear that, instead of being extremely clamorous and inattentive to Folkestone[80](so much that he was obliged repeatedly to stop, in order to procure silence), and then listening to what I said very favourably, the House had adopted a conduct exactly the reverse.
Lord Londonderry is to-day to open a plan of providing for the annual charge of five millions now paid in half-pay, pensions, &c., by granting long annuities for forty-five years, by which means a saving of two millions annually is to be made, which is to repeal the salt tax and diminish the window-tax.
Being myself no friend to the Sinking Fund, and anxious that the Government should have the credit of affording every practicable remission of taxation, I have no objection whatever to this; but I must say for those who support that system, it is somewhat ridiculous with one hand to expend five millions in relief of the burthens of posterity, and with the other to transpose a burthen from our own shoulders upon theirs.
I am still myself sanguine in my hope of the continuance of peace, as I think it clear that both powers wish to avoid war, and that the Emperor Alexander is aware of the certainty that the flame once lighted must spread further.
THE RIGHT HON. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
House of Commons, Sixp.m.My dear B——,Lord Liverpool had not, at eleven this morning, returned from Brighton, and Londonderry was not out of bed, or at least not come down. I sent your two notes to the latter, but have not yet seen him, though the post is just going out.The visit to Brighton relates, I believe, wholly to the Civil List, on which the country gentlemen are to make their next serious attack. I do not agree with you in your wish that the Government should break up upon so very unpopular a question as that of the Admiralty. I myself look at the minority on the salt tax with more apprehension and concern than the majority on the Admiralty.Ever yours,C. W. W.
House of Commons, Sixp.m.
My dear B——,
Lord Liverpool had not, at eleven this morning, returned from Brighton, and Londonderry was not out of bed, or at least not come down. I sent your two notes to the latter, but have not yet seen him, though the post is just going out.
The visit to Brighton relates, I believe, wholly to the Civil List, on which the country gentlemen are to make their next serious attack. I do not agree with you in your wish that the Government should break up upon so very unpopular a question as that of the Admiralty. I myself look at the minority on the salt tax with more apprehension and concern than the majority on the Admiralty.
Ever yours,
C. W. W.
THE RIGHT HON. THOS. GRENVILLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
March 4, 1822.My dear Duke,The country gentlemen have so much deserted the Ministers in the Admiralty questions, that it is not a propitious moment to ask favours, while so much ill-humour mutually prevails. A great many of these country gentlemen being sulky and discontented because the price of corn will not sustain the rise they had made in their rents, vent their spleen by opposing and thwarting the Government; and some who were steady anti-reformers have suffered themselves to be gulled by Cobbett into attributing the pressure of their rents to an inadequate representation in Parliament, though it has no more to do with their rents than with those of the Cham of Tartary. Yet these blockheads all profess that they do not wish to change the Government, though they are doing all that they can to annihilate them. The danger is a pretty serious one, for, with the connexion that Opposition holds with the Radicals, and the daily pledges they give to the tenets of these people, it is probable that the extensive changes that would immediately take place, would have very much the effect of an entire revolution in the government of the country. At sixty-seven this is less interesting to me than it is to you and to your son, for whose sake I heartily wish I may see this with exaggerated alarm.Most affectionately yours,T. G.
March 4, 1822.
My dear Duke,
The country gentlemen have so much deserted the Ministers in the Admiralty questions, that it is not a propitious moment to ask favours, while so much ill-humour mutually prevails. A great many of these country gentlemen being sulky and discontented because the price of corn will not sustain the rise they had made in their rents, vent their spleen by opposing and thwarting the Government; and some who were steady anti-reformers have suffered themselves to be gulled by Cobbett into attributing the pressure of their rents to an inadequate representation in Parliament, though it has no more to do with their rents than with those of the Cham of Tartary. Yet these blockheads all profess that they do not wish to change the Government, though they are doing all that they can to annihilate them. The danger is a pretty serious one, for, with the connexion that Opposition holds with the Radicals, and the daily pledges they give to the tenets of these people, it is probable that the extensive changes that would immediately take place, would have very much the effect of an entire revolution in the government of the country. At sixty-seven this is less interesting to me than it is to you and to your son, for whose sake I heartily wish I may see this with exaggerated alarm.
Most affectionately yours,
T. G.
THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
London, March 6, 1822.My dear Duke,Your letter of the 3rd followed me into Hampshire, from whence I returned this day; and I assure you that I am much flattered by your confidence.You are quite right; the country gentlemen treat the Government exceedingly ill. What I complain of is not the votes of individuals upon the salt tax or the Lords of the Admiralty, or upon any other question of reduction, as in the existing temper of the country, men may find themselves obliged to follow the torrent rather than stem it; but what I complain of is their acting in concert, and as a party independent of, and without consultation with, the Government, which they profess to support, but really oppose. In ordinary times, and under ordinary circumstances, this conduct could not be borne for a moment. The Government would necessarily be obliged to take the line which you suggest; and I think that under ordinary circumstances the result would be what you suppose. I think it also not impossible that we may find ourselves obliged to take this step before this session closes. But I confess that I shall take it myself, and see it taken by my colleagues with the greatest reluctance and pain, for reasons which in fact constitute the great difference between these times and others.It would not be difficult to form a Government to succeed to us out of our own party. But if we are unable to conduct the Government, they would be still more unequal to it; and they would want particularly our experience in tiding over the difficulties of the day. The Opposition are still more unable than ourselves or others to form and conduct a real Government. But they would be able, and not unwilling, to do a great deal of mischief—enough probably to prevent us or any others who should succeed to them from being able to conduct the Government again. They would soon find that they could not govern upon their new system; and they would not be supported by the country on that or any other; but they would just have the power to render the government of the country impossible to their successors.I have stated to you very shortly my view of this question, which I believe is the true one. I believe, then, that however painful it may be to us, and I declare most sincerely that it is so to me, it is our duty to remain where we are as long as we can; and at all events endeavour to overcome the difficulties of this most critical of all moments.Believe me, ever yours most sincerely,Wellington.
London, March 6, 1822.
My dear Duke,
Your letter of the 3rd followed me into Hampshire, from whence I returned this day; and I assure you that I am much flattered by your confidence.
