Chapter II: Part 2

_25th, Friday, Money Hill._--On Sunday, 20th, Curran[44] dined with us. He was intimidated at the sight of the tables as he passed through the room, and told Mr. Tierney he feared he should not be able to speak. He kept his word, as he did not utter three sentences during dinner. We had, besides, Mr. Grey, ye Bessbro’s, Mr. Weld, Mr. George Ponsonby[45] (the Irish orator), and the Duke of Bedford. On Monday Mr. Wm. Smith, the Irish Unionist, Mr. Hoare, whom I knew at Sherborne, and Calonne. Calonne slept. He gave us a most interesting narrative of the assembling of the Notables, and many particulars of the latter event during his Administration; if ever I have patience I believe I would detail the account. We went the next day to Money Hill, where we found the Smiths. They stayed till Thursday, on which day Ld. Bor. came. He went on Friday; we returned home on Saturday....

On Tuesday the Beauclerks went. She wished very much to stay, as her health required repose; the motion of the carriage disagrees with her always, and she was not recovered from the journey of the day before. This consideration, added to her being far advanced with child, had no effect upon Beau.; he was positive. I fear he is disposed to be peremptory in trifles. I do not like to give way to all my fears upon the score of his temper, but she is all sense and gentleness. Ld. Morpeth and Dumont dined, a very pleasant dinner. Ld. M. stayed, and _cause’d_ late; Dumont slept. Ld. M. is very amiable in a small party, where he is quite at his ease.

Bonaparte is returned with his staff to Paris. The cause of his return is involved in mystery as yet.[46]

[Sidenote: A MIXED PARTY]

_7th November._--I have just begun La Harpe’s _Cours de Littérature_; they are lectures upon _les belles lettres_, delivered at the Lycée. On Friday, 1st Nov., a remarkable pleasant day, Ld. Ossory, Macartney, Morpeth, Calonne, Fish Craufurd, Tierney. The youth of Ld. M., and the Jacobinism of the latter did not promise to accord with the years and gravity of the rest of the party, but the singularity gave a zest, and everybody was delighted. Tierney won so much upon Ld. Macartney, that I am sure he might be made coadjutor to any outlandish embassy Ld. M. may be appointed to: he boasts of being _homme à tout plat_. Ld. Ossory was very happy, notwithstanding my Lady’s prohibition of his being so within these walls.

The Smiths came in the evening. We were to have taken them next day to my mother’s in Suffolk, that Mrs. S. might visit her father at Newmarket, but during the night Ld. H. was seized with some sharp twinges of the gout, which obliged us to delay our journey, much to my disappointment, as by it I lost the sight of my dear little Harriet. Saturday alone with the Smiths. Sunday Dr. Hager came; Smiths went away. Ld. H. continued ill; not so bad as the fit last autumn. It is curious that the pain seized him almost the day twelvemonth.

_10th Nov. Sunday._--The failure of the Dutch expedition has created at the time a great sensation, but the public mind is absorbed in the expectation of another enterprise upon the French coast. All parties disclaim having projected it. Pitt’s friends say it was all Dundas’s scheme; he again lays it to the Queen and Princess of Orange; and they to the _map-makers_ for placing dry land where there ought to be swamps. The only person who uniformly disapproved of the undertaking was the Stadtholder.

Public affairs everywhere have assumed a gloomy aspect. The badness of the season has destroyed the corn in many counties, and the increased price of provisions in the setting in of a threatening winter announces misery to the wretched poor and perhaps no small clamour from them, as certainly the corn sent to Holland must have taken considerably from the stock here, besides that the transports employed to convey the troops were chiefly North-country colliers. Thus the price of coals is at an unknown height, 60 shillings the chauldron. (In December 1799, 6 _guineas_.)

I have been reading _Joseph Andrews_. It is, in point of interest, inferior to _Tom Jones_. There are scenes where the wit is even more excellent, but the _nature_ of his characters are sacrificed to a love of buffoonery. Parson Adams is frequently put into situations so extravagant that the ludicrous is destroyed by the impossibility of the events. Fielding had a model, his tutor, a Dr. Young,[47] who was full of learning and simplicity. There is a story of him whilst he was chaplain to one of the Duke of Marlborough’s regiments. The enemies were encamped near each other expecting to be engaged; the _distrait_ chaplain walked out, and was so absorbed in the perusal of his _Æschylus_ that he passed the lines. A sentinel seized him for a spy, and carried him to the general. During his examination he stated so naturally that without thinking of anything one foot followed the other, and brought him without his knowledge where he was, adding that he assured his Excellence he was no spy. ‘Ah, mon ami, I sincerely believe you. The D. of M. ne vous aurez jamais choisi pour espion, mais vous resterez dîner.’ He was sent off, fully acquitted of the suspicion.

[Sidenote: CALONNE]

I have endeavoured to persuade Calonne to write his _Mémoires_. Even those of his own life would be interesting; but the period of his Administration, and his generous sacrifices to the Princes subsequent to their emigration, would fill up a period in the history of the Revolution which can only be well done by him. He set the best machine of revolt in motion. His own story is that when at the head of the Finance he found that for many years the expenditure of the Government had exceeded its receipts, and that Necker’s _compte rendu_ was a false assertion upon false fact: that to remedy this deficit he had persuaded the King to let him propose an equal taxation to the Noblesse and Clergy; that the Queen also was got over, till the night before he was to make his speech to the Notables, when she joined the faction headed by the Archevêque de Sens.[48]

A _bon mot_ of Mirabeau upon him. He was a rash, impetuous man, without conduct or judgment. ‘L’Archevêque de Sens est toujours hors de son diocèse.’

I am reading the Arabian History in the most methodical way, too laborious to continue. I read Marigny, and refer to Ockley, the _Universal History_, and Gibbon. The latter I shall read when I have finished the others, because to read Gibbon one must understand the history he writes of _à fond_--at least so from his summary way of describing one should infer he thought it necessary for his readers.

Sunday, we had a very pleasant party, Hare, Fitzpatrick, Ld. Robert, Mackintosh, Mr. Scarlett, Smiths, Dumont. Mackintosh talked very pleasantly: his efforts to please were guided by good taste. His memory is very correct and retentive; he illustrated literary criticisms with lively quotations, particularly from Burke and Gibbon. Mr. Scarlett[49] is a rising man at the Bar; his profits are more upon the circuit than in the King’s Bench, but when Erskine and some few of the monopolists are removed he will distinguish himself there. He has an uncommonly benevolent countenance; his heart seems full of mild virtues; tho’ very unassuming, he yet is agreeable in a mixed conversation. Smith’s boisterous yet superior intellect did not dominate; Hare’s keen wit and the General’s discerning taste subdued his usual propensity to overpower with clamour and dispute for victory alone. He was temperate and entertaining.

Hare was in full glee; they had all dined at the Lord Mayor’s Feast the day before. Combe[50] is an Opposition man, and the _patriots_ were received with acclamations in the City; Fox was dragged by the populace, so was the Duke of Bedford. The whole civic festival went off with triumph to the _party_.

Whitbread, the _arch-seceder_, is disposed to return to his duty in Parliament, and measures are to be taken to persuade Mr. Fox to do the same. God knows whether they will succeed. It is a matter of very little consequence whether they do nor not, as the prejudice in the country is too strong to be conquered even by the misconduct and failure of Ministers. The General stayed all night.

[Sidenote: DUMONT]

This morning, Monday, 11th, Dumont left. I was sorry to lose him, as he is _facile à vivre_ and full of amusement to me. He is very universally liked by all who have the least relish for literature and good conversation. We had rather a motley mixture at dinner: Hare, Fitzpatrick, General Dalrymple,[51] Capt. Murray, and the Duke of Bedford. The latter is in very bad health; his spirits are visibly affected. On ye 12th the General left us to make some alterations at Sunning Hill; Hare, only, to dinner. On Wednesday Ld. H. went out for the first time. Lewis dined: he repeated some verses he wrote this last summer in Scotland, ‘Reflections in a Royal Burying-ground.’ They are the best of his, quite in a grand style; there are parts full of philosophy and feeling. In the evening a very comfortable gossiping coze with Hare.

The price of porter is raised; the augmentation has been admitted without clamour. Every article of _first necessity_ is alarmingly dear.

_14th Nov., ’99._--I continue reading the Arabian history with interest, especially in Ockley, whose style is plain and manly, tho’ criticism might be busy detecting vulgarisms. A comical observation of Gibbon’s upon himself in his _Memoirs_ just occurs. He says, ‘Ye year 1770 was particularly favourable to the growth of my _intellectual_ stature.’ The expressions are uncommonly ludicrous, combining it with the recollection of his misshapen, grotesque figure; for he was a monster, and so filthy withal that one could not endure being close to him.

On Thursday, Tierney, Dumont, Sr. Lionel, and Hare to dine; very lively and pleasant. Tierney bore a very equal share in the task of amusing with Hare, who is unique in excellence.

Friday alone. Saturday Mr. Morrice came to stay. Went to the play, where I gained a violent _migraine_ and additional cold; brought the Smiths home.

_Sunday, 17th._--Sick with headache. Hare to dinner, Duke of Bedford, Robinson, Major Hare, Hare’s son. Laughed so immoderately at Hare’s liveliness that my head was much worse, and I went to bed seriously ill. The Duke of Bedford looks infinitely better. I am in great hopes he will recover. He is in better spirits.

_12th January, 1800._--A variety of little circumstances and frequent illnesses have prevented me from continuing regularly my notes. I went in the course of the month of December to Dalham.[52] I saw my dear child. Mrs. Smith went with us. Our visit did not exceed four days; we returned by the way of Cambridge, Ld. H. Petty and Mr. Debarry dined with us there. I was curious to ascertain whether the Gothic architecture of Henry VII. [_sic_] chapel would please me now, as it did many years ago, long before I saw the wonders of Italy: I found time and comparison had not in the least diminished my admiration of it.

[Sidenote: NAPOLEON’S LETTER]

Bonaparte returned suddenly from Egypt to France. He has overthrown the Directory, and the then form of Governt., and established a constitution at the head of which he is placed as Grand Consul. Should it be a permanent usurpation I will learn with accuracy the outlines, but the revolutions have been as variable as chemical nomenclature or systems of metaphysics. He opened a negotiation for peace lately by writing a letter _directly_ to the King: his offer was rejected upon frivolous and peevish pretexts. The reply was made in the most barbarous language, crabbed, ungrammatical, and incomprehensible.[53] The joke of the day was that each of the Ministers who were present contributed their phrase: Mr. Pitt, ‘ye limited possibilities’; to Mr. Windham, ‘the line of hereditary Princes’; Ld. Grenville, ‘rapine, anarchy, and plunder’; nor were Lds. Westmoreland and Camden forgotten by giving ‘their explicit acquiescence’ to all that was done.

I went to a Harlequin farce on ye 28th December after dining in Cavendish Square; a gun was fired off, which frightened me, and on the morrow I was taken ill. I was very weak and confined to my bed many days; this day is ye 13th, and I am still indisposed.

During my confinement I have been reading among other things multitudes of novels, most of them sad trash, abounding with the general taste for spectres, hobgoblins, castles, etc., etc. Godwin has added to his publications; critics say, not to his reputation. In his preface he announces that he has not abided by the principles contained in his _Political Justice_, as he throughout the work shows that the greatest calamity is to loosen the ties of social confidence and domestic love.[54] Poor Mr. Weld, who dined here occasionally, dropped dead at the Tower, playing at whist with Ld. Thanet. He died under great pecuniary embarrassments. Marsh came to us the first day of the vacation; Ly. Lucy and the Dss.[55] were in the house, but it so happened by Ly. L.’s illness and sure management on our part that they never met.

_13th Jan._--Monsieur de Bouillé se plaignant de la Révolution dit, ‘Ce sont nos gens d’esprit qui nous ont perdu.’ ‘Ah, Monsieur, que ne nous sauviez-vous’ [_sic_], said Mde. de Coigny.

Quand le mariage de Lord Paget fut remis à cause de l’accident qu’il eut en se tirant la botte, elle dit, ‘C’était un mariage remis àpropos de bottes.’

Une personne, attaquée de paralisie à mi-corps, étant depuis grosse, elle dit, ‘Elle accouchera donc d’un profil.’

Lorsque Monsr. d’Épremesnil perdit sa popularité, il demanda à Mde. de Coigny pourquoi le même peuple qui l’avait couronné de laurier l’accablait d’injures et le brûlait en effigie. ‘C’est,’ dit-elle, ‘que rien ne brûle plus vite que le laurier dépêché.’

Allant dîner oû elle comptait s’ennuyer, elle dit, ‘Ce dîner me pèse sur le cœur avant de me peser sur l’estomac.’

A _polacre_ conveying dispatches from Alexandria to France was taken off Toulon, carried into Minorca, and the dispatches, which did not sink when thrown overboard, have been forwarded by General Fox to the Governt. They contain minute details of the military colony, and complaints of their being in total want of ammunition, etc., etc. The official letter is from Kléber; he conveys a sort of censure upon Bonaparte for his having quitted the army. He encloses Bonaparte’s letter to the army upon his quitting Egypt, in which various reasons for his departure are given; among them is _l’obéissance_. There is also a letter from the _Contrôleur des Finances d’Égypte_. He complains bitterly of the difficulty in levying the taxes, and the stubbornness of the Turks, who, sooner than pay will submit to stripes and even death. These letters and many private ones are to be made public and commented on by the mild spirit of Mr. Gifford.[56] They will be published in a few days, before the meeting of Parliament, in order to give the proper cue to those country members whose warlike spirits may have been subdued at the sight of the universal suffering throughout the country--a suffering aggravated, if not caused, by the horrors of war.

There can be nothing more contemptible than the personal pique all Ministerial people seem to feel towards him. The object in publishing these letters is merely to gall him by an expression or two, and for this gratification they shabbily put in the names of individuals, which may be the means of much private ruin. They say, ‘Aye, this will do him up!’

[Sidenote: LORD ANDOVER’S DEATH]

Poor Ld. Andover![57] Unfortunately, in giving his gun to his groom the piece went off, and the whole contents were lodged in his body: he retained his senses 7 hours after the accident, and died shortly after. His wretched wife! What must her feelings be! Each most tenderly attached to the other. It is the only tie which when dissolved makes the vast world a wilderness. How can piety, fortitude, or reason bear up against such a dreadful calamity? Indeed, one cannot wish it should prolong the existence of the miserable relict. That direful separation alone can shake the love of life so deeply rooted in us all. Canning says Ld. Andover used to remind him of Ld. H. at times. Great heavens! how far beyond a remedy must be her sorrows. Without knowing any of the parties, the despair of the situation quite overcomes me, and draws tears of unfeigned pity from my eyes; how fortunate for her should she never awaken to her wretchedness, but die in the agonies of delirium. Oh! in mercy let such be my close if I am doomed to the--oh! I cannot with calmness suppose the case.

Ye Friday party[58] did very well, dissimilar as are the opinions of the parties. On Saturday Ld. Wycombe brought a Spaniard,[59] who is just come from Paris, and is in England without the knowledge and against the consent of the Ministers. He has resided in Paris during the last four years, and he has adopted the principles of Revolution _con amore_. He calls the Church Establishment an infamous institution, and appears quite ripe to back his principles by his practice.

Mr. Fox was persuaded to come and attend the House of Commons on the day the subject of the negotiations was discussed. He always must speak well, but I should have preferred an oratorical, philosophical survey of the events that had arisen during the secession to a mere debating speech, which he made.

The intercepted letters are published with a preface avowedly by Canning; the notes are certainly by another hand. During the debate which Mr. Fox attended Canning launched out with his usual flippancy of tongue against the D. of Bedford, and said he would not lose his time in replying to arguments brought forward from a man of _such_ an intellect. Fox gave him the retort _un_courteous and made the little great man shrink. In going out he asked him if he seriously thought he could persuade the country that the D. of B. was an idiot. ‘No, I don’t; but why did he attack my publication?’ ‘My publication!’ And such a thing it is; the prophecies announcing the Messiah could not usher him in with more awful pomp than he does these letters to the notice of the public.

[Sidenote: LORD KING]

It was lucky that the first time Mr. Fox heard his nephew speak, should be when he spoke the best. Tho’ his terror was excessive, yet he possessed himself, and made upon the subject of the negotiation a very able speech. On the Dutch inquiry, moved by Ld. H., Ld. King spoke uncommonly well. Ld. H. was the more pleased, as it was merely out of friendship to him that he prevailed upon himself to conquer his dread of addressing a public assembly. He is a very young man, very handsome, very awkward, and very shy, but very full of most excellent qualities. He is a good son, a warm and generous friend. His principles, political and religious, are inimical to the actual state of those in force. The first are moderated: he was a lover of liberty even to democracy, and still abhors religion to impiety, but the experience that has corrected him of one excess will cure him of the other, and doubtless he will become very like other people.

When the division was coming on, Ld. Liverpool and Ld. Malmesbury and many others called out, ‘Pooh, pooh! you won’t divide! Why, you will have but three. Pooh, pooh! Don’t think of it!’ ‘Aye, but I will divide!’ cried Ld. H. ‘If I am single I will have a division’; when, to his great surprise and pleasure, the Duke of Somerset and Ld. Mansfield divided with him, besides King and Bessborough. Ld. Camelford did the same, but pique against Ld. Grenville explains his conduct.

From several conversations I had alone this summer with the D. of Somerset I collected that he was, tho’ not disposed towards Opposition, yet averse to Ministers. He is a sensible man, inclined to act upon his own judgment: his manner, from shyness, is against him. I suspect that he has a love of fun in him, for he told me that he was occupied in persuading Lewis to write a book on moral philosophy, as he was certain from the opinions he heard from Lewis that it would be at least entertaining. ‘For,’ says he, ‘he calls _virtues_ what the world holds in abhorrence as great vices, and these paradoxes he maintains so strangely that I cannot illustrate them stronger than by telling you that he confesses himself surprised that Wilberforce should have published his book after _The Monk_. He thinks it great want of taste to give a system of morality in a dry, forbidding form, whereas “_mine_ is given in a popular, pleasing manner, which diverts whilst it instructs, annner to upbraid him for his vote the night before, but hed is adapted to every capacity.”’ Yesterday when he came in to dinner Lds. Boringdon and Amherst lifted up their hands in a ma rather showed an unwillingness to be tutored. Again, during a dinner, Ld. B. leant across me to tell him he was a rival to Julian. I immediately said, ‘I see no apostasy in being guided by good sense and not biassed by interest.’ Ld. B. said no more, and the Duke looked thanks for the reproof. Again Ld. B. asked how he meant to vote upon a question which is coming on. The question is improper to ask, and the Duke replied very well, ‘I shall decide when I hear the arguments on both sides.’

We had a numerous party; Sir James St. Clair is lately returned from Minorca, of which place he gives but a sorry account. His wife is handsome; she did not love him when they first married, but his good nature has conquered her dislike, and she is almost in love with him. In most marriages a material change occurs in the course of ten years, but she has the merit of _singularity_ in hers. Ld. Lorne is an old favourite of mine; his good humour, cheerfulness, and ease is quite charming. Lewis’ lines in an epilogue to _Barbarossa_, which they acted at Inverary, are very descriptive of him:--

And Lord Lorne’s easy air, when he got in a passion,
Proved a tyrant must needs be a person of fashion.
He seemed much at home through the whole of the play;
He died in a style that was quite _dégagé_.
And his orders for murder, disclosed by their tone,
’Twas the same if he gave them or let them alone.

_14th Feb., 1800._--Bob Heathcote came for the first time. ‘A fool and his money are soon parted.’ Most of his is squandered at the gaming table, Newmarket, rare editions, sums lent to ----, splendid dinners, and, in short, in every way that it can go. He is, however, very good-natured, and not conceited--merits that cover a thousand blemishes, and in society make up for most deficiencies.

[Sidenote: MR. KINNAIRD]

A few days back Mr. Kinnaird,[60] eldest son of Ld. Kinnaird, dined here for the first time. Being a Scotchman and having studied in a Scotch University, report puffs him high, of course. Tho’ it overdoes his deserts, yet he merits some praise. He is clever and willing to please; one cannot pity him for _shyness_, as he labours under no embarrassment upon that score. Living in the world will set his head right and render him useful. He is an eager politician against Ministers.

Ld. H. is gone down to the H. of Lords, as a message from the King to subsidise the _German_ Princes is before the House. It is conjectured that our magnanimous ally, the Imperial Paul, is deserting the cause he espoused so vehemently; whilst we are to continue fighting until ‘experience and the evidence of facts’ render a peace proper with Bonaparte. One of the finest passages in Mr. Fox’s speech was where he took up the expression of those who gave for reason the not negotiating immediately, that ‘we should _pause_.’ He described with energy the calamities of war, the villages sacked, cattle destroyed, the field of battle covered with agonised victims weltering in their blood, who, if questioned as to the cause they were fighting in, could not answer as in other wars, ‘ambition,’ ‘aggrandisement of territory,’ etc., etc. ‘No, we fight because the English Ministers are doubtful as to the moral qualities of Bonaparte.’

Lord Carlisle is mightily disposed to vote against the Ministers, a propensity which gives his son great alarm, as he is riveted to all the dogmas of the Ministerial creed, the necessity of the war, faith in the prowess of Suwarrow, the infallibility of Mr. Pitt, etc., etc.

General Fitzpatrick has published his letters to Lord Kenyon.[61] Previous to doing so he sent them to the King, accompanied by a letter calculated to delight him, appealing to him as the head of the school of honour and chief among gentlemen. The motto to the publication is very happy; it is taken from Kenyon’s own speech on the trial of Horne Tooke in 1792: ‘Mr. Horne Tooke, I cannot sit here to hear names calumniated and vilified, persons who are not in this case, persons who are absent, and cannot defend themselves. A Court of Justice is no place for calumny. You must see the impropriety of it, and it does not become the feelings of an honourable mind.’

I heard of a great trait of Scotch nationality. At a dinner at the Chief Baron’s,[62] where Sylvester Douglas[63] was, the news, just then fresh, of Bonaparte’s seizure of the Governt. was mentioned, upon which both the Scotchmen at the same moment inquired, ‘And what did Macdonald[64] do?’

[Sidenote: THE PRINCE’S HEALTH]

The Prince of Wales is supposed to be dying: whatever his illness may be besides, revived love for Mrs. Fitzherbert has aggravated and added to the measure of it. Mde. de Coigny says it’s like a _rondeau_, in which variations are made _ad libitum_, but the return is to the first air. He had a numerous dinner last week, composed solely of parsons; whether this was fun or fear is uncertain. If he had been in a vein for the former, it might have been indulged, as no set of men abhor each other with more heartfelt hatred than those pious brethren; each is in the way of the other, like an overloaded market in Bengal of English beauties. The other night at D. House he fell back in his chair and pointed to have his neckcloth loosened; fortunately Farquhar was there, and ordered proper remedies for his recovery.

The French have played a very good trick in return for our publishing the intercepted letters. They pretend to have found hidden in the wall of a house belonging to a Chouan chief, letters written by Pitt, Windham, etc., to recommend the Royalists to make peace with the Republicans at any rate, and then break it when the English succours arrive. This may be a _real_ correspondence, but if not, _è bene trovato_.

Menzini,[65] the satirist, was derided for his poverty by an insolent and haughty Cardinal, who from his balcony perceived him walking, shabbily dressed. The Cardinal expressed his contempt in the lines of Petrarch:--

Povera e nuda vai Filosofia.

Menzini, with great quickness, replied by the next line of the poet:--

Dice la turba al vil guadagno intesa.

Caraccioli said of England, ‘Que c’était un pays où il y avoit mille religions, et qu’une sauce.’

M. de Lauragais[66] said of it, ‘Qu’il n’y avoit rien de poli que l’acier, point de fruits mûrs que les pommes cuites.’

_1st March, 1800._--Within these last ten or twelve days Mrs. Beauclerk and Mrs. Smith have each added their individual contributions to the population of the world: a little Mimi, and a still smaller boy are the production.

[Sidenote: COMTE D’ARTOIS]

Tierney told me of a circumstance which had been conveyed to him _from authority_. At one of the dinners given by the Comte d’Artois to Pitt and the Cabinet Ministers, the Cte. expressed his astonishment and indignation _to_ Pitt, that a man possessing such principles as Mr. Tierney does, and uttering all that his turbulent and discontented disposition gives rise to, was allowed to go about; that such a man in a well-regulated Governt. should be confined, and not allowed to be at large to preach politics. Pitt replied that Mr. Tierney was a member of Parliament, a very loyal subject, and respectable in his private character. This was said drily, and intended as a reproof to a very ill-judged question. Nothing could show a greater want of taste and knowledge of English customs, than to abuse a member of Parliament to the Prime Minister of England, and tho’ I would not detract from Mr. Pitt, yet his defence of Tierney was such as the occasion extorted, and ought to have been made for any man in Parliament who has not outraged the laws. Even Sir Francis Burdett is as yet entitled to a similar justification. The Cte. d’Artois (at present, according to the _ancien régime_, Monsieur) is a man of slender abilities with violent passions; before the Revolution he was weak and volatile, he is now weak and revengeful.

Bonaparte gives fresh proofs every day of his talents for governing, both in his disposition to conciliate and resist. He has issued letters to recall most of the emigrant nobles who have not borne arms against their country, infants, women, and priests; he manifests a strong determination to fight as well as he did formerly, and not allow of anything being wrested from the nation.

There is upon record a very curious fact, that well considered might abate the ardour of those who are disposed to fight on for the Restoration ‘of the line of Hereditary Princes,’ as it shows that that event would not in all probability induce France to fall back within her ancient limits--one of the objects proposed by the restoration of ye Bourbons. Upon the restoration of Charles II., the Spaniards applied to the English Court for the surrender of Jamaica, upon the ground of its being conquered by an usurper.[67] The English Ministers submitted the question to the ablest civilians in the country, and they were unanimous in their opinion that whatever conquest had been achieved by the arms of G. Britain, whether under lawful or usurped authority, _that_ acquisition, once annexed and become an integral part of the Dominion, it was safe to maintain even by force of arms. And can it seriously be supposed, first, that the French nation will ever receive a Monarch forced upon them at the point of the bayonet by the allied armies, knowing that the incentive that provokes those allies is the partition of France? And, 2ndly, admitting the restoration were practicable, would the Kings, whose object would be popularity, venture to dismember their country? Why, even the unhappy emigrants, starving and exiled, feel triumph and exultation at every victory obtained by their countrymen.

Washington died towards the close of the year 1799. His name will stand high in the page of history, and posterity will be apt to outstep truth to bestow enthusiastic eulogy upon him, who has been great from his mediocrity. Mankind delight in assigning deep designs to very obvious facts. We shall hear of his being the first among generals, legislators, patriots, and practical philosophers, of his integrity, his disinterestedness in sacrificing to the public, of his well understood ambition in preferring a _splendid obscurity_ to elevated insignificancy; in short, what will not be said except the truth--a plain, painstaking, plodding man, whose profession of land surveyor taught him a smattering of mixed mathematics which became useful when military positions were to be conceived, a mild, even temper, that neither offended nor captivated. So much will be said, and hitherto so little has been said, that I shall wait and hear. All France and America mourned at his death.

Canning sent to beg we would fix a day that he might dine here. He came, we had only Lds. G. Leveson, Boringdon, and Ly. Bess. Went off very agreeably. He was witty upon the new Institution,[68] which is a very bad imitation of the _Institut_ at Paris; hitherto there is only one Professor, who is a jack-of-all-trades, as he lectures alike upon chemistry and shipbuilding.

[Sidenote: HORNE TOOKE’S ELECTION]

When Horne Tooke harangued the electors of Westminster from the hustings he was often put out by one of the mob closing his sentences with a nasal ‘Amen.’ This ridiculous finale did him more mischief than all the arguments of his adversaries to prove his incapacity, on account of having taken Priest’s orders, and now the Bishop of London refuses to induct him because he is a layman. He is ingenious enough, I doubt not, to reconcile these seeming contradictions.[69]

Hare, joking with Ld. H. upon his small divisions, some of which have been composed of Ld. King and himself only, says he ought to say, ‘Ego et _Rex_ meus.’

