Chapter IV (1)

During the late discussions respecting the Queen, the freedom of a certain portion of the press had known no bounds. When the tide of popular opinion began to turn, it was thought advisable that some effort should be made to restrain it within the limits of decency, and punish offenders; and one of the most eager to take advantage of the change was the illustrious individual who had suffered most from the abuse.

THE KING TO LORD ELDON.

Brighton, Jan. 9, 1821.

MY DEAR LORD,

As the Courts of Law will now open within a few days, I am desirous
to know the decision that has been taken by the Attorney-General
upon the mode in which all the vendors of treason, and libellers,
such as Benbow, &c. &c., are to be prosecuted. This is a measure so
vitally indispensable to my feelings, as well as to the country,
that I must _insist_ that no _further_ loss of time should be
suffered to elapse before proceedings be instituted. It is _clear_
beyond dispute, from the improvement of the public mind, and the
loyalty which the country is now everywhere displaying, _if
properly cultivated and turned to the best advantage by Ministers_,
that the Government will thereby be enabled to _repair_ to the
_country_ and to _me_, those evils of the magnitude of which there
can be but one opinion. This I write to you in your double capacity
as a friend and a Minister; and I wish, under the _same_ feelings
to Lord Sidmouth, that you would communicate my opinions and
determination to him.

Always, my dear Lord,

Very sincerely yours,

G. R.

The ferment that had so long agitated society was maintained with much heat in political circles, and rumours of Ministerial changes were rife, as had often previously been the case, just before the meeting of Parliament. At this crisis, the intermediate party of the Grenvilles were daily gaining importance in the eyes of both Whigs and Tories, and, as will be shown, its policy became a question of absorbing interest to its leaders. The Queen still managed to keep herself prominently before the public, and was using her best exertions among her supporters in the House of Commons to force the Government to allow her advantages and privileges claimed by her as belonging to her rank--her name in the Liturgy, and a palatial residence, with a corresponding income, being the chief. On these points the correspondence will be found to be peculiarly illustrative.

DR. PHILLIMORE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Doctors' Commons, Jan. 16, 1821.

MY DEAR LORD,

I am naturally desirous of ascertaining, by the only mode of
communication which seems open to me, your general opinion and
sentiments as to the outline of the course we ought to shape in the
stormy debates we shall probably have so speedily to encounter. Our
situation as a party appears to be more critical than it has ever
been. The Ministers have conducted themselves with great imbecility
and indecision, and the Opposition have distinguished themselves by
their violence and intemperance; and under these circumstances we
are looked upon as a rallying point between the two extremes, and
our opinion is very anxiously looked for by many persons who wish,
if they can, to make it the guide of their conduct. It seems to me,
therefore, very desirable to consider, as much as we can
before-hand, any of the questions on which we may be called upon to
give an opinion. The two first points expected to be brought
forward are the Liturgy and the Palace. With respect to the
Liturgy, I am strongly inclined to think, upon an examination of
the subject (for at first I had considerable doubt upon it), that
the King has the right to do as he has done; and though I do not
think his exercise of the right discreet or advisable under the
circumstances, still if he had the right, I should not be disposed
to hold that the Queen's name ought _now_ to be placed in the
Liturgy. The general opinion of lawyers is, I think, unfavourable
to the King's claim; but then, perhaps, that opinion is frequently
given without any examination of the subject.

On the Palace, I feel no difficulties. If we are to allow her--as I
understand it is to be proposed that we shall--L50,000 per annum,
she may well afford to pay rent for her habitation.

Questions may be expected to be raised also as to the policy of
Government in bringing forward any measure against the Queen, and
as to their mode of conducting it when brought forward. On both of
these points it appears to me that much blame is imputable to the
Ministers; but these are questions which cannot be brought forward
substantively for some days at least, and therefore I trust I shall
have an opportunity of discussing them with you before any occasion
can arise on which we may be called upon to give any opinion
respecting them.

The Address, I suppose, will be such as not necessarily to
compromise those who vote for it to any opinion as to the wisdom of
Ministers; but I think, however bad, in point of tactics in
general, it may be to propose an amendment, that, under existing
circumstances, an amendment must be moved. The query then is,
whether we should explain our vote? and if we do, what should be
the nature of that explanation?

The Government people either are, or pretend to be, in better
spirits than they were three weeks ago; but I have great doubts
whether they will be able to withstand the storm;--at all events,
if they do, they will be severely shattered; all will depend on
whether they can get their friends to vote. They very much
encourage the idea that we are to support them, and to take office
at or about Easter; but this is a _ruse de guerre_ resorted to at
the opening of every session.--I never witnessed more dismay than
was excited by a rumour very much circulated last week, that
Plunket was to take an active part against the Government.

Another report set on foot is, that the King is very desirous that
the Government may be beaten on the Address, as it will give him a
good excuse to get rid of them.

I fear there is little chance of Wynn's coming to London till the
last moment; but I have not heard anything from him on this point.

Believe me, my dear Lord,

Your Lordship's obliged and faithful servant,

JOSEPH PHILLIMORE.

MR. W. H. FREMANTLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Stanhope Street, Jan. 24, 1821.

MY DEAR LORD,

I waited till now to write to you, to give you my opinion on the
first appearance of things. The House of Commons is evidently
determined to support the Ministers, and I see the Opposition think
so, for they are not near so triumphant as I should have expected;
and there are strong symptoms already of dissension between the
Mountain and Whigs; the former are turbulent to a degree, and tried
once or twice yesterday to stop debate by noise and clamour; and
the few words I had with your brother[60] showed me _he_ was
discontented. He said the Opposition were destroying their own
game, and that there was no hope; that they were milk-and-water,
and did not seize the advantages they possessed. From this it is
clear their meeting at Burlington House was not quite satisfactory,
and I am persuaded the violent ones wished for an amendment.--The
Liturgy question is to be argued on the point of law, which is the
best thing that could happen to Ministers; and the Opposition are
to object to the sum of L50,000 (which is the proposed amount of
the allowance), as not being enough. This will throw the odium of
the burthen, and even of the proposition, on the Opposition, which
is also advantageous to Government.--Never was anything, however,
so low and wretched as the Treasury Bench. It is quite disgraceful
and contemptible, and not even upheld by its adherents and
followers. They all say it cannot go on; but, nevertheless, _I
think_ it will, for there is a determination not to take the Whigs.
This more and more confirms the propriety of our line of moderate
but quiet support, and disconnecting ourselves with the
responsibility of all their measures. I took an opportunity before
I left the country of saying to _the sister_ fully all you wished.
I had two hours' private communication with her.--I spent two
days--Friday and Saturday last--at Dropmore. I found Lord G----
thoroughly convinced these people could not stand, and that the
Whigs must come in, but equally decided as to our not joining
either. So far, he need be under no apprehension of the latter; for
until necessity demands it, I don't think the application will be
made. He fancies a Whig Government could not last six months,
reasoning from the conduct of George III.; but in this I am
persuaded he would find himself deceived, for the same decision and
steadiness of mind does not belong to his successor. And should the
change once take place, new attachments and habits would prevail,
and obliterate all former anger.--The Government say their majority
on Friday will be seventy. I think more, by the symptoms of
yesterday.

Nothing could be so wretched as the mover and seconder, or so tame
as Tierney.--I shall finish this at the House.

Half-past Five o'clock.

Nothing material has occurred. Petitions are presenting by
hundreds, and much violent language accompanying them; but
Castlereagh keeping very cool, and refusing all discussion--the
Opposition manifesting great impetuosity and violence, and, I
think, hurting themselves. Lord Tavistock has given a notice for
Monday se'nnight of a motion of general condemnation of the
Ministers for their proceedings regarding the Queen. I cannot give
you the exact words.

W. H. F.

[60] Lord Nugent.

As might have been expected, soon after the meeting of Parliament, two or three of the Opposition members began an active agitation in favour of the Queen; but the majority of the members were opposed to much discussion on the subject, and it became evident that her cause was daily losing ground in that assembly. On the 26th of January, during a debate on a motion respecting the omission of the Queen's name in the Liturgy, Lord Castlereagh made a forcible reply to the attacks upon his colleagues, in which he vindicated the conduct of the Government, and taunted the Opposition with their proceedings against the Queen on former occasions. His argument was directed against Lord Erskine, who had recently, in the House of Lords, while referring to the Queen, expressed himself offensively towards Ministers; but Lord Grenville's friends considered that he was attacked, and were warm in their indignation. Lord Grenville and Mr. Thomas Grenville, however, were more tolerant.

MR. W. H. FREMANTLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Stanhope Street, Jan. 31, 1821.

MY DEAR LORD,

After I received your letter, I called at Lord Liverpool's, but
could not gain admittance; since that, I have been considering more
fully the subject, and think that any explanation now, after the
lapse of so many days, and when the whole debate is gone by, could
lead to no one advantage; and I fear also that Lord Grenville might
fancy I improperly interfered on a question so personally
concerning himself. I have no doubt Lord Liverpool would ask me if
I were authorized by him to express his anger, or to call for an
explanation; and he would probably write to Lord Grenville upon the
subject. The offence was undoubtedly great, and such as you were
justified in resenting; but I am thoroughly persuaded it was one of
Lord Castlereagh's bothering Irish arguments which led him on, and
that it was no premeditated attack on your friends. His object was
to lay it on Lord Erskine; and in the conversations I have since
had with his friends, they have told me he was extremely sorry that
your friends should have felt hurt, that he never meant it, and
that his only object was to expose the conduct of Lord Erskine. All
this, you will say, may be very true, but is no excuse to you; but
again I must say, what could you have done? Lord Liverpool could
not give up Lord Castlereagh, and you could not resent it so as to
vote with the Whigs. The Government are already apprized of your
feeling and that of your friends on this subject, and I have no
doubt--at least, I should think--it would put them more on their
guard. I really think it might be considered by Lord Grenville as
very officious in me to call on the Prime Minister to take up his
battle without any previous communication or authority from him. I
could undoubtedly say it was your feelings I was expressing; but
the answer would naturally be, that Lord Grenville personally was
concerned. However, the lapse of time is at present the additional
objection, and no apology could answer to you or your friends but a
public explanation from Castlereagh, which could not be made. I
assure you I have been very much disturbed by your letter, being
always anxious to obey your wishes and forward your objects, and in
the first place called on Lord L---- for that purpose.

The debate yesterday was much more violent and personal than the
first--at least, previous to the Speaker's leaving the chair. I
left the House after that, and know not what was done. The evident
disposition of the House is to stifle all further proceedings
regarding the Queen, but it is equally the intention of the
Opposition to pursue it; but the latter must ultimately give way,
for the House will not hear them. The saints--Butterworth,
Wilberforce, &c. &c.--are favourable for her restoration to the
Liturgy, and this question is to be brought forward again, but of
course will be rejected by a still larger majority.

I see that Charles Wynn and Phillimore are so decidedly disposed to
the Opposition, that their minds are at all times on the alert to
catch an opportunity of attacking the Government. I certainly do
not support or think well of the Government, but I am _quite
satisfied_ that nothing short of a total overthrow of everything
would induce the Whigs to unite with you; and I am equally
satisfied that the only and best prospect of office is to keep
terms with the present Government, not with a view of joining them,
but of keeping them unfettered and unexasperated for any future
arrangements.

That some change must soon take place cannot be doubted, and be
assured that Parliament _will not_ have the Whigs. Canning, it is
said, will not return to the Board of Control; and the Ministers'
followers all hold the language of change after these questions are
got over. I give you these opinions of my own, and what I hear, and
be assured there is no being more eager or more watchful of your
interests and objects than I am. I shall keep this open till I go
down to the House, in case there should be anything new.--The Duke
of Devonshire is come to town a thorough Reformist: this is a
conversion; as also Lord Fitzwilliam. It is hardly possible to
conceive that their anger should have led them to such a thorough
departure from all their old feelings and principles.

There is nothing new. Lushington was most violent last night; and
nobody believes Admiral Wood's assertion that the Queen has no
bills or debts.

Ever most truly,

W. H. F.

MR. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

MY DEAR B----,

We cannot argue the question of the expediency of the original
omission, without consuming more paper and time than I can afford;
but it still appears to me--1st. That at that time Ministers had
not decided to bring the business forward, or to publish the
Queen's infamy; 2ndly. That though I am myself perfectly satisfied
of the King's prerogative, it was so far disputable as to render
such an exercise of it very unwise; 3rdly. That there could have
been no greater difficulty or impropriety in proceeding, if it
should afterwards be rendered necessary by her coming to England,
against "our gracious Queen Caroline," than against "the Princess
of Wales," prayed for the preceding Sunday. As to the phrase of
"gracious," it is a mere title of honour attached to the station,
and far less objectionable than "most religious," which _Charles
II._ was the first sovereign who assumed, and which produces little
sensation even when used as an epithet to _some_ of his successors.
Still, if they were mealy-mouthed, they might have inserted "Her
Majesty Queen Caroline." I should also have wished to have sent
a yacht, or suitable conveyance, to bring her over to her
trial,--just as, if she had been found guilty on an impeachment,
and sentenced to transportation, I would not have despatched her to
Portsmouth in the caravan, or to Botany Bay in a transport. To
neither of these, however, did I attach as much blame as to the not
notifying the death of the Princess Charlotte, which I think the
most brutal omission I ever remember, and one which would attach
disgrace in private life, even in a case where a divorce was
pending, or had actually taken place.

My great objection is to the spirit of irritation and provocation
which dictated the whole, as if they wished to goad her into the
course she has since pursued, instead of endeavouring by all means
in their power to avert what every other man in the kingdom felt to
be a most hazardous and perilous crisis.

I am much inclined to think that you are quite right as to the key
which explains Peel's conduct. Still, I hear from all sides how
_we_ are to come in after Easter. This may proceed either from
a desire to strengthen themselves by really combining us with Peel
in a new arrangement, or (which I think more probable) from a
design of cajoling us into present support.

An apology was transmitted to me from Castlereagh, through Lewis,
for his attack on the Commission of 1806, professing it to have
been quite _inadvertent_, and merely levelled at Erskine, without
_recollecting_ that Lord Grenville was equally implicated.

I certainly hear from many quarters that the country gentlemen are
loud in their representations to Ministers of the necessity of
their strengthening themselves, if they wish for a continuance of
support. Probably this will be answered by Canning's return, and
the accession of Peel.

I have just heard, on the authority of a man who told me that he
had seen Lady O----'s letter, that H---- A---- having eloped from
Florence with her second daughter, she followed them, and when she
found them, he had taken poison. Now, why they should take the
trouble of eloping, and, still more, why he should take poison, is
not easy to conceive.

LORD GRENVILLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Dropmore, Feb. 1, 1821.

