Memoirs of the Court of George IV. 1820-1830 Part 16

MY DEAR LORD BUCKINGHAM,

I have received your note in answer to that which I wrote to you on Wednesday; and I wish you would let me know whether you have any objection to my stating that I know those are your feelings, if there should be an opportunity.

I shall be at Winchester on Wednesday, for the meeting of the Lieutenancy, but I am obliged to return here that night, as I have some people here; otherwise, I should take that opportunity of paying you a visit at Avington.

Believe me, ever yours most sincerely,

WELLINGTON.

I was last week at Woburn. I think the Opposition are much more annoyed at having failed in pledging a number of persons by a vote to go with a Committee on Reform, than they are at the loss of the Roman Catholic Bill.

RIGHT HON. THOMAS GRENVILLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Dropmore, May 15, 1821.

MY DEAR LORD B----,

I hear from London that the D---- of N---- has been so ill-advised as to have offered to the Q---- the Marshal's box at the Coronation, and that she has written to the K---- to know where and in what dress she should appear at that ceremony. I presume the answer will be, "In a white sheet, in the middle aisle of the Abbey." Perhaps _two_ white sheets might be more appropriate, if the report is founded of Bergami the Second, in the person of a certain strapping Scotch Baxter, seven foot by six. If the K---- continues to drive Lord L---- to the wall on one side, and the commoner Lord L---- urges him with a Catholic measure on the other, I should not be surprised that he took that opportunity of withdrawing himself from the turmoil, and of leaving _champ libre_ to the commoner Lord L----, who may feel more confidence than is reasonable, that he should find himself strong enough to take the whole Government upon his own shoulders--a speculation which, however flattering to his ambition, seems hardly within his reach to carry through, the general opinion being certainly much less favourable to him than to the present First Lord. Perhaps, however, the K---- is tired of his old Ministers, and is ready enough to take to their opposers, provided he can do so with at least the appearance of making it his own act, instead of his submitting to undisguised compulsion; but if he puts away his present servants, he places himself as unconditionally now at the discretion of Opposition, as he would have been if he had surrendered to them at the beginning of the session. Perhaps female influence may have contributed to this new view as a new measure; and undoubtedly it is a most marked demonstration, that the three _first_ subject dinners after the accession should be found in the three leading houses of Opposition. The probability, however, is that it is an over-refinement to give consistency or premeditation to that which may be only the unrestrained irritation of the moment.

Yours most affectionately,

T. G.

LORD GRENVILLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Dropmore, May 16, 1821.

Certainly, your description of the discussion for and against the proposed relief to the Catholics is not encouraging, any more than the prospect which the papers seem to hold out of the rejection of the Grampound Bill by the majority of the Cabinet, in contradiction to Lord Liverpool's support. The King's demonstrations of renewed intercourse with the great peers of opposition must also, in such a moment, be a source of weakness, as well as of personal vexation.

In this state of things, I do not wonder that both parts of the Government should be unwilling to stir this Catholic question again in any shape; and I certainly see no such benefit likely to arise from doing so in the mode of partial relief, as to induce the friends of conciliation on a larger scale to embark in any such proposal as this limited measure holds out.

If any other proof were wanted beyond what the general view of the subject affords, to convince any reasonable man that this mode of treating the most important of all our present public interests as no Government question, is the worst instead of the best that could be adopted, Lord Londonderry's[64] own situation in respect of this subject at this moment would be decisive against it. He has, I am persuaded, been restrained only by that pledge from taking the only course which becomes him on the subject, and which, if he had adopted it in consequence of the pa.s.sing of the Bill in the House of Commons, would have been decisive in its favour in its subsequent stages. Having neglected to do this at that time, I myself think that his doing it now would be a step of much more doubtful result, and probably of much more dangerous consequences, and therefore, if I were his adviser, which I am very glad I am not, I do not see what I could suggest but now to leave the matter as it is. Shall we see you on Monday? As to the direct reference which Lord L----'s conversation seems to have had to yourself and your own conduct, in respect to making yourself, personally and officially, a party to this system of treating the greatest of all questions in our domestic policy as no Cabinet measure, what I have already said will sufficiently show you my opinion. It is a mode of getting rid of a present difficulty, but at the risk and almost certainty of the greatest possible embarra.s.sments in future. And this deserves the greater consideration, inasmuch as the events of this session have again rendered this Roman Catholic question so very prominent a feature of all that can be looked to for some time to come.

