His Majesty asked no other, and he should continue to serve his Sovereign, to the best of his abilities, without fearing any responsibility that might attach to his official conduct."* Afterwards, in the year 1813, when Earl Grey was sitting by him on the woolsack, and they were talking on the subject of the Princess of Wales, he said, "I do assure you—you may believe it or not, as you think proper-but I do assure you, that when I had the conference with the King in 1807, which I requested, it was solely for the purpose of representing to him what mischief might follow if Perceval was not prevented from publishing the book which he was then bent on publishing." As he confessed that he did not expect to be believed, we may be allowed to entertain some doubts as to the accuracy of his recollection of all that passed in the interview with the King. In the "Anecdote Book," he says, (I believe with strict truth,) "In order to disarm political jealousy, I communicated to Lord Grenville, then Minister, that I was going to Windsor, and the nature of the business which led to my visiting his Majesty." He goes on flatly and circumstantially to deny the charge, but he materially weakens the force of his denial by introducing it with this insincere sentence:-"It happened, unfortunately, about this time, that the Administration meditated a bill in Parliament which was favourable to the Roman Catholics, and that there was that misunderstanding in consequence of it which led to the King's dismissing his administration." He must have thought that those were very credulous who could be persuaded that he considered the blunder of the Whigs in bringing forward the "Roman Catholic Officers' Bill," and their consequent dismissal, as misfortunes,-and he could not have sifted very nicely the facts which he was to lay before them. It would appear that for a short time after the formation of the new Government,—for the purpose of wreaking vengeance on the discomfited Whigs, there was an intention to publish "the Book." Lady Hester Stanhope, in a conversation with her physician, in the year 1837, referring to this subject, said,-"I prevented the explosion the first time, and I will tell you how. One day the Duke of Cumberland called on me, and in his accustomed manner began:- Well, Lady Hester, it will be all out to-morrow. We have printed it; and to-morrow it will be all out.' I knew what he meant, and said to him- Have you got the Chancellor's leave? I, for my part, don't like the business at all.''Why don't you like it?' asked the Duke. Because,' answered I, ‘I have too much respect for Royalty to desire to see it made a subject for Grub Street song.' I did not say this so much on the Prince of Wales' account as for the sake of the Princess. I dreaded the other disclosures to which a business like this might lead. The Duke turned away, and I saw that the same idea struck him; for, after a pause, he resumed his position, and answered,-You are quite right, Lady Hester; by * Parl. Deb. ix. 422. † Mem. of Sir S. Romilly, iii. 104. Twiss, ch. xxiv. It was printed in a private press in the house of Mr. Perceval, on the west side of Lincoln's Inn Fields. --, you are quite right, but what am I to do? We have gone too far. What am I to do?' Why, I think,' rejoined I, 'the best thing you can do is to go and ask the Chancellor.' So off he packed; and I fancy Mr. Perceval and the Chancellor and he talked it over, and decided on quashing the business."* It has been said that the chief opposition to the suppression came from the King, who, "hating his eldest son with a hatred scarcely consistent with the supposition of a sound mind," wished that he should be exposed to public obloquy. The true end for which "the Book" had been composed having been accomplished, the authors themselves. soon became very much ashamed of it, and were eager to destroy every trace of its existence. Some copies, however, surreptitiously got into circulation, and in the "Phoenix" Sunday newspaper, published on the 21st of February, 1808, there appeared the following announcement and mottoes: "We are fortunate enough to be in possession of some most important documents on a subject so peculiarly interesting, that when we farther explain ourselves, the public will be astonished to learn that they are now likely to be brought to light. The insertion of them shall take place as soon as we have made the necessary preparations for giving the most extensive circulation to our paper. Ib. 'The tidings that I bring will make my boldness manners.' • At what ease Might corrupt minds procure knaves as corrupt Ib. When I am dead, good wench, Let me be used with honour; strew over me 'After my death, I wish no other herald, 1b. Ib."" The Chancellor and Mr. Perceval were grievously alarmed; and Sir Vicary Gibbs, the Attorney General, with a view to stop the publication by injunction, filed an information in the [A. D. 1808.] * Vol. i. p. 395. Lady Hester afterwards states, in a manner which rather impairs her credit, that Mr. Perceval paid 10,0007. out of the secret service to recover one copy of "the Book," which had been stolen from his table. † Lord Brougham. Court of Chancery, stating that a commission had issued by the King's orders to certain privy councillors, to inquire into certain charges against her Royal Highness the Princess of Wales; that they had made a Report upon the subject to his Majesty; that Francis Blagdon, the proprietor of the Phoenix Sunday newspaper, pretended to have got a copy of this Report, and that he was about to publish it with certain scurrilous commentaries, and praying that he might be prevented by injunction from doing so, and that by a decree he might be ordered to deliver up the same to the Attorney General for the use of his Majesty. Strange to say, the case came on before the Lord Chancellor Eldon, one of the authors of "the Book." He adjourned the hearing of it from Lincoln's Inn Hall to his private room. There the motion was made by the Attorney General in person-assisted by Sir Arthur Piggott, Sir Samuel Romilly, Mr. Bell, and Mr. Mitford, "that an injunction might be awarded to restrain the defendant from parting with and from printing or publishing the Report in the Information mentioned, or any document or proceeding made or had in the prosecution of the said commission, or any abstract or extract of or from the same.” I have not been able to learn what passed during the discussion, but, from an Office copy of the order made, which lies before me, along with the information and affidavits, it appears that the injunction was granted in the terms prayed for. One would have expected that the matter would have been handed over to the Master of the Rolls, but I do not suppose that there was any impropriety in Lord Eldon himself sitting and giving judgment on this occasion, for the application did not proceed on the piracy of any original observations on the Report from his pen, as a violation of literary property, contrary to the law of copyright-but merely upon the title of the Crown to prevent the publication of a Report made by privy councillors in such an inquiry; and there could be no doubt respecting the law upon this subject, although it seems to have been utterly forgotten by those great lawyers, Lord Eldon, Mr. Perceval, and Mr. Plumer, when they themselves composed and printed "the Book" for general circulation. Although the Book" was suppressed, the unhappy Princess was received at Court, and was treated with much kindness and respect by her present protectors, till her husband became Regent and King, and they became his Ministers. CHAPTER CC. CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD ELDON TILL THE LORD ELDON, on being re-appointed Chancellor, thought his tenure of the Great Seal exceedingly precarious; yet he held it continuously for more than twenty years-taking a pro [A. D. 1807.] minent part in an Administration which, in the midst of unexampled difficulties, skilfully conducted our foreign affairs, and, by the aid of the most consummate General who ever led an English army to victory, overthrew the power of Napoleon, and restored peace to the world. The first measure of the new Administration was an immediate dissolution of the Parliament, which had only sat a few [JUNE 26, 1807.] months. This Lord Eldon strongly recommended, notwithstanding his violent animadversions on the late Ministers for dissolving a Parliament which had sat above four years. The speech delivered by him, closing the session in the King's name, announced the object of this proceeding to be,"to afford to his people the best opportunity of testifying their determination to support him in every exercise of the prerogatives of his crown, which is conformable to the sacred obligations under which they are held, and conducive to the welfare of his kingdom and to the security of the Constitution." This plain denunciation of the Catholics was received with loud applause, and most of the candidates supposed to be favourable to their claims were defeated at the hustings. When the "No-Popery Parliament" met, the note of triumph was sounded in the royal speech delivered by the Lord Chancellor, which boasted of "the numerous addresses which his Majesty had received from his subjects, expressing their firm resolution to support him in defending the just rights of his crown and the true principles of the Constitution."* An amendment being moved, censuring the late dissolution, and the principles upon which the change of Administration had taken place, the Lord Chancellor said the present Government was stiginatized by the amendment, which accused them of manifest misconduct. He defended the dissolution, which had been found necessary for the safety of the Established Church; and he denied the general doctrine, that Ministers, by accepting office, were responsible for the manner in which their predecessors had been dismissed,† although he declared his entire approbation of the principles on which the King had lately called to his councils men in whom not only his Majesty but the nation confided."‡ The amendment was rejected by a majority of 160 to 67.§ On a subsequent day, Lord Erskine and Lord Spencer having reiterated the same complaints on the occasion of the second reading of a Bill to indemnify Ministers for an Order in Council rendered necessary by the dissolution of Parliament, "the Lord Chancellor avowed, that, with a view to render the new Administration as firm and as vigorous as possible, he had been a strenuous adviser-probably one of the most strenuous advisers-of that measure. He looked to the Protestant * 9 Parl. Deb. 577. † Sir Robert Peel, who will generally be found to lay down sound constitutional doctrine, admitted, in the Parliament which met in the beginning of 1835, that in accepting office, after the dismissal of Lord Melbourne's Government by William IV., he made himself responsible for that act, although he was at Rome when it took place, and he was in no respect actually privy to it. § Ib. 607. 9 Parl. Deb. 605. people, whose regard and veneration, once lost to the Government, would at least be but imperfectly replaced by the conciliation of the Roman Catholics. But such a conciliation was not, in his opinion, at all likely to be effected. He concluded by taunting the late Government for confining their measure of relief to officers in the army and navy, and asked why it should not be extended to all professions and all offices in the state?"* In a subsequent stage of the bill [JULY, 1807.] he was quite jocular in answering a charge of having been factious when in Opposition, and observed, that “All the Talents, as they were called, had been absolutely without any opponents in that House, or he believed any where else, until they began to oppose themselves.”† The only other occasion of his addressing the House during this session was for the purpose of throwing out Lord Holland's Bill for the establishment of Parochial Schools, [AUG. 11, 1807.] -on the ground that "it departed from the great principle of education in this country, by taking the business of instruction, in a great degree, out of the superintendence and control of the clergy. He even objected to a provision in the bill giving the Court of Chancery jurisdic tion over the funds appropriated to the use of the schools; saying,what he would not have allowed any one else to say, without expressing high indignation,-"It should be recollected how money so intrusted was sweated in that court, and how, in the end, when the oyster came to be divided, the parties entitled got nothing but the shells." His will in the House of Lords was henceforth law, and at the prorogation he exultingly returned thanks to [AUG. 14, 1807.] them in the King's name, "for the steady loyalty, and the zealous devotion to the public service, which had characterized all their deliberations"-although only a few months had elapsed since his desponding conviction that the King was alienated from him, and that the Whigs, with their new Parliament, were permanently fixed in power. This revolution was in no small degree to be attributed to his own dexterity in turning to account the prejudices of the King and of the people. Lord Eldon at this time exercised a much greater influence in the Cabinet than had belonged to any Chancellor for a vast number of years. The nominal head of the Government was the Duke of Portland-never a very vigorous statesman, and now enfeebled by age and disease; and Mr. Perceval, leader of the House of Commons, having long practised as counsel under the Chancellor, still regarded him as his chief. Lord Camden, Lord Westmoreland, Lord Mulgrave, and Lord Chatham, were very little considered; and Lord Hawksbury, Lord Castlereagh, and Mr. Canning, though aspiring statesmen, had not yet acquired much ascendency. Lord Eldon continued in high favour with the King and the Duke of Cumberland; and his colleagues, sensible that they chiefly owed their places to his skilful intrigues, were, for a while, much disposed to defer to his opinion. * 9 Parl. Deb. 778. ‡ 9 Parl. Deb. 1176. † Ib. 808. |