You are quite right; the country gentlemen treat the Government exceedingly ill. What I complain of is not the votes of individuals upon the salt tax or the Lords of the Admiralty, or upon any other question of reduction, as in the existing temper of the country, men may find themselves obliged to follow the torrent rather than stem it; but what I complain of is their acting in concert, and as a party independent of, and without consultation with, the Government, which they profess to support, but really oppose. In ordinary times, and under ordinary circumstances, this conduct could not be borne for a moment. The Government would necessarily be obliged to take the line which you suggest; and I think that under ordinary circumstances the result would be what you suppose. I think it also not impossible that we may find ourselves obliged to take this step before this session closes. But I confess that I shall take it myself, and see it taken by my colleagues with the greatest reluctance and pain, for reasons which in fact constitute the great difference between these times and others.
It would not be difficult to form a Government to succeed to us out of our own party. But if we are unable to conduct the Government, they would be still more unequal to it; and they would want particularly our experience in tiding over the difficulties of the day. The Opposition are still more unable than ourselves or others to form and conduct a real Government. But they would be able, and not unwilling, to do a great deal of mischief—enough probably to prevent us or any others who should succeed to them from being able to conduct the Government again. They would soon find that they could not govern upon their new system; and they would not be supported by the country on that or any other; but they would just have the power to render the government of the country impossible to their successors.
I have stated to you very shortly my view of this question, which I believe is the true one. I believe, then, that however painful it may be to us, and I declare most sincerely that it is so to me, it is our duty to remain where we are as long as we can; and at all events endeavour to overcome the difficulties of this most critical of all moments.
Believe me, ever yours most sincerely,
Wellington.
The Government was for the hundredth time menaced with immediate dissolution; but the familiar proverb that pronounces the longevity of ordinary men when threatened, appeared to be equally applicable to Cabinet Ministers. It will be seen from the following communications that they were likely to lose the support of one of their most influential friends at Court. Sir Benjamin Bloomfield, however, was not so completely disgraced as the writer tries to make it appear, for, on the 1st of April he was gazetted as a Knight Grand Cross of the Bath, and lived to enjoy several other honours and advantages.
THE RIGHT HON. W. H. FREMANTLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
Board of Control, March 10, 1822.My dear Duke,You can have no idea how much advantage we derive from the division of the other night, being of much greater importance to the Government than to us, and it is so felt by the Opposition. Nothing could be more absurd than Tierney's conduct, speaking entirely against Creevey, and by his vote identifying himself with the Opposition upon it. Lord N—— was really the height of folly, to call it by no other name, for the division was so miserable a one, and so completely confined to the Opposition, that there was no one reason why he should have come up for it.I am rather surprised at your saying that you think Ireland is looking worse; it is not thought so here. I asked both Peel and Plunket on Saturday, and their accounts from Ireland and their private opinion on the subject were much more favourable. Plunket told me he was satisfied that as yet nothing had emanated from Dublin, that whatever were the steps of insurrection either at Limerick or Cork, they proceeded without communication or combination with Dublin. I am quite persuaded the only thing for the Government to establish and confirm their strength would be to force Canning into the Cabinet. It is the height of madness to let him go abroad in the present state of the House of Commons.As to the conduct of the K——, it is inexplicable. He is praising Lord Liverpool on all occasions, but sending invitations to nothing but the Opposition. The communications on the subject of Bloomfield are now carried on by the Duke of Wellington. How this is to end no one guesses, as to the provision that is to be made for him. With regard to Ireland I am quite satisfied the great man is holding the most conciliating language to both parties; holding out success to the Catholics, and a determination to resist them to the Protestants.Ever yours,W. H. F.
Board of Control, March 10, 1822.
My dear Duke,
You can have no idea how much advantage we derive from the division of the other night, being of much greater importance to the Government than to us, and it is so felt by the Opposition. Nothing could be more absurd than Tierney's conduct, speaking entirely against Creevey, and by his vote identifying himself with the Opposition upon it. Lord N—— was really the height of folly, to call it by no other name, for the division was so miserable a one, and so completely confined to the Opposition, that there was no one reason why he should have come up for it.
I am rather surprised at your saying that you think Ireland is looking worse; it is not thought so here. I asked both Peel and Plunket on Saturday, and their accounts from Ireland and their private opinion on the subject were much more favourable. Plunket told me he was satisfied that as yet nothing had emanated from Dublin, that whatever were the steps of insurrection either at Limerick or Cork, they proceeded without communication or combination with Dublin. I am quite persuaded the only thing for the Government to establish and confirm their strength would be to force Canning into the Cabinet. It is the height of madness to let him go abroad in the present state of the House of Commons.
As to the conduct of the K——, it is inexplicable. He is praising Lord Liverpool on all occasions, but sending invitations to nothing but the Opposition. The communications on the subject of Bloomfield are now carried on by the Duke of Wellington. How this is to end no one guesses, as to the provision that is to be made for him. With regard to Ireland I am quite satisfied the great man is holding the most conciliating language to both parties; holding out success to the Catholics, and a determination to resist them to the Protestants.
Ever yours,
W. H. F.
THE RIGHT HON. W. H. FREMANTLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
Board of Control, March 11, 1822.My dear Duke,You may depend upon it nothing can be more precarious than the situation of the Government at the present moment. My own opinion is that it will stand, but the difficulties are great, and we shall only be extricated from them by the fear of the country gentlemen bringing in the Opposition. The defence for the Post-office will be most arduous; it can only be taken on the ground of influence, which must be maintained. If it is lost, which seems to be apprehended, it cannot alone form a sufficient ground for the breaking-up the Government. It is undoubtedly (coupled with other measures which have taken place) a good ground for Government to hold a language of retirement, but they must rest such a step on some more important proof of want of confidence—I mean the loss of any taxes—as, indeed, a small division against the repeal of a tax, which would be almost as discreditable to them as the repeal itself. You will observe by the papers that notice has been given for the repeal of almost all—indeed, I may say all—the taxes which bear on agriculture. This therefore must be the touchstone, and upon this they must rest their determination. If I were to speculate on the question of the Postmaster-General, I should think it would not be carried; but such is not the general opinion, and if we are to believe the common report, Lord Normanby will carry his motion.I don't know whether you have heard the particulars of Bloomfield's dismissal. He received on Thursday last in town a notification from Brighton of what was intended, and he got at the same time a note from Lord Liverpool, desiring him to call upon him at ten o'clock the next morning. This he accordingly did, when the Minister formally announced the King's order of dismissal from all his employments and offices, together with the order to quit his residence at Carlton Palace and the Stud House (Lady Bloomfield retaining the Rangership of Hampton Court Park, which she holds for life); an offer was at the same time made to him to retain his salaries, which he rejected. No ground was given for the dismissal. Sir Benjamin claimed a Peerage which had been promised by the King under his hand within the last month. This was rejected on the part of Lord Liverpool, but the person who communicated this to me, and who had it from Bloomfield himself immediately on his leaving Lord Liverpool, told me that on this point Bloomfield said he should make his stand. No private secretary is to be appointed with the rank of Privy Councillor; Mr. Watson is to remain to arrange the King's papers, and to lay them before his Majesty. The Privy Purse not named. Thus far I tell you as knowing distinctly, and from the very best authority, the facts. On what ground the dismissal has taken place I cannot tell you more than common report, which varies and invents ten thousand different reasons—one that there was a large sum to be accounted for in the expenses of the Coronation, incurred for diamonds. The whole of these expenses were referred to an auditor, and Bloomfield was summoned to give an account of these diamonds; his answer was that they had been furnished by order of the King, and his directions were to place them on the Coronation account. Whether they were so applied he could not say, but took it for granted they were. It was not, however, so proved; and the King, considering such a disclosure, or rather explanation, on the part of Bloomfield as a breach of confidence, made it the ground of his dismissal. There may or may not be some truth in this report; but depend upon it, the measure has arisen from an intrigue in the party now governing at the Pavilion. For my own part, I think nothing can augur worse for the Government than this very bout. I am quite confident Bloomfield was devoted to this Government, and I am also sure that no new nomination of private secretary takes place, because in such an event the Ministers must have a voice, and no one could be appointed but under the sanction of Government. There is a large party of Opposition gone down to Brighton this week—Duke of Devonshire, Lord Lansdowne, &c. &c.I will endeavour to communicate with Parnell, but he evidently avoids me, and depend upon it he will not commit himself until he finds which party prevails. Plunket is arrived, and is actually at this moment in the next room with Wynn. We have not much fear in our quarter of the Board of Control on Thursday, which I suppose will end in an abusive speech from Creevey. Vansittart's Superannuation Bill will create a great deal of discussion, and which he will not mend by his explanations. I have nothing to add; you shall hear from me as things occur. The next ten days will decide upon the question. I had a note yesterday from Lord Grenville on other matters, but he adds a few sentences expressive of his apprehensions for the Government, which can only be maintained by a sudden alarm and consequent support from the independent part of the House of Commons.Ever, my dear Duke, sincerely yours,W. H. F.
Board of Control, March 11, 1822.
My dear Duke,
You may depend upon it nothing can be more precarious than the situation of the Government at the present moment. My own opinion is that it will stand, but the difficulties are great, and we shall only be extricated from them by the fear of the country gentlemen bringing in the Opposition. The defence for the Post-office will be most arduous; it can only be taken on the ground of influence, which must be maintained. If it is lost, which seems to be apprehended, it cannot alone form a sufficient ground for the breaking-up the Government. It is undoubtedly (coupled with other measures which have taken place) a good ground for Government to hold a language of retirement, but they must rest such a step on some more important proof of want of confidence—I mean the loss of any taxes—as, indeed, a small division against the repeal of a tax, which would be almost as discreditable to them as the repeal itself. You will observe by the papers that notice has been given for the repeal of almost all—indeed, I may say all—the taxes which bear on agriculture. This therefore must be the touchstone, and upon this they must rest their determination. If I were to speculate on the question of the Postmaster-General, I should think it would not be carried; but such is not the general opinion, and if we are to believe the common report, Lord Normanby will carry his motion.
I don't know whether you have heard the particulars of Bloomfield's dismissal. He received on Thursday last in town a notification from Brighton of what was intended, and he got at the same time a note from Lord Liverpool, desiring him to call upon him at ten o'clock the next morning. This he accordingly did, when the Minister formally announced the King's order of dismissal from all his employments and offices, together with the order to quit his residence at Carlton Palace and the Stud House (Lady Bloomfield retaining the Rangership of Hampton Court Park, which she holds for life); an offer was at the same time made to him to retain his salaries, which he rejected. No ground was given for the dismissal. Sir Benjamin claimed a Peerage which had been promised by the King under his hand within the last month. This was rejected on the part of Lord Liverpool, but the person who communicated this to me, and who had it from Bloomfield himself immediately on his leaving Lord Liverpool, told me that on this point Bloomfield said he should make his stand. No private secretary is to be appointed with the rank of Privy Councillor; Mr. Watson is to remain to arrange the King's papers, and to lay them before his Majesty. The Privy Purse not named. Thus far I tell you as knowing distinctly, and from the very best authority, the facts. On what ground the dismissal has taken place I cannot tell you more than common report, which varies and invents ten thousand different reasons—one that there was a large sum to be accounted for in the expenses of the Coronation, incurred for diamonds. The whole of these expenses were referred to an auditor, and Bloomfield was summoned to give an account of these diamonds; his answer was that they had been furnished by order of the King, and his directions were to place them on the Coronation account. Whether they were so applied he could not say, but took it for granted they were. It was not, however, so proved; and the King, considering such a disclosure, or rather explanation, on the part of Bloomfield as a breach of confidence, made it the ground of his dismissal. There may or may not be some truth in this report; but depend upon it, the measure has arisen from an intrigue in the party now governing at the Pavilion. For my own part, I think nothing can augur worse for the Government than this very bout. I am quite confident Bloomfield was devoted to this Government, and I am also sure that no new nomination of private secretary takes place, because in such an event the Ministers must have a voice, and no one could be appointed but under the sanction of Government. There is a large party of Opposition gone down to Brighton this week—Duke of Devonshire, Lord Lansdowne, &c. &c.
I will endeavour to communicate with Parnell, but he evidently avoids me, and depend upon it he will not commit himself until he finds which party prevails. Plunket is arrived, and is actually at this moment in the next room with Wynn. We have not much fear in our quarter of the Board of Control on Thursday, which I suppose will end in an abusive speech from Creevey. Vansittart's Superannuation Bill will create a great deal of discussion, and which he will not mend by his explanations. I have nothing to add; you shall hear from me as things occur. The next ten days will decide upon the question. I had a note yesterday from Lord Grenville on other matters, but he adds a few sentences expressive of his apprehensions for the Government, which can only be maintained by a sudden alarm and consequent support from the independent part of the House of Commons.
Ever, my dear Duke, sincerely yours,
W. H. F.
THE RIGHT HON. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
East India Board, March 22, 1822.My dear B——,Canning has at length swallowed his scruples and difficulties, and will next week be appointed Governor-General. I regret this extremely, for the reasons mentioned in my last, but it cannot I fear be prevented. I was mistaken in telling you that Newport went away, as he voted with us.Ever yours,C. W. W.
East India Board, March 22, 1822.
My dear B——,
Canning has at length swallowed his scruples and difficulties, and will next week be appointed Governor-General. I regret this extremely, for the reasons mentioned in my last, but it cannot I fear be prevented. I was mistaken in telling you that Newport went away, as he voted with us.
Ever yours,
C. W. W.
THE RIGHT HON. W. H. FREMANTLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
Stanhope Street, March 30, 1822.My dear Duke,The King has been in town and went this morning back to Brighton. I hear from thebestaccounts that he is ill, thinks ill of himself, and is low, but Wynn told me he thought he looked very well and was particularly civil to him, and inquired most kindly after you. Bloomfield is to have a pension of 1200l.per annum, Lady Bloomfield the Park at Hampton Court (not the Stud House); he is also to retain the Privy Purse, but to do no duty for it (how this is to be I know not). This is calculated altogether to afford an income of 2800l.per annum. He is to go to Brighton on Monday to be invested with the blue ribbon, and the second Irish Peerage is held out to him. All this you may rely upon, as it comes from the King's own lips. The only ground of complaint urged, is Bloomfield's temper, which was all of a sudden found to be so bad that he could not longer go on with him. He also said, "He had engaged not to renew the appointment of Private Secretary, but that he did not know how he could possibly go on without one." This looks as if he meant to fight the battle again, and the Ministers will be mad if they give way.You will see what occurred yesterday respecting the Catholic question; they will bully Plunket into moving it, which for one I shall be sorry for.I am just interrupted, therefore am compelled to finish this.Ever most faithfully yours,W. H. F.
Stanhope Street, March 30, 1822.
My dear Duke,
The King has been in town and went this morning back to Brighton. I hear from thebestaccounts that he is ill, thinks ill of himself, and is low, but Wynn told me he thought he looked very well and was particularly civil to him, and inquired most kindly after you. Bloomfield is to have a pension of 1200l.per annum, Lady Bloomfield the Park at Hampton Court (not the Stud House); he is also to retain the Privy Purse, but to do no duty for it (how this is to be I know not). This is calculated altogether to afford an income of 2800l.per annum. He is to go to Brighton on Monday to be invested with the blue ribbon, and the second Irish Peerage is held out to him. All this you may rely upon, as it comes from the King's own lips. The only ground of complaint urged, is Bloomfield's temper, which was all of a sudden found to be so bad that he could not longer go on with him. He also said, "He had engaged not to renew the appointment of Private Secretary, but that he did not know how he could possibly go on without one." This looks as if he meant to fight the battle again, and the Ministers will be mad if they give way.
You will see what occurred yesterday respecting the Catholic question; they will bully Plunket into moving it, which for one I shall be sorry for.
I am just interrupted, therefore am compelled to finish this.
Ever most faithfully yours,
W. H. F.
THE RIGHT HON. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
India Board, March 30, 1822.My dear B——,I had an audience on Thursday after the Council, and was very graciously received, with very particular and really kind inquiries about your health.You know that my bile is not easily stirred, nor am I, for a Welshman, particularly irritable on anything connected with politics; but really in the course of twenty-five years' parliamentary life, I do not believe I have ever felt so much as on Lord King's coarse and personal attack on Henry. If he chose to question the propriety of the Swiss mission, it was perhaps bad taste in him, but after all fair political game; but to speak of one so nearly connected with him, and whom he had affected always to maintain intimacy with, as a person wholly unknown, to rake into his diplomatic life, and by implication accuse him of overstating his losses in his claim for compensation fifteen years ago, shows such a total absence of all feeling that I cannot trust myself ever again to exchange a word with him.On public affairs I have little new to say. We tide on and shall do neither good nor evil without being compelled to it.Ever most affectionately yours,C. W. W.
India Board, March 30, 1822.
My dear B——,
I had an audience on Thursday after the Council, and was very graciously received, with very particular and really kind inquiries about your health.
You know that my bile is not easily stirred, nor am I, for a Welshman, particularly irritable on anything connected with politics; but really in the course of twenty-five years' parliamentary life, I do not believe I have ever felt so much as on Lord King's coarse and personal attack on Henry. If he chose to question the propriety of the Swiss mission, it was perhaps bad taste in him, but after all fair political game; but to speak of one so nearly connected with him, and whom he had affected always to maintain intimacy with, as a person wholly unknown, to rake into his diplomatic life, and by implication accuse him of overstating his losses in his claim for compensation fifteen years ago, shows such a total absence of all feeling that I cannot trust myself ever again to exchange a word with him.
On public affairs I have little new to say. We tide on and shall do neither good nor evil without being compelled to it.
Ever most affectionately yours,
C. W. W.
CHAPTER VIII.[1822.]
SIR WILLIAM KNIGHTON. MR. CANNING BRINGS FORWARD THE CATHOLIC QUESTION. OPINIONS RESPECTING CATHOLIC RELIEF. STATE OF THE KING'S HEALTH. POLITICAL MEETING TO CONSIDER A NEW CATHOLIC MEASURE. MARQUIS WELLESLEY AT THE PHŒNIX PARK. COMPLAINTS OF HIS INATTENTION TO HIS DUTIES AS LORD-LIEUTENANT. SPEECH OF DR. PHILLIMORE ON THE CATHOLIC QUESTION. MOTION ON THE APPOINTMENT OF MR. HENRY W. WYNN. CONDUCT OF MR. ROBERT PEEL. LIBELS. ANTI-CATHOLICISM IN WALES. BALL FOR THE RELIEF OF THE IRISH. PROJECTED VISIT OF THE KING TO SCOTLAND.
CHAPTER VIII.
The statement hazarded in the next letter, of Sir W. Knighton's literary incapacity, is, we believe, unfounded. The memoir of this gentleman, edited by his widow, affords ample evidence to the contrary, and he enjoyed a large share of the King's confidence at this date, and subsequently. Lord King's motion for a further reduction of the Civil List, animadverted on in the same communication, was made on the 26th of March, and Mr. Canning's notice of motion for the admission of the Catholic Peers into the Imperial Legislature was given on the 29th; the motion was brought forward on the following day, and carried by a majority of five; on May the 10th, the second reading was carried by an increased majority of fourteen. The interest taken by the Duke of Buckingham in the question may be seen in some of the following letters:—
THE RIGHT HON. W. H. FREMANTLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
Board of Control, April 1, 1822.My dear Duke,Depend upon it there must be some mistake or fumble about your application for theentrée. The fact is, there is no distinct person at present to whom the reference is had at Brighton, and I have heard that the King complains bitterly of the inability of Knighton, who is quite incapable of writing a letter; whether this is true or not I cannot absolutely say, but I believe it from the quarter it came; it seems impossible that the King should have received the letter, or it must have escaped his memory on Thursday when Wynn was with him, otherwise he would have made some observation to him upon it. But pray don't hurry any further step: I will desire Mrs. F. to mention the thing to the Duchess and see what is said upon it; I doubt if she is in correspondence with the King.I did not mention all the jobs for Bloomfield; he is to have a Governorship of Fort Charles, which Lord Stewart gives up to him, and the promise of a foreign mission, in addition to what I before enumerated to you. Lord King's conduct is worse than your brother's, who was not at the moment aware of "his honourable friend's" intention, and really does not know the details of your father's conduct as teller. I find from Charles W—— that Lord Grenville is equally outrageous with Lord King. It is evident that the Mountain are moving heaven and earth to lower you and your friends, but it will not do. I dread all the discussions arising from the Catholic question; Canning consulted no one, and I really believe not a soul was aware of his intention previous to his giving the notice. It will place Plunket in a very awkward predicament, for it must bring on the argument on the general question; you have no reason, however, as far as I can understand it, to complain of a want of communication, for it was Canning'smove, and his alone. James Stanhope told me this morning he was coming into Parliament immediately; I think he said it was Houldsworth's seat, but am not quite sure. The Agricultural Report is to be made to-day, and Lord Londonderry gives notice for a motion upon it, I suppose to bring in a Bill after the holidays. We shall get through the Miscellaneous Estimates to-day, and shall have advanced altogether most extremely in Parliamentary business, much beyond the usual proceedings, so as to secure the House being up in time, provided no unforeseen events occur.Ever most faithfully yours,W. H. F.
Board of Control, April 1, 1822.
My dear Duke,
Depend upon it there must be some mistake or fumble about your application for theentrée. The fact is, there is no distinct person at present to whom the reference is had at Brighton, and I have heard that the King complains bitterly of the inability of Knighton, who is quite incapable of writing a letter; whether this is true or not I cannot absolutely say, but I believe it from the quarter it came; it seems impossible that the King should have received the letter, or it must have escaped his memory on Thursday when Wynn was with him, otherwise he would have made some observation to him upon it. But pray don't hurry any further step: I will desire Mrs. F. to mention the thing to the Duchess and see what is said upon it; I doubt if she is in correspondence with the King.
I did not mention all the jobs for Bloomfield; he is to have a Governorship of Fort Charles, which Lord Stewart gives up to him, and the promise of a foreign mission, in addition to what I before enumerated to you. Lord King's conduct is worse than your brother's, who was not at the moment aware of "his honourable friend's" intention, and really does not know the details of your father's conduct as teller. I find from Charles W—— that Lord Grenville is equally outrageous with Lord King. It is evident that the Mountain are moving heaven and earth to lower you and your friends, but it will not do. I dread all the discussions arising from the Catholic question; Canning consulted no one, and I really believe not a soul was aware of his intention previous to his giving the notice. It will place Plunket in a very awkward predicament, for it must bring on the argument on the general question; you have no reason, however, as far as I can understand it, to complain of a want of communication, for it was Canning'smove, and his alone. James Stanhope told me this morning he was coming into Parliament immediately; I think he said it was Houldsworth's seat, but am not quite sure. The Agricultural Report is to be made to-day, and Lord Londonderry gives notice for a motion upon it, I suppose to bring in a Bill after the holidays. We shall get through the Miscellaneous Estimates to-day, and shall have advanced altogether most extremely in Parliamentary business, much beyond the usual proceedings, so as to secure the House being up in time, provided no unforeseen events occur.
Ever most faithfully yours,
W. H. F.
THE RIGHT HON. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
April 3, 1822.My dear B——,If I felt that any one vote was likely to be lost to the general Catholic question in the event of the success of Canning's motion, I should be very much disposed to agree in your view of the impolicy of agitating it. But if there be a reasonable probability (as we have been told) that there are those who, adverse to a measure of general concession, would accede to this, I should anticipate a directly opposite result to what you expect. Supposing the Bill to be carried, or even to meet with an increased support in the House of Lords, upon neither of which points am I myself very sanguine, it could not fail to be a stepping-stone to further success. Independent of the immediate gain of six votes when they are most wanted, there are many who, having once voted for a motion of concession, though not intending to proceed further, would feel themselves drawn in, and perceive that they cannot maintain that if it be safe for a Roman Catholic to exercise the functions of the Peerage, he must necessarily overturn the Constitution if elected to the House of Commons or appointed a justice of the peace. Our adversaries are perfectly right when they say that no breach can be made in the present system without necessarily entailing the fall of the whole of it.I have, however, already told you that in my own opinion, this is so generally felt that there will be scarcely any difference in the division upon the particular and the general question. That it will be thought, as it is in fact, merely a new road to attain the same object. At the same time it is perfectly true, that by this means we get rid, or rather postpone, many of the difficult details which we have to encounter; and that the case of the Peers, who are deprived of a vested interest which they possessed without the slightest inconvenience to the public, long after the other Catholics were disabled from exercising their civil functions, is infinitely the strongest which exists.Altogether, though the motion is brought forward not only without consultation, but even without the previous knowledge of most of the friends of the Catholics, still, my impression of its justice is such that even if I had a much stronger opinion of its impolicy than I had, I would earnestly support it; and I cannot but feel the utmost anxiety that under the particular circumstances in which you stand, the line which Lord C—— has taken upon the subject, and the disposition which exists to represent your conduct in the most unfavourable light, that you would reconsider the matter before you resolve to separate yourself from the rest of those who have so long advocated this measure. Upon questions ofrightandwrongevery man must judge for himself, but on those of policy and expediency it seems to me that the opinion of the great body and the most eminent of those who contend for the same object ought to prevail.I have just heard that Plunket has returned, and is desirous to see me. If I can have any conversation with him before the post goes out I will write again, if not, to-morrow. I hear that he has no apprehension of any jealousy on the part of the Irish of the claims of the Peers being brought forward separately. He is extremely distressed between the strong wish of Lord Londonderry to keep back, and of the Opposition to force forward the question.My own opinion is, as I have already told you, that the conversation which passed on Friday in the House when reported in Ireland will produce so strong a feeling in favour of the latter course that he cannot resist it.Ever affectionately yours,C. W. W.
April 3, 1822.
My dear B——,
If I felt that any one vote was likely to be lost to the general Catholic question in the event of the success of Canning's motion, I should be very much disposed to agree in your view of the impolicy of agitating it. But if there be a reasonable probability (as we have been told) that there are those who, adverse to a measure of general concession, would accede to this, I should anticipate a directly opposite result to what you expect. Supposing the Bill to be carried, or even to meet with an increased support in the House of Lords, upon neither of which points am I myself very sanguine, it could not fail to be a stepping-stone to further success. Independent of the immediate gain of six votes when they are most wanted, there are many who, having once voted for a motion of concession, though not intending to proceed further, would feel themselves drawn in, and perceive that they cannot maintain that if it be safe for a Roman Catholic to exercise the functions of the Peerage, he must necessarily overturn the Constitution if elected to the House of Commons or appointed a justice of the peace. Our adversaries are perfectly right when they say that no breach can be made in the present system without necessarily entailing the fall of the whole of it.
I have, however, already told you that in my own opinion, this is so generally felt that there will be scarcely any difference in the division upon the particular and the general question. That it will be thought, as it is in fact, merely a new road to attain the same object. At the same time it is perfectly true, that by this means we get rid, or rather postpone, many of the difficult details which we have to encounter; and that the case of the Peers, who are deprived of a vested interest which they possessed without the slightest inconvenience to the public, long after the other Catholics were disabled from exercising their civil functions, is infinitely the strongest which exists.
Altogether, though the motion is brought forward not only without consultation, but even without the previous knowledge of most of the friends of the Catholics, still, my impression of its justice is such that even if I had a much stronger opinion of its impolicy than I had, I would earnestly support it; and I cannot but feel the utmost anxiety that under the particular circumstances in which you stand, the line which Lord C—— has taken upon the subject, and the disposition which exists to represent your conduct in the most unfavourable light, that you would reconsider the matter before you resolve to separate yourself from the rest of those who have so long advocated this measure. Upon questions ofrightandwrongevery man must judge for himself, but on those of policy and expediency it seems to me that the opinion of the great body and the most eminent of those who contend for the same object ought to prevail.
I have just heard that Plunket has returned, and is desirous to see me. If I can have any conversation with him before the post goes out I will write again, if not, to-morrow. I hear that he has no apprehension of any jealousy on the part of the Irish of the claims of the Peers being brought forward separately. He is extremely distressed between the strong wish of Lord Londonderry to keep back, and of the Opposition to force forward the question.
My own opinion is, as I have already told you, that the conversation which passed on Friday in the House when reported in Ireland will produce so strong a feeling in favour of the latter course that he cannot resist it.
Ever affectionately yours,
C. W. W.
THE RIGHT HON. W. H. FREMANTLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
Board of Control, April 4, 1822.My dear Duke,I dined yesterday at the Duke of Gloucester's, and, sitting by the Duchess, I had an opportunity of talking to her, and find she has no correspondence at all with the King, and is evidently not in communication with him but when he comes to town; and as I knew she tells every thing on earth to the Duke, and that he gossips again to his friends in Opposition, I thought it better not to say another word on the subject of your application to the King.I am quite satisfied of the proper way of recurring to the subject, which is that Wynn should mention it to Lord Liverpool as a private hint, and it would be immediately settled; for be assured the King does not object, but that it is owing to some mistake, or loss of letter, and requiring an explanation—through Wynn would be much the easiest mode, and not make it of too much importance; for I think you should consider the thing as a matter almost of course, and not place more importance upon it than that which of course belongs to the incivility of not answering your letter, and this really I cannot but think is unintentional.Lady J—— is come back from Paris, abusing the K—— most violently, and regretting she ever was such an idiot as to suffer her boys to go to the Coronation. In short, there is nothing she does not say against him—and what do you think for? Because he has conferred the Dukedom of Buckingham on you, when Lord J—— was the proper representative of the title. This is very good, but I am not sorry the King should find these Opposition ladies not quite so disposed towards him.Plunket still undecided as to his motion, which, for my own part, I hope he will not bring on, for be assured neither his nor Canning's has the chance of succeeding in the House of Lords, and the Lansdownes are only urging it because they see, or flatter themselves they see, the prospect of discussion thereby in the Cabinet.The Report, as was expected, from the Agricultural Committee, is a miserable performance, concocted by Bankes, and affording no one benefit of any sort or kind, saving this, which in my opinion is valuable—an acknowledgment that Parliament can do nothing for the relief of the farmer.I think Lord King looks foolish and awkward, as well he ought. His conduct is universally blamed.Ever, my dear Duke,Most faithfully yours,W. H. F.P.S.—The King comes to town on the 18th to remain for some little time. Does not return to Brighton, but, on his leaving town, goes to the Cottage at Windsor.
Board of Control, April 4, 1822.
My dear Duke,
I dined yesterday at the Duke of Gloucester's, and, sitting by the Duchess, I had an opportunity of talking to her, and find she has no correspondence at all with the King, and is evidently not in communication with him but when he comes to town; and as I knew she tells every thing on earth to the Duke, and that he gossips again to his friends in Opposition, I thought it better not to say another word on the subject of your application to the King.
I am quite satisfied of the proper way of recurring to the subject, which is that Wynn should mention it to Lord Liverpool as a private hint, and it would be immediately settled; for be assured the King does not object, but that it is owing to some mistake, or loss of letter, and requiring an explanation—through Wynn would be much the easiest mode, and not make it of too much importance; for I think you should consider the thing as a matter almost of course, and not place more importance upon it than that which of course belongs to the incivility of not answering your letter, and this really I cannot but think is unintentional.
Lady J—— is come back from Paris, abusing the K—— most violently, and regretting she ever was such an idiot as to suffer her boys to go to the Coronation. In short, there is nothing she does not say against him—and what do you think for? Because he has conferred the Dukedom of Buckingham on you, when Lord J—— was the proper representative of the title. This is very good, but I am not sorry the King should find these Opposition ladies not quite so disposed towards him.
Plunket still undecided as to his motion, which, for my own part, I hope he will not bring on, for be assured neither his nor Canning's has the chance of succeeding in the House of Lords, and the Lansdownes are only urging it because they see, or flatter themselves they see, the prospect of discussion thereby in the Cabinet.
The Report, as was expected, from the Agricultural Committee, is a miserable performance, concocted by Bankes, and affording no one benefit of any sort or kind, saving this, which in my opinion is valuable—an acknowledgment that Parliament can do nothing for the relief of the farmer.
I think Lord King looks foolish and awkward, as well he ought. His conduct is universally blamed.
Ever, my dear Duke,
Most faithfully yours,
W. H. F.
P.S.—The King comes to town on the 18th to remain for some little time. Does not return to Brighton, but, on his leaving town, goes to the Cottage at Windsor.
The Catholic question as introduced this session by Mr. Canning, created more than its customary amount of political excitement, because, though one in which the Duke of Buckingham, his family and friends, had long taken a consistent interest, it was pressed forward by the Opposition to embarrass the recent coalition and the Government. The reader will shortly see the result.
THE RIGHT HON. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
Whitehall, April 4, 1822.My dear B——,I called to-day upon Plunket, and found him still in great doubt as to the course which it might be expedient for him to pursue on the Catholic question during the present session.The bias of his own mind is evidently to defer the agitation of it till the next session, and he dwelt much on the disadvantage which might arise if Lord Londonderry, though supporting the measure, should cool in the active personal exertion to influence votes and to fix the wavering which he exhibited last session. Altogether, he considered the question as too important for him to decide upon singly, and therefore was disposed to request a meeting of its principal Parliamentary friends on Tuesday, the 16th, the day before the Houses re-assemble. In the interim he hoped to hear again from Ireland, and to see Lord Grenville. He would also be very anxious to communicate with you on the subject. It is obvious that if it is to be brought forward, it must be before Canning's, as it would be absurd to carry up the general measure after the Lords have rejected the more limited one.My uncle Tom is very favourably inclined to Canning's proposition, as he thinks that the admission of the general proposition is too great a change to expect at once from the House of Lords, while the proposition of the strongest of the detailed points, one by one, might be more likely to succeed. With this view, he told me that he had himself more than once suggested trying a personal Bill to enable the present Duke of Norfolk to sit and vote, and afterwards for the other peers, leaving the laws as they stand. This, I confess, I should not be so well inclined to. It will be an advantage, if we are to fight it in the proposed shape, that we are at once rid of all the details of oaths, securities, &c., for I conclude the consciences of the Roman Catholic Peers will, if the declaration be omitted, be disposed to swallow the Oath of Supremacy without a single wry face, which will be a most useful example to the other Catholics, and will of itself go far to bring the priests into order. Plunket does not apprehend any jealousy of the limited measure from Ireland, as he thinks that they will consider it as a stepping-stone, and will be much alive to the gain of six votes.Plunket mentioned confidentially the opinion of Lord Wellesley in favour of deferring the general Bill till next year, for which likewise Lord Londonderry and Lord Melville seemed very anxious. How far what has passed in Parliament, and the eagerness of the Opposition, may drive the Catholics in Ireland forward, he could not calculate, but otherwise conceived them to be content to acquiesce in its postponement. At all events, I am most desirous that, whether you entirely approve of the manner in which the question is brought forward or not, you would acquiesce in the course to be determined upon, which I am sure is of the greatest importance to the public character of us all.Ever most affectionately yours,C. W. W.
Whitehall, April 4, 1822.
My dear B——,
I called to-day upon Plunket, and found him still in great doubt as to the course which it might be expedient for him to pursue on the Catholic question during the present session.
The bias of his own mind is evidently to defer the agitation of it till the next session, and he dwelt much on the disadvantage which might arise if Lord Londonderry, though supporting the measure, should cool in the active personal exertion to influence votes and to fix the wavering which he exhibited last session. Altogether, he considered the question as too important for him to decide upon singly, and therefore was disposed to request a meeting of its principal Parliamentary friends on Tuesday, the 16th, the day before the Houses re-assemble. In the interim he hoped to hear again from Ireland, and to see Lord Grenville. He would also be very anxious to communicate with you on the subject. It is obvious that if it is to be brought forward, it must be before Canning's, as it would be absurd to carry up the general measure after the Lords have rejected the more limited one.
My uncle Tom is very favourably inclined to Canning's proposition, as he thinks that the admission of the general proposition is too great a change to expect at once from the House of Lords, while the proposition of the strongest of the detailed points, one by one, might be more likely to succeed. With this view, he told me that he had himself more than once suggested trying a personal Bill to enable the present Duke of Norfolk to sit and vote, and afterwards for the other peers, leaving the laws as they stand. This, I confess, I should not be so well inclined to. It will be an advantage, if we are to fight it in the proposed shape, that we are at once rid of all the details of oaths, securities, &c., for I conclude the consciences of the Roman Catholic Peers will, if the declaration be omitted, be disposed to swallow the Oath of Supremacy without a single wry face, which will be a most useful example to the other Catholics, and will of itself go far to bring the priests into order. Plunket does not apprehend any jealousy of the limited measure from Ireland, as he thinks that they will consider it as a stepping-stone, and will be much alive to the gain of six votes.
Plunket mentioned confidentially the opinion of Lord Wellesley in favour of deferring the general Bill till next year, for which likewise Lord Londonderry and Lord Melville seemed very anxious. How far what has passed in Parliament, and the eagerness of the Opposition, may drive the Catholics in Ireland forward, he could not calculate, but otherwise conceived them to be content to acquiesce in its postponement. At all events, I am most desirous that, whether you entirely approve of the manner in which the question is brought forward or not, you would acquiesce in the course to be determined upon, which I am sure is of the greatest importance to the public character of us all.
Ever most affectionately yours,
C. W. W.
LORD GRENVILLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
Dropmore, April 8, 1822.You know I have quite done with political speculations, and discussions of every kind. If Canning's motion succeeds (as I conclude it will) in the House of Commons, and comes up to the House of Lords, I can have no doubt of supporting it, as far as my vote, or more probably, my proxy, may extend, because it is one of the points that I have always most strongly urged, and particularly in my speech, even, of last year; and also because it really does seem to me that such a motion follows as a natural and undeniable consequence from any opinion entertained by the friends of the general measure, that next year would be more favourable than this for the discussion of the main question, in so far as it concerns the great body of the Irish Catholics.The conduct of that body has certainly been often such as to show the utmost blindness as to what was likely to advance or obstruct their cause. But I cannot think them so ignorant as not to see the infinite advantage which the success of such a motion would give their friends in any future discussion.My own opinion, indeed, is that it is in something of this piecemeal way that their object will ultimately be obtained; and I should not be without considerable hope of seeing Canning's measure carried, even in this year, if I felt quite sure that it would have fair play given it.As to the prudence of postponing or bringing forward the main question this year I have formed no opinion, and I mean to form none. I have done with such speculations; I have entire confidence in Plunket's judgment and uprightness; and my greatest fear is that of seeing the measure taken out of his hands, to fall into worse, and worse I am sure they will be into whatever hands other than his it can fall. He is coming here on Friday, and if you wish to say anything to him on the subject, you cannot do better than meet him.
Dropmore, April 8, 1822.
You know I have quite done with political speculations, and discussions of every kind. If Canning's motion succeeds (as I conclude it will) in the House of Commons, and comes up to the House of Lords, I can have no doubt of supporting it, as far as my vote, or more probably, my proxy, may extend, because it is one of the points that I have always most strongly urged, and particularly in my speech, even, of last year; and also because it really does seem to me that such a motion follows as a natural and undeniable consequence from any opinion entertained by the friends of the general measure, that next year would be more favourable than this for the discussion of the main question, in so far as it concerns the great body of the Irish Catholics.
The conduct of that body has certainly been often such as to show the utmost blindness as to what was likely to advance or obstruct their cause. But I cannot think them so ignorant as not to see the infinite advantage which the success of such a motion would give their friends in any future discussion.
My own opinion, indeed, is that it is in something of this piecemeal way that their object will ultimately be obtained; and I should not be without considerable hope of seeing Canning's measure carried, even in this year, if I felt quite sure that it would have fair play given it.
As to the prudence of postponing or bringing forward the main question this year I have formed no opinion, and I mean to form none. I have done with such speculations; I have entire confidence in Plunket's judgment and uprightness; and my greatest fear is that of seeing the measure taken out of his hands, to fall into worse, and worse I am sure they will be into whatever hands other than his it can fall. He is coming here on Friday, and if you wish to say anything to him on the subject, you cannot do better than meet him.
THE RIGHT HON. W. H. FREMANTLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.
Englefield Green, April 10, 1822.My dear Duke,The note you have enclosed me makes the thing more embarrassing, and I have been puzzling my brain how I can possibly promote the object; but I really know not in what way I could move. I could write aprivate and confidential letterto Lord Conyngham (whom I know intimately), stating the case, and expressing your embarrassment about it; but I don't know whether you would approve of this, and I cannot think of any other means. Let me know by return of post, and I will act accordingly. Perhaps you would write yourself to him, quite as a private friend (if you know him well enough), but if you had rather I should, only say so. I am quite sure, from Bloomfield's letter, it is meant to be done; but thechiefis so strange and inconsistent, and I suppose so perfectly incapable of going through with his business, that unless he has a man at his elbow constantly to jog him on, he is not to be depended on for one moment.I shall remain here till the day before the meeting. I dread any confusion that may arise from the jumble of the Catholic question. Be assured, whatever one may think of this question, it is not one that the public will go with you upon, in any measure of hostility to the Government, much less of separation, and as to our carrying it, or preventing its being carried, the question rests so entirely on the House of Lords, that it is there and there only that it will be decided; and as long as we have the present Chancellor and Lord Liverpool, it is out of the question, unless the King were to take a part, which he certainly will not. Why, then, what would be the result? We should separate, the Government would go on, and we should have another sixteen years of opposition. I am arguing only on the idea of our taking a line different or more violent than the other best supporters of the measure. I mean Plunket, Londonderry, Canning, &c. &c. My idea is that the latter does not mean mischief so much as the regaining some little character and importance which he has so justly lost.—The King comes to the Cottage here as early as he possibly can after Easter. I believe him to bedecidedlyill; his legs swell, and when they are reduced, he has violent attacks in his chest and head. His appetite is bad, and he is very low about himself.Faithfully yours,W. H. F.P.S.—In looking at Bloomfield's letter again, I see he saysthe King said he had given the necessary orders. Surely this would justify you in writing to the Duke of Montrose to ask the question.
Englefield Green, April 10, 1822.
My dear Duke,
The note you have enclosed me makes the thing more embarrassing, and I have been puzzling my brain how I can possibly promote the object; but I really know not in what way I could move. I could write aprivate and confidential letterto Lord Conyngham (whom I know intimately), stating the case, and expressing your embarrassment about it; but I don't know whether you would approve of this, and I cannot think of any other means. Let me know by return of post, and I will act accordingly. Perhaps you would write yourself to him, quite as a private friend (if you know him well enough), but if you had rather I should, only say so. I am quite sure, from Bloomfield's letter, it is meant to be done; but thechiefis so strange and inconsistent, and I suppose so perfectly incapable of going through with his business, that unless he has a man at his elbow constantly to jog him on, he is not to be depended on for one moment.
I shall remain here till the day before the meeting. I dread any confusion that may arise from the jumble of the Catholic question. Be assured, whatever one may think of this question, it is not one that the public will go with you upon, in any measure of hostility to the Government, much less of separation, and as to our carrying it, or preventing its being carried, the question rests so entirely on the House of Lords, that it is there and there only that it will be decided; and as long as we have the present Chancellor and Lord Liverpool, it is out of the question, unless the King were to take a part, which he certainly will not. Why, then, what would be the result? We should separate, the Government would go on, and we should have another sixteen years of opposition. I am arguing only on the idea of our taking a line different or more violent than the other best supporters of the measure. I mean Plunket, Londonderry, Canning, &c. &c. My idea is that the latter does not mean mischief so much as the regaining some little character and importance which he has so justly lost.—The King comes to the Cottage here as early as he possibly can after Easter. I believe him to bedecidedlyill; his legs swell, and when they are reduced, he has violent attacks in his chest and head. His appetite is bad, and he is very low about himself.
Faithfully yours,
W. H. F.
P.S.—In looking at Bloomfield's letter again, I see he saysthe King said he had given the necessary orders. Surely this would justify you in writing to the Duke of Montrose to ask the question.
THE RIGHT HON. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.