prince instruction in the theory of the British Constitution; and knowing little more than the princess herself, of the English people and government, had taught him that his own honour, and the interests of the country required the extension of his personal influence, and a more active exercