Admission of Lord Ellen the cabinet. under Lord Grenville and Mr. Fox'; and personal intercourse soon overcame the king's antipathy to the latter. Lord Sidmouth having a strong body of parliamentary friends, who, to use the words of his biographer, "constituted a species of armed neutrality, far too powerful to be safely overlooked," and being "understood to enjoy the favour and confidence of the king, and to be faithfully devoted to his Majesty's interests, was induced to join a party with whom he had neither connexion, nor political sympathies. The king's friends were not to be neglected, and were amply provided for. Lord Sidmouth himself, "not wishing to excite jealousy by very frequent intercourse with the king," declined the Presidency of the Council, and accepted the less prominent office of Privy Seal.5 It As there was a difficulty in admitting any of Lord Sidmouth's political friends to the cabinet, Lord Ellenborough, the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench, was associated with him, in order to give weight to his counsels. This arrangement was open to grave constitutional objections. had been the policy of our laws to render the judges independent of the Crown; and now the first criminal judge became one of its confidential advisers. Though the appointment was successfully defended in Parliament, where the precedent of Lord Mansfield was much relied on, it was generally condemned by 1 Rose's Corresp., ii. 236. 2 Twiss's Life of Eldon, i. 510. 5 Ibid., 416; Mr. Abbot's Diary, with Lord Ellenborough by his side, put him in mind of a faithful old steward with his mastiff, watching new servants, lest they should have some evil designs against the old family mansion."-Lord Sidmouth's Life, ii. 417. c. 23. 13 Will. III. c. 32; 1 Geo. III. public opinion, and no similar appointment has since been made.1 Difference the admi army. Before the new ministry was completed, the king with the was alarmed at a supposed invasion of his prerogative. king on On the 1st February, Lord Grenville proposed to his nistration Majesty some changes in the administration of the of the army, by which the question was raised whether the army should be under the immediate control of the Crown, through the Commander-in-Chief, or be subject to the supervision of ministers. The king at once said that the management of the army rested with the Crown alone; and that he could not permit his ministers to interfere with it, beyond the levying of the troops, their pay and clothing. Lord Grenville was startled at such a doctrine, which he conceived to be entirely unconstitutional, and to which he would have refused to submit. For some time it was believed that the pending ministerial arrangements would be broken off; but on the following day Lord Grenville presented a minute to his Majesty, stating that no changes in the management of the army should be effected without his Majesty's approbation. To the doctrine thus amended, there could be no reasonable objection, and the king assented to it. The Grenville ministry fell, like that of Mr. Pitt in 1801, Differenc by proposing a measure affecting the king's religious king on the scruples. As all the circumstances regarding this measure will be described elsewhere 3, it is sufficient here to say that on proposing the Army and Navy Service Bill,by which some of the disqualifications of officers in the Lord 1 Hans. Deb., vi. 308; Campbell's Lives of Chief Justices, ii. 451; Lives of the Chancellors, vi. 584; Lord Sidmouth's Life, ii. 417; Chapter on Administration of Justice. 2 Ann. Reg., 1806, 26; Lord Sidmouth's Life, ii. 416. 3 Chapter XII., on Civil and Religious Liberty. Army and Navy Ser vice Bill. Activity of friends. army The king's friends, and the opponents of the ministry, did not neglect this favourable opportunity of turning his Majesty's well-known religious scruples to account; but soon directed his personal influence against his ministers. On the 4th March, Lord Sidmouth "apprised his Majesty of the nature and details of the measure; "2 said he should himself oppose it; and soon afterwards tendered his resignation to Lord Grenville. On the 12th, the Duke of Portland wrote to the king, expressing his belief that the measure had not received his Majesty's consent, and that it could be defeated in the House of Lords. "But for this purpose," said his grace, "I must fairly state to your Majesty, that your wishes must be distinctly known, and that your present ministers should not have any pretext for equivocating upon the subject, or any ground whatever to pretend ignorance of your Majesty's sentiments and determination, not only to withhold your sanction from the present measure, but to use all 1 Lord Malmesbury's Corresp., iv. 381-384. your 2 Lord Sidmouth's Life, ii. 459— 462. 2 influence in resisting it." Writing on the same day, his grace said: "His Majesty has signified his orders to my nephews, Lords George and James Thynne, to vote against it." On the following day a person came to Lord Malmesbury from the Queen's house, authorised to say, "that his Majesty's wishes, sentiments, and intentions, respecting every measure which may lead to alter the legal restrictions the Catholics are liable to, are invariably the same as they always have been, and always will be so." 3 The king himself also intimated to Lord Grenville, that "he should certainly think it right to make it known that his sentiments were against the measure."4 al of the Hence it appears that courtiers and intriguing statesmen were still as ready as they had been twenty-five years before, to influence the king against his ministers, and to use his name for the purpose of defeating measures in Parliament; while the king himself was not more scrupulous in committing himself to irregular interference with the freedom of parliamentary deliberations. On this occasion, however, opposition to Withdrawthe ministry in Parliament by the king's friends, obnoxious was averted by the withdrawal of the measure. announcing its abandonment to the king, the ministers committed a second indiscretion. They reserved Pledge proposed by to themselves, by a minute of the cabinet, the right the king, of openly avowing their sentiments, should the Ca- and remotholic Petition be presented, and of submitting to ministers. his Majesty, from time to time, such measures as they might deem it advisable to propose.5 The king not On bill 4 Letter to Mr. T. Grenville, 14th March, 1807 (Court and Cabinets of Geo. III., iv. 135). 5 Hans. Deb., ix. 231-247; Life val of the Proceed Commons on the change of ministry, 1807. only desired them to withdraw this part of the minute, but demanded from them a written declaration that they would never, under any circumstances, propose to him further concessions to the Catholics, or even offer him advice upon the subject. To such a pledge it was impossible for constitutional ministers to submit. They were responsible for all public measures, and for the good government of the country; and yet, having abandoned a measure which they had already proposed, they were now called upon to fetter their future discretion, and to bind themselves irrevocably to a policy which they thought dangerous to the peace of Ireland. The king could scarcely have expected such submission. The ministers refused the pledge, and the king proceeded to form a new administration under Mr. Perceval. He had regarded this contest with his ministers as "a struggle for his throne;" saying, "he must be the Protestant king of a Protestant country, or no king." 2 In the Commons, the dismissal of the Government on ings in the these grounds, and the constitutional dangers involved in such an exercise of the prerogative, did not pass without animadversion. On the 9th April, Mr. Brand moved a resolution, "That it is contrary to the first duties of the confidential servants of the Crown to restrain themselves by any pledge, expressed or implied, from offering to the king any advice which the course of circumstances may render necessary for the welfare and security of the empire." In the debate it was argued, that as the king was not responsible by law, if the ministers should also claim to be absolved from responsibility, by reason of pledges given to the king, of Lord Sidmouth, ii. 463; Lord 1 Hans. Deb., ix. 243; Lord Sid mouth's Life, ii. 464; Rose's Correspondence, ii. 328-331. 2 Twiss's Life of Lord Eldon, ii. 34. |