[64] Lord Castlereagh's father having recently died, he had succeeded to the t.i.tle.

LORD GRENVILLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.

Dropmore, Sunday Night.

I have just got your letter, and write these few lines to save the post, though I have, in truth, in what I wrote to Charles this morning, said all that occurs to me as material on the subject.

It is of great importance that you should not appear, either to Plunket or to others, to stir a single step in the matter without his previous approbation.

I most entirely agree in the utter impossibility of either yourself or Wellesley, or any other supporter of the Catholic Bill, bringing forward any such proposition as this, or even acquiescing in it, except under an express and positive declaration that you do so only as seeing in it an advance, _however small_, towards the final and total accomplishment of that which can alone satisfy your own duty and opinion on this subject.

How can Lord Londonderry or any of his colleagues think that any of those who were turned out in 1807, precisely because they would not pledge themselves to any truce or cessation of this question short of its total and final accomplishment, would now lend themselves to such a measure for the sake of obtaining for the Catholics benefits so small that it is even doubtful (as I explained to Charles this morning, according to my view of the subject,) whether they or their opponents would gain most by thus varying the state of the question?

I forget which bishop it was that was foolish enough to express his hope that the present rejection of the Bill would finally set the question at rest. But I well remember that I noticed this nonsensical expectation in the course of what I said, and a.s.sured him that it neither ought to have, _nor would have_, that effect.

And indeed if I, and half or all the supporters of the Bill, had thought differently, and were inclined to lend ourselves to such a pledge, how could any or all of us answer for the Catholics themselves, or bind ourselves, if they stirred the question in opposition to our pledges, that we would then vote against our declared opinions?

All this, in my judgment, only shows that Lord Londonderry is, as he may well be, most uneasy in his situation, as resulting from the present strange and most anomalous state of this business, which he ought to have foreseen, but did not, as at least a possible event, when he agreed to form a Government in which the one most important feature in the whole political interests of the country was not to be considered as a ministerial question.

"You have what I advise;" but pray do not forget that, on this subject above all others, Plunket is ent.i.tled, not to _know_, but almost to _direct_ your course.

GRENVILLE.

The Queen put in a formal claim to be crowned with the King, and Mr.

Brougham urged it, with all his forensic eloquence and skill, before the Privy Council; but, as will be seen, all the princ.i.p.al precedents were in opposition to his argument:--

"William the Conqueror's Queen was crowned two years after he was crowned.

Henry I.'s Queen, ditto.

Stephen's Queen, ditto.

Richard I.'s Queen, crowned abroad.

John's Queen, not crowned with him, but crowned.

Henry III.'s Queen, not with him, but afterwards, alone.

Edward III.'s Queen, crowned alone.

Henry IV.'s Queen, crowned--not with him.

Henry V.'s Queen, ditto.

Henry VI.'s Queen, not crowned with him, but alone.

Henry VII.'s Queen, crowned long after him.

Henry VIII.--Some of his Queens crowned, some not.

Charles I.--His Queen not crowned at all.

Charles II.--His Queen not crowned at all.

George II.'s Queen, or George I.'s, I am not sure which, not crowned at all."[65]

[65] Twiss's "Life of Lord Eldon," vol. ii. p. 43.

On the 21st of May a feeble attempt was made in the House of Commons to bring forward the pretensions of the Queen to share in the approaching State ceremonial; but the firm language of Lord Londonderry, and the apathy of the House on the subject, set the matter at rest.