My brother has just shown me your letter, and I trust I need not
assure you that I am, as always, most deeply sensible of your
affectionate kindness; but I am perfectly _horrified_ at the
notion which it has suggested to you, on an occasion which surely
does not call for the smallest manifestation of any resentment or
dissatisfaction whatever.

If you support Government on these questions about the Queen, it is
not at all from any particular attachment to Lord C----, or any of
his colleagues, but from what you think due both to the King and to
the country, to contribute, as far as you can, to resist the
degradation which the Radicals and their allies would bring on the
first, and the ruin which must, if they succeed in that attempt,
ensue to the country.

It would be most unjust to require Lord C----, in this warfare, to
abstain from a natural and obvious ground of defence. I am not so
unreasonable as to expect this, if I cared one farthing about
anything that can be said of that inquiry, in which, if I cared at
all, it was in being too easily satisfied. Nor am I so thin-skinned
as to have any feeling on the subject; and the only thing that
could have made it at all unpleasant to me would be the appearance
(which such a step as you speak of must have) of my being angered
on the occasion, and having used any influence I might have with
you to the effect of inducing you to act contrary certainly to all
my opinions and wishes, and, I believe, contrary to your own.

Pray--pray, therefore, let all your friends, if they and you agree
with me in thinking Lord Tavistock's motion fit to be negatived,
cry "No!" as stoutly as I would if I had anything to say or do on
the occasion.

RIGHT HON. THOMAS GRENVILLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Dropmore, Feb. 1, 1821.

MY DEAR LORD B----,

The two brothers here are quite astounded at the importance which
you and Charles attach to Lord Castlereagh's attack upon the
Government of 1806-7, and still more at the influence which both of
you seem disposed to give to it in your conduct on the impending
motions in Parliament. In the first place, it is to be observed
that it is not fair dealing to expect Castlereagh to forbear from
attacking Lord Grey, Lord Lansdowne, and Mr. Tierney, on their
hostility to the Queen fourteen years ago, because he cannot do so
without including Lord Grenville, as well as Lord Spencer and Lord
Erskine, as members of that Government. I think Lord C---- fully
entitled to reproach that inconsistency of conduct to Lord Grey and
his colleagues--an inconsistency which in no degree applies to Lord
Grenville; but even if it did, surely Lord C---- is not to be
deprived of his legitimate warfare upon those to whom he is
opposed, because Lord Grenville was in those days politically
connected with them. But even supposing that you had reason in this
respect to complain of Lord C---- (which I utterly deny), still it
would be a most unjustifiable, and unbecoming, and culpable course,
to suffer any such personal considerations to influence your
conduct upon the great public questions which are impending. Those
questions are to decide whether the Opposition is to be suffered,
from its base alliance with the Radicals and with the Q----, to
take violent possession of the Government, in order to overturn the
whole system of our constitution; to bring in annual or triennial
Parliaments; to do little short of introducing universal suffrage;
to disband the army, which now holds the Radicals in check; and,
very probably, to let loose Bonaparte, under pretence of mitigating
his confinement. These are some of the first fruits of what is to
be expected from Lord Tavistock's motion, if, by its success, it
removes the present Government; and can you look at any part of
this picture, and yet suffer any personal considerations to weigh
for one moment in your mind, while such superior considerations are
at stake? I could have added much upon the disgrace you would throw
on Lord Grenville, if he could be suspected, as he would, of being
a party to so much personal irritation in questions of the very
vital existence of the constitution of the country. But he writes
himself.

The next letter commences with a reference to the judgment passed by Judge Bailey on that popular leader, Sir Francis Burdett. It was merely a fine of L2000, and imprisonment for three months in the King's Bench:--

MR. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Whitehall, Feb. 10, 1821.

I agree with you in considering the sentence on Burdett--a sentence
so unexpected as to call for the plaudits of all the Radicals who
surrounded the Court, and the congratulations of his friends--as
most calamitous; and, unfortunately, it is not the first instance
in which the Court of King's Bench, or rather the present judges
who preside in it, have shown that they are not proof against
popular clamour and the apprehension of personal danger. On the
reduction of the army, I am by no means so sure that I agree with
you. I have not the means of estimating the exact quantum of troops
which may be requisite for preserving the internal tranquillity of
the country, but am inclined to believe that the salutary operation
of the Bills of 1819, and the increase which has taken place in the
Yeomanry, do afford a reasonable expectation that a less number of
regulars will now be sufficient than were before required--and
unless I was quite satisfied to the contrary, I am not prepared to
complain of any measure which tends to alleviate the financial
pressure.

It is quite true that there are symptoms of some understanding
between Castlereagh and Peel, though the speech of the latter
plainly stated his disapprobation on several points of the conduct
of Government. The most decisive is his abandonment of Pitt's old
Hill Fort, which he had occupied, and returning to his former
position in the rear of the Treasury Bench.

The debate last night was much more decidedly in favour of
Government than either of the former--at least, so it appeared to
me; but perhaps I may be prejudiced, from having taken a part in
it. Wilberforce made a remarkably feeble, vacillating speech, and
at last turning the scale in favour of the motion by the
make-weight of popular opinion, which he allowed to be formed on
false and mistaken principles. Lamb spoke most strongly against the
motion, but concluded by voting in its favour, because the question
had so much disturbed the country, that the true honour would
belong to the party which first conceded it. Acland's was one of
the most impressive and efficient speeches I ever heard. And on
this state of the debate, Castlereagh most wisely, and to the great
satisfaction of the House, allowed us to go to a division at a
quarter before one, instead of keeping us till six or seven, which
would have been the inevitable consequence of his speaking. To our
great amusement, Creevey, Fergusson, Wilson, Lambton, and Sefton
were shut out, and afterwards received the inquiries of their
friends whether it was not from scruples of conscience, and being
unable to make up their minds, that they had abstained from voting.
The party is certainly unlucky; for on a preceding night, Lord
Carhampton and Luke White paired off and went comfortably to bed,
without finding out that they were on the same side. We now, I
trust, are rid of the Queen's business, though I still fear we must
have one night on the Milan Commission; but nobody has yet given
notice of a motion on the subject.

I was rather surprised on Monday night to find Ministers so weak as
to be totally unable to risk a division on Davie Gilbert's proposal
of throwing Grampound into the Hundreds, and that afterwards, when
joined by us and by several members from the Opposition, they were
beaten two to one; much, I think, owing to Ward's speech. I have
now, I think, sent you gossip enough for one day.

Ever yours,

C. W. W.

Have you heard that a match is declared between Lord Dartmouth and
Lady Frances Talbot? To see them together will be somewhat like
Lord Bulkeley and Lord Abingdon at the Encoenia.

One of the principal subjects of political interest was the Catholic question, brought forward in the House of Commons on the 2nd of March by Mr. Plunket, in a Committee of the whole House; and a Bill for the Emancipation of the Catholics was introduced by him on the 7th of the same month, the second reading of which was debated on the 16th, and carried by a majority of 11.

LORD GRENVILLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Hanover Place, March 5, 1821.

It is extremely difficult, I believe, even for those most
intimately acquainted with the present composition of the House of
Commons, to anticipate the final result of the Catholic question.
Many things that one hears would lead one to be very sanguine in
one's hopes; but then, the difficulties are so great of steering
between groundless fears on one side and groundless jealousies on
the other, and the means are so great which are possessed by the
enemies of conciliation on both sides, that every step taken in the
business is surrounded with danger of failure.

Plunket talks of dividing the measure into two Bills, if he can get
Castlereagh to consent to it--one of concession, the other of
security; a most wise project, if it can be accomplished. His
exertions have been beyond all praise, and the tone of moderation
which he has given to the discussion must do great good, whatever
be the result.

I am sorry there was a necessity for giving so much time; but I
trust, after the second reading, it will proceed, if at all, with
better expedition.

In the House of Lords, the Chancellor and the Bishops will
certainly persevere in their resistance; but if there really is
that change of course on this subject in higher quarters, which
common prudence so loudly calls for, I should not at all fear their
opposition.

All will depend on that. But indeed I do not see why Liverpool
himself should (on the grounds on which he has always argued the
question) be debarred from taking the wiser resolution to acquiesce
in such a measure if it comes up from the House of Commons, rather
than to set the House of Lords singly to stand in the breach
against the claims and wishes of five-sixths of the population of
Ireland.

Whether he will be clear-sighted enough to see this course, which I
think lies plain before him, or whether he has stoutness enough to
adopt it, I know not; but sure I am of what he _ought_ to do.

The King must certainly, if he means to go to Ireland in May, mean
to carry this boon with him; and if he does, his visit will be
productive of more good than one could easily describe. If
not,--then, for _good_, read _mischief_.

I send you back your Neapolitan news. My only wish is that the
matter was settled, and had been so long ago.

"Lord Lansdowne writes word to a correspondent here," says a contemporary letter-writer, "that everything in England has fallen in price, except the Grenvilles. They certainly have made an excellent bargain, in proportion to their talents, reputation, and numerical strength. Were Lord G---- still in the full vigour of life and exertion, one should not be surprised at any sacrifice made to obtain so powerful a support; but by his retirement from public affairs, one would have thought that the value of the family was reduced near to that of the half-dozen votes they can bring into a division."[61]

[61] Lord Dudley's "Letters," p. 301.

The first of the next series refers to a private quarrel that at the period excited a great deal of notoriety:--

RIGHT HON. THOMAS GRENVILLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Cleveland Square, March 13, 1821.