Marquis de la Rivière[70] has with a degree of superabundant loyal zeal, vexed me. At dinner here he overheard me telling Calonne the story of the Cte. d’Artois asking Pitt why a man like Tierney was not shut up. He straight went and asked Monsieur if it was true; he, of course, said _no_, and contradicted it plump. This contradiction Rivière believes implicitly, and wrote me a formal denial of the charge. This provokes me, as I hate being made a party in a _tracasserie_, and still more hate having named any person. However, the thing is of no importance, because I certainly credit Tierney’s statement in preference to Monsieur’s asseveration to the contrary.

I was childish enough last night to go and see the new play; it was almost my first _sortie_ from my couch, but I am not punished for the imprudence, as I have been perfectly well all day. I found Lewis in my box; he is the only person I give leave to enter at all times. He was just returned from Cambridge, where he had heard Ld. Henry Petty deliver a declamation, composed in the very best taste, full of feeling and ingenuity.

I have been reading Le Brun’s journey to Persepolis in 1704, the ruins of which (Persepolis) seem equal to anything of antiquity in point of solidity, size, and extent.

In future times when this little island shall have fallen into its natural insignificancy, by being no longer possessed of a fictitious power founded upon commerce, distant colonies, and other artificial sources of wealth, how puzzled will the curious antiquary be when seeking amidst the ruins of London vestiges of its past grandeur? Acres now covered by high, thin walls of brick, making streets _tirés à cordon_, divided into miserable, straitened, scanty houses, will, when decayed, crumble into a vast heap of brick-dust. No proud arch to survive the records of history, no aqueduct to prove how much the public was considered by ye Governt., no lofty temples, no public works! St. Paul’s anywhere would be a grand edifice; finer as a ruin than in its present state, disfigured with casements, whitewashed walls, pews, etc. The bridges alone would strike the eye as fine remains; they are magnificent. The reason of the meanness of everything throughout England proceeds from two causes. One is the scantiness of materials for great works, viz., stone and marble; second is, that commerce begets independence, from whence springs selfishness and the wish to enjoy what you acquire. Hence there is no ambition, no desire of perpetuating by great works fame to posterity.

[Sidenote: THE HUMANITARIANS]

Hobhouse,[71] who dined here last week for the first time, is a leading man among the Dissenters. He and Mr. Wm. Smith have written controversial books, and he has distinguished his own sect by the denomination of _Humanitarians_, not to be confounded with Unitarians. Priestley, in fact, is the founder of their doctrines, which doctrines they say are drawn from the New Testament in conformity with the primitive practice of Christianity. They assert that most points of faith in the Established Church proceed from the corruptions of Christianity. Christ they believe to have been the son of Joseph and Mary, but that he became inspired by a divine gift. They deny the Trinity, original sin, and the soul; their paradise is composed of material objects, not admitting the separation of soul and body. The Bible they hold to be an historical chronicle, Moses merely a legislator, the Prophets inspired darkly announcing Christ.

Sheridan by chance dined here on Friday, with a whole troop of Frenchmen. I was afraid he would be annoyed, as he does not speak French (which is the strangest thing imaginable for a man in his situation), but he, on the contrary, was pleased with his party. The company were ye Archevêque de Bordeaux, Calonne, Rivière, and Mr. Lattin. He was diverted at seeing the Archevêque laugh heartily at some sallies which might have shocked a bigot or a prude.

Crébillon Père, when upon his deathbed, sent for his son. ‘Ah! mon fils, est-ce donc bien vrai que vous soyez un de ces philosophes à la mode, qui veulent le bouleversement de la religion?’ He drew from behind his pillow a crucifix, and pointing to it, ‘Vous voulez donc détruire ce qu’il lui a tant coûté pour établir?’ This story Condorcet used to be very fond of telling.

Lady Ann Hatton speculates upon marrying Lord Abercorn. Lady Bessborough, who is all credulity, believes _de bonne foi_ that this marriage will take place; even I, who am incredulous, have doubts in his favour, provided what I am told is true, such as, that Ld. A. has taken his daughters to visit their future mother. Beauclerk thinks Ly. Ann dreams, and imparts the vision to Lady B. for facts. Ld. Morpeth behaves admirably, but has wisely not given in a _contre projet_ to the project upon the _tapis_. For a moment I thought the marriage story with Ld. A. was a scheme to obtain a real one from him, but _nous verrons_. Tho’ I do not particularly like Ly. Ann, I shall be glad to see her rescued from the humiliating state she is in; neglect, poverty, and discredit are horrid sufferances. If she closes her career with one of the greatest matches in the kingdom, I don’t know how young women will credit wise precepts of ‘virtue alone is rewarded,’ etc. She is 36, her appearance is so youthful that no one guesses her to be above 24, if so much. Her figure is light, airy, and graceful; Hare says she has a sort of vivacity that raises your expectations, but what she says is so flat that it damps curiosity.

Bonaparte allows of the return of the emigrants; I almost fear he extends that indulgence too far. Once restored to their possessions they will long for their titles, and a King will be the fountain of honour. The Duc de Liancourt has obtained all his estates which were not sold, and those of the Duc de la Rochefoucauld; this makes him among the number of the richest individuals in Europe.[72]

[Sidenote: TALLEYRAND’S SARCASMS]

A very profligate man, who was an agent of the Duc de Richelieu in all his vicious debaucheries, said in a company one day where Talleyrand (L’Évêque d’Autun) was, how much he was injured by the calumnies propagated against him, ‘Et vraiment je n’ai jamais fait qu’une méchanceté de ma vie.’ Talleyrand, with calm indifference, replied, ‘Et quand finira-t-elle?’ I rather think the man’s name was Rulhière.[73]

Talleyrand is remarkable for his cold sarcasms. When M. de Narbonne was Minister at War, Mde. de Staël was his protecting mistress, she guided everything; and one day at a Council of War, at which, very improperly, she was present, each Minister gave their opinion upon the different projects proposed for the plan of attack by some generals. She delivered, among the rest, hers with great warmth and decision; when she had finished she turned to Talleyrand, and said, ‘Why, you do not say a word! What do you think?’ He coldly replied, ‘C’est que je ne m’y entends nullement dans les affaires militaires.’ This bitter reproof vexed her to a degree of passion that she burst into tears; she merited the chastisement, for ‘qu’avait-elle à faire dans ce galère-là?’

An excellent pamphlet, called _Observations upon the Preface to the intercepted correspondence_, contains some witty and severe strictures upon Canning’s highly absurd arguments contained in said preface. It has been imputed to Grey, Lds. Wycombe, Holland, and to Tierney. Ld. H. admired it so much that his uncle Fitzpatrick said he could not resist telling him it was his, but it is a profound secret.

Mr. Fox is employed in writing the history of some late period in the British annals, but whether King William’s reign or Charles II., I am not certain, but I rather believe the latter.[74] I sent him by his desire some books upon the subject, Ld. Grey’s narrative of the Rye House Plot, Baxter’s _Life_ of himself, and I have proposed to him various other miscellaneous tracts. A philosophical history from such a pen will be beyond praise, but I much fear his habitual indolence will interfere too much to allow a shadow of hope that he will finish a section even.

Ld. H. has a quality in common with him that is very serviceable in many ways--a great enduring patience in listening to the arguments of any fool, however great, and of always doing his best to answer them; of never allowing himself to feel, ‘Why exert myself for this fellow?’ Fox says he always likes to hear the opinion of a fool, as he gets by it two opinions, that of the person who gave him the opinion, and his own as he adopts it.

General Smith lost a great deal of money at Brookes’; to dissipate his chagrin he walked about the room, and at length joined in a conversation upon religion. ‘For my part,’ said he, ‘I cannot understand what they mean with their _Trinity_ and _Holy Ghost_.’ ‘I wonder at that,’ replied General Fitzpatrick, ‘as the symbol is a pigeon.’

[Sidenote: GENERAL FITZPATRICK]

The General is less remarkable for brilliant repartees than Hare, but all he says shows a profound knowledge of the world, life, manners, and character; his observations are mostly just and expressed in the best and purest language, adorned with an undescribable good taste. His conversation and writings remind me of Addison. Leave out the morality and piety, and the two characters are the same: mild, gentlemanlike, and each possessing chaste humour. The General is by far the better poet of the two. I am told that my taste is corrupted by that which prevails, but I think energy of expression is oftentimes wanting in both of the above styles.

North,[75] the Bishop of Winchester’s son, Ld. H.’s old friend, brought his wife to dine here some days ago. She is pretty rather, but looks sour-tempered.

Bread is 17 pence the quartern loaf, coals six guineas the chaldron, turkeys 16 shillings, capons 8s. 6d., meat dearer than usual. During this scarcity, be it natural or artificial, we adopt the regulations of the H. of Lords; each person in the family is limited to a quartern loaf per week, no pastry, no fine bread for breakfast.

_19th March, 1800._--A satirical poem called _The Campaign_ is just published; it abuses the Duke of York and the Dutch Expedition. It is imputed to Mr. Courtenay,[76] an old member of Opposition, a man of great coarseness, but some wit. In the House of Commons some supporter of Mr. Pitt’s Administration complimented him on having conducted the machine of Government with such success, in spite of the _drag chain_ of Opposition. Mr. Courtenay, in his reply, remarked upon the beauty and correctness of ye metaphor, since the machine was confessedly going downhill.

_22nd March._--Erskine and Mr. Lattin (and a foolish, handsome Irishman, Mr. Henry) dined, and were extremely entertaining yesterday. Erskine, I have always found hitherto far from agreeable, but yesterday was an exception. He talked strangely upon religion; he pretends to Christianity, but the Mother Church would not take him into her bosom. Bishops and churches, he declares, have destroyed true religion; had he the power of Christ he would drive the _doctors_ out of the _Temple_ as he did, and out of Lincoln’s Inn besides. The Church Establishment he maintains to be the total ruin of the simple, primitive worship. The Trinity he explains with ingenuity, and reprobates the Incomprehensible Mystery of three separate and individual persons.

The little Monk Lewis has behaved like a great fool, and made himself highly ridiculous. He sent to the Duke of Somerset and desired he would _wait upon him_ the next day at 1 o’clock. The Duke obeyed the summons, and _did wait_ upon him. ‘I understand, D. of Somerset, that you have exposed me to the contempt of being again blackballed by the New Club. I think the part you have acted by so doing unbecoming the character of a friend; thus I desire our acquaintance may drop here.’ He rung the bell, and bid the servant open the door for the D., and thus dismissed him. The D. of S. is remarkably good-natured, and most certainly did what he thought Lewis would like, but, poor little man, he is very irritable and quarrelsome, and will shortly be left not only friendless, but without many acquaintances.

[Sidenote: THE ROYAL INSTITUTION]

This Institution[77] of Rumford’s furnishes ridiculous stories. The other day they tried the effect of the gas, so poetically described by Beddoes; it exhilarates the spirits, distends the vessels, and, in short, gives life to the whole machine. The first subject was a corpulent, middle-aged gentleman, who, after inhaling a sufficient dose, was requested to describe to the company his sensations; ‘Why, I only feel stupid.’ This intelligence was received amidst a burst of applause, most probably not for the novelty of the information. Sir Coxe Hippisley was the next who submitted to the operation, but the _effect_ upon him was so _animating_ that the ladies tittered, held up their hands, and declared themselves satisfied. The experiment to remove the popular prejudice in favour of silver teapots failed, as the thermometer gave the lie to the Professor’s learned dissertations, but it must have been from the malice of his evil genius, for the fact is in his favour.

The Bishop of Killala’s[78] narrative of what passed in the town and neighbouring district whilst the French were in possession of it in ’98 under Humbert, is extremely interesting. It is written simply, with a great appearance of truth and feeling. His palace was the headquarters of the General and his officers. He speaks with highest admiration of their humanity, civility, and incredible discipline. There is even humour in his description of some of the scenes, particularly that in which he describes the mixture of mirth and contempt with which the French officer thrust indiscriminately upon the noddles of the Irish the gaudy helmets. He yields the palm of superiority to the English for their _dexterity_ in pillaging and in plunder; indeed compared with every European army, save the Papal one, it is the only _excellence_ in candour we can admit them to lay claim to.

Great embarkations are making at Plymouth of the Guards and other troops. Their destination is not known, but rumour says they go to the Mediterranean. Were I not satisfied how _harmless_ an English military force is against an enemy in battle array, I should wish contrary winds to waft them leagues out of their course, if they are destined for Egypt; but they inspire as little alarm to their enemies as they do confidence in their countrymen, for they are, as one of their commanders in Ireland said publicly of them, ‘Formidable only to their friends.’

* * * * *

[Sidenote: PICTURES BY VAN DYKE]

This house[79] has contained many remarkable and interesting persons; there are curious stories about its origin. Some say it was a nunnery, others, that it was built by a _Cope_ in the reign of Philip and Mary. It came by marriage into the possession of Rich, Earl of Holland.[80] He was a most accomplished and gallant cavalier, and so amiable that Charles I. conceived a jealousy against him, probably not totally without foundation. In consequence of this he was confined by order to his house, but his Royal mistress refused to cohabit with the King until her favourite chamberlain was at large. During his residence here Van Dyke passed a year with him, and probably painted some of those portraits which now decorate most of the best collections in England.[81] There is a very fine portrait of ye Earl of Holland, done by this celebrated artist, in the possession of Lord Breadalbane, at Taymouth.[82] It represents him in the prime and beauty of manhood, arrayed in the apparel of a bridegroom, such as he was when he represented his Royal Master at the Court of France to the lovely Henrietta Maria. His left leg is covered with white satin, it being the one put into bed to the bride when Royal marriages are made by proxy. He held employments of considerable trust, but was accounted wavering in his politics and irritable in his temper. He retired here just when the Civil war broke out, in disgust. Clarendon says, ‘He was visited by all the disaffected Members of Parliament, who held frequent meetings at Holland House.’ Some time after, when the Civil war was at its height, he offered to join the King’s party at Oxford, but being coldly received he returned to the Parliament forces. On 6th August, 1647, ‘The Members of Parliament who were driven from Westminster by tumult met General Fairfax at Holland House and subscribed to the declaration of the Army, etc.’[83] Some ascribe his desertion of the Royal cause to his hatred of Ld. Strafford. He gave a proof of his wish to restore it; in consequence of which he was taken prisoner, confined to his house, and dragged to execution the 9th of March, 1648–9. His body is buried in Kensington Church. In the July following, Lambert, then General of the army, fixed his headquarters here. It was restored to the family of Rich. When the Puritans shut up public theatres, the actors used to act at the houses of the nobility, and this house is mentioned as having frequently been the scene of much dramatic mirth and festivity.

[Sidenote: ADDISON]

Addison was tutor to the Earl of Warwick.[84] He married the Countess, his mother, a marriage which made no addition to his happiness; it neither found them nor made them equal. She always remembered her own rank, and thought herself entitled to treat with very little ceremony the tutor of her son. Rowe’s ballad of despairing love is said to have been written either before or after marriage upon this memorable pair, and it is certain Addison has left behind him no encouragement for ambitious love. There is a pretty little poem by Rowe upon the occasion of his first visit to Holland House to see the Countess of Warwick. It is said by some author, “Holland House is a large mansion, but could not contain Mr. Addison, the Countess of Warwick, and one guest, Peace.” During his residence here the house was frequented by the wits and poets of the time, Pope, Tickell, Steele. Upon his deathbed he sent for Gay, with whom he had had little previous intercourse. He told him he had injured him, but would recompense him if he recovered: ‘What the injury was, he did not explain.’ Lord Warwick was a disorderly young man, and had received without heed the advice of Addison, who used his utmost to reclaim his morals and mend his life; when he found himself dying he sent for him, ‘That he might see how a Christian can die.’[85] He expired under this roof in 1719.

Thou hill, whose brow the antique structures grace
Rear’d by bold chiefs of Warwick’s noble race,
Why, once so loved, whene’er thy bower appears,
O’er my dim eyeballs glance the sudden tears!
How sweet were once thy prospects fresh and fair,
Thy sloping walks and unpolluted air!
How sweet the glooms beneath thy aged trees,
Thy noontide shadows, and thy evening breeze!
His image thy forsaken bowers restore;
Thy walks and airy prospects charm no more;
No more the summer in thy glooms allay’d
Thy evening breezes, and thy noonday shade.

_Tickell, on the death of Addison._

And again in his _Kensington Garden_:--

Where now the skies high Holland House invades
And short-lived Warwick sadden’d all the shades.

Johnson repeats with great indignation Mandeville’s observation upon Addison. It was that he appeared to him like a parson in a tye wig: a laughable and, I daresay, a true remark.