MY DEAR LORD B----,

Nobody can be more sensible to your kindness in what you have done
respecting Henry, than Charles is; neither do I find in him more
reluctance respecting his beginning a communication with Lord C----
than is quite natural, and than I think you would yourself approve.
The real truth is, that Charles's opinions certainly do not tend as
decidedly and as professedly as yours have done to intercourse with
the present Ministers, and least of all, perhaps, with Lord C----.
It was very kind in you, therefore, to take upon yourself the
communication by which you intended to do a service to Henry; and
when you had so determined, I think you took the least objectionable
course in applying yourself to _Lord L----_. By so doing, you
effected the very amiable and kind purpose which you had in view,
of assisting Henry's wishes without breaking in upon Charles's
reluctance to pledge himself farther than he could conscientiously
bring himself to do. Having, therefore, yourself taken the step of
applying to _Lord L----_, whenever a renewed application becomes
necessary by a new opening in the diplomatic line, or by the
expectation of one, the easy and natural course of your kindness
will be to renew that application yourself to _Lord L----_. If, on
the other hand, Charles was to apply himself personally to _Lord
C----_ in the present stage of the business, he will be as much and
as entirely committed as if he himself had made the original
application; and your kindness will not have spared him the
embarrassment of becoming a suitor, and of incurring an obligation,
where he wishes to stand free of any, except to you. In truth, as
far as I understand the present position of the business, it does
not seem to me that, after so recent a promise to you from Lord
L---- and Lord C----, any renewed application from you or from any
of Henry's friends is likely to produce anything except a renewal
of the same favourable disposition, whenever occasion should arise.
If any circumstances should produce, or even render probable, any
new opening in the missions, then will be the natural moment, not
for Charles's application to Lord C----, but for the renewal of
yours to _Lord L----_. At the same time, I am sure Charles will not
be unnecessarily reluctant or adverse to any communication with
Lord C---- that may become necessary, or may naturally arise out of
your request to Lord L----, and out of such circumstances as may
require discussion; but though the present state of things seems to
promise no advantage in any renewed application from you, whenever
it does, I am sure you will find Charles heartily and sincerely
grateful to you for your warm and disinterested kindness to his
brother.--I should distrust, as you do, the result of the Catholic
Bill, if every day did not furnish some new evidence which, if
correct, seems to promise a more favourable result. Yesterday, I
heard of Lord Fife having said that the K---- had told him he did
not wish to influence his opinions; and to-day I hear from good
authority that Bloomfield has written within these four days, that
the K---- will go to Ireland with the certainty of greater and more
general popularity than could _have been_ conceived.

The language of the opponents, too, is colder and flatter than it
has ever been; rumours--I know not how true--of the Duke of Rutland
hesitating on the question, and daily talk of other unexpected
votes. Perhaps these rumours are exaggerated; but still they add to
the general tide and current of opinion as to the probable success,
and that opinion may go far to procure the result that is so much
to be wished.

My own notions are, that there should be no exclusion in the Bill
except that of the Lord-Lieutenant, who ought to be as much
excluded there as the K---- is here. I would not exclude the
Chancellor, because I think first it is a breach of the great
principle of the measure; and secondly, because it will be an
irritating bar to and exclusion of the whole legal profession in
Ireland, who are the most influencing and formidable body in that
whole country, in all times, and on all questions of public
agitation. I would, therefore, leave the Seals open to them, and
satisfy the Protestants, as to all ecclesiastical dangers, by
special commissions and clauses for the objects of their
apprehensions. But for all practical good, one must learn to be
satisfied with what can be reached, when what we desire is out of
our reach. Till this measure passes, neither England nor Ireland
can be safe.

Yours ever most affectionately,

T. G.

DR. PHILLIMORE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Whitehall, March 14, 1821.

MY DEAR LORD,

I feel, indeed, much indebted to your Lordship for your letter of
the 11th inst., and we are all grateful to you for your criticisms
on the Bills; and this I should have told you before, but that I
was entirely occupied by professional business throughout yesterday
morning, and, besides, I wished to consult with Lord Grenville
(with whom I was engaged to dine yesterday) as to the policy of
some of the amendments you have suggested. Some are obviously
improvements on the face of them. The difficulty, as I foresaw,
arises as to the insertion of the additional words to express,
"That no one shall exercise the function of a bishop who shall not
have been approved by the King." We discussed this point fully last
night, and Lord Grenville is decidedly of opinion (and this he
desired me to mention to you, as from him) that if we venture upon
it we shall _shipwreck_ the whole measure. By having the negative
of the King to the nomination of any person whose loyalty and good
conduct may be suspected, we surely have, in substance and effect,
all the security which can be necessary for the protection of the
Protestant establishment; and it would be a sad pity to hazard a
measure which, to a certain extent, at least, is happily advanced,
for the sake of expressions, preferable certainly, but not
essential for our security. I have been with Plunket on the subject
this morning, and his view coincides with Lord Grenville's
entirely. He says it would be laid hold of immediately by the
enemies to the measure amongst the Catholics, and made the source
of much discontent and irritation, and that the rather because the
Bill has been transmitted to them in its present shape, as the
measure to be proposed on this branch of the subject. I should add,
that Plunket expressed the greatest anxiety to concur in any
suggestion which came from you.

You suggest the exclusion of Roman Catholics from the office of
Lord Chancellor of Ireland; but it does not seem to me--and, what
is of more consequence, it does not seem to Lord Grenville--that
the same reasons exist to exclude them from this office which may
be urged against their filling the office of Lord High Chancellor.
The Irish Chancellor has not, _virtute officii_, the disposal
of Church patronage, nor is he called upon to advise the King in
any way respecting it; and the same principle, therefore, which
might be applied to exclude them from this function, might be put
forward as a ground for their exclusion from the functions of any
judge. To say the truth, Lord Grenville is so great an enemy to the
principle of exclusion, that he suggested, instead of the clause as
it now stands, that no Lord Chancellor should dispose of any Church
preferment till he had subscribed the Thirty-nine Articles; but
upon suggesting this alteration, we found it would raise such a
storm from the Dissenters (who are already moving in all directions
against the measure), that there was no option but to abandon it.
It will be a satisfaction to you to know that Lord Grenville has
been consulted throughout, and has himself revised and corrected
the Bills. He appears exceedingly anxious for the success of them;
and certainly, when we reflect how much his public life has been
connected and mixed up, as it were, with the Catholic question, we
cannot be surprised at the exultation he would naturally feel at
witnessing the complete triumph of opinions he has so long and so
uniformly held.

The anti-Catholic country gentlemen complain of the apathy of the
country; and the King has told Lord Fife he hopes he will vote
according to his fancy on the question. These are favourable
symptoms.

Believe me, your faithful and obliged,

JOSEPH PHILLIMORE.

MR. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

March 15, 1821.

I am most sensible, my dear B----, of the kindness of your
continued and active interest for Henry, and, if I saw anything
like an opening, should not hesitate to follow up the overture
which you have made in his behalf; but unless some new circumstance
had occurred since your letter to Lord Liverpool, which presented a
mode of effecting its object, I really should think it too early to
make a second application; besides which, I quite agree with my
uncle, that, in the present situation of affairs, it is preferable
that any application of this nature should, as you have yourself
determined, proceed through Lord Liverpool rather than Lord
Castlereagh; but if I can get an opportunity of reminding
Castlereagh, I certainly will not neglect it.

Everything I see and everything I hear contribute to make me more
and more sanguine respecting the Catholic question. The tide
clearly sets at present in its favour, and the King's good
inclinations are every day more and more surmised. The principal
defalcation of strength which we have to apprehend arises from the
present disjointed and divided state of the Opposition, the members
of which are outrageous against each other, and, according to
Macdonald's report, may be expected by the next Session to split
into three or more distinct parties. He did not specify either the
persons likely to form these, or the points in dispute. At present
one can only see the Mountain and their lukewarm coadjutors; but
what the third is to be, remains to be shown. The amendments which
you suggest to the Catholic Bills appear to me, in general,
improvements, with the exception of the addition of the
Chancellorship of Ireland to the excepted offices, and the
requiring that the King should signify his _approbation_ to the
Bishops before the exercise of episcopal functions. Both of these
would have the effect of extremely diminishing the _effect_ of the
measure in Ireland.

Lord Grenville strongly objected to the exception even of the
English Chancellor, as justifiable upon no principle, when the
exercise of ecclesiastical patronage had been provided for in the
other part of the Bill; and it is difficult to discover what
principle can justify the exclusion of the Chancellor of Ireland,
which would not also extend to every other judicial situation. We
must recollect that the Irish Catholic barristers are just the body
who have, after the priests, the greatest influence, and whom it is
most desirable not to leave a perpetual badge of degradation and
inferiority upon. With respect to the necessity of signifying the
King's express approbation, it is one of the points which the Irish
clergy most objected to, and the omission of which has most
reconciled them to the measure; and if the efficient control is
attained, it surely is desirable that we should not be nice as to
the exact mode in which it shall be exerted. In my own view--and,
what is far more important, in that of my uncle--the question of
securities is, from the great alteration in the situation of Europe
since 1813, become of comparatively small importance, and rather to
be conceded to satisfy the scruples of others, and facilitate the
final success of this great measure, than to be insisted upon by
ourselves.

Dawson's speech against the army estimates last night occasioned
surprise, and looks as if the Catholic question had occasioned some
hitch in his _beau-pere_ Peel's negotiations.

Ever most faithfully yours,

C. W. W.

MR. W. H. FREMANTLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Pall Mall, March 16, 1821.

MY DEAR LORD,

I am hurried to death by the time, and therefore must make my
relation short I endeavoured to meet the Duke yesterday morning;
but failing in this, I enclosed your note to me, saying I owed it
to him not to withhold such information for his _private ear_,
and desiring him to send me back your note. He sent it back in half
an hour, with the enclosed note from himself. This morning he
begged to see me; and being on a Committee, and not released till
four o'clock, I have only at this moment come from him at his
office.

He entered into a very full discussion of the whole business; and,
first and foremost, declared in most positive and unequivocal
terms, that he was perfectly innocent of the charge imputed to him,
and that, fortunately, he had been so guarded in his whole
proceedings throughout this disagreeable quarrel between Lord W----
and his wife, that he should be enabled most fully and clearly to
rebut and destroy any charge ... that might be brought against him.
But feeling this, however, very strongly, he had been to Lord C----
this morning; had consulted with him upon it; and, for the sake of
the family, he thought it most essential, and most highly
desirable, if possible, to prevent Lord W---- from bringing the
charge forward. He considered Lord W----'s object to be founded
exclusively on a wish to blacken her character, and to enable him
to come forward with more effect in his defence (which he must
make) in the case in which he is involved with Mr. W----; that
however much he might blacken her in the first instance, it would
ultimately recoil on himself, and therefore it was a real object to
stop the further proceedings, if possible; that he (the Duke) had
done everything in his power to reconcile the differences
throughout, and that such must appear if Lord W---- persisted.
These were the grounds on which, as a gentleman (without adverting
to a personal consideration), he thinks he ought to advise that a
stop should be put to W----'s further prosecution of this charge
against his wife. The _habeas corpus_ has been demanded, and must
be discussed to-morrow, at _three_ o'clock, in the Chancellor's
private chamber; but in this discussion, if Lord W---- persists,
this business must be gone into. The great object, therefore, that
the Duke would recommend is, that you should, if you think proper,
before that time communicate by a special messenger to W----, or to
the individual through whom you gained your information, and
endeavour to persuade him (the Duke being so completely armed
against such a charge, and so prepared to refute it ultimately),
that it could only for a moment serve his purpose, but in the end
would damage his case. Indeed, I am persuaded, from what he said,
that if W---- abandoned this attack on his wife, there would be
little doubt that Mr. W---- would ultimately give way, and not call
him up for his defence. In the many communications which W---- has
had with the Duke, he has, at various times, not only personally,
but by letter, absolved the Duke from all suspicion on his part of
criminality ... and the Duke, throughout all these transactions and
communications which he has had with Lady W----, has uniformly and
constantly consulted and advised with her brother, Lord C----, upon
them.

I have written to you, therefore, as I assured the Duke I would do,
and at his desire, and have ventured to say that I was quite sure
you would view the circumstance on the same liberal and gentlemanly
grounds he had put it, and endeavour to use your influence (if you
have any) to stay the further proceedings on this charge, by
sending up a servant to the party or parties, as you might think
most advisable, before three o'clock to-morrow--it is now nearly
six.

Ever yours,

W. H. FREMANTLE.

MR. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

MY DEAR B----,

The whole of the third volume of the "Notice des Manuscrits de la
Bibliotheque du Roi" is occupied with an account of the MSS.
relative to the proceedings against Joan of Arc. There is an
account of one which appears to be a duplicate of yours, though I
think the number of pages is less, and every page is mentioned to
be verified by the signatures of the notaries, who are called
Terrebone and Dionysius Comitis, and which is mentioned to be
lettered "Processus Justificationis Joannae d'Arc." Probably this
with the date may be the best for your book. I take for granted you
have the "Notice des Manuscrits" at Stowe; and as the account is a
very detailed one, it will be very desirable to compare your MS.
with it. Perhaps, however, this may be best done in town.

We only go into the Committee to-day _pro forma_, in order to
reprint and then recommit for discussion on Wednesday. The oath is
now to be a new one, embodying the explanation, which is thought
better than adhering to the old one, for which I am rather sorry.
Everything looks favourably. Walter Burrell, Sir Hussey Vivian,
Curteis of Sussex, Fox Lane, have all declared their intentions of
not voting in the Committee, and we hope others may follow the
example; but it is a period of nervous suspense. The debate on
Friday was one of great forbearance, and it is difficult to say
whether Peel most spared Mackintosh--or Canning, Peel. Canning
stated that there was as great a community of sentiment between
Peel and himself as could well subsist between public men. His
speech and Wilberforce's were both uncommonly good.

I had some conversation with Plunket on Saturday about his views,
and I am sorry to find him most disinclined--indeed, I might say
almost resolved--against taking any office which would fix him in
England, and looking only to the Attorney-Generalship and Great
Seal of Ireland, but thinking that he could, while in the former
office, give considerable attendance in the House of Commons.

He appeared to feel that there was no longer any obstacle to his
taking office under the present Government, as now constituted, and
to be well disposed to accept the offer of the Attorney-Generalship
of Ireland whenever they can make room for him, though he would
much prefer coming in with us.

Ever affectionately yours,

C. W. W.

MR. W. H. FREMANTLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Stanhope Street, March 20, 1821.

MY DEAR LORD,

I have seen the Duke, who desired me to express to you his very
sincere thanks for the trouble you have taken in the subject of
this detestable quarrel of the W----s. He assured me he would never
mention your name to any human being; and you may rest assured that
no letter to me shall ever go out of my hands.

With regard to leaving the whole matter in dispute to the
arbitration of mutual friends, the Duke says there is no difficulty
whatever in procuring Lady W----'s consent to it; she has repeatedly
offered it, and is now ready to abide by such a reference. With
regard to the child, this is a subject that must be decided by the
Court, and cannot, and ought not, to form a part of the reference.
If the father is entitled to take his child, he will, of course,
have it; and there seems to be no doubt on this point. The real
question of reference would be the litigation which is now carrying
on between Lord W---- and Mr. W----, and the pecuniary arrangements
and formal separation of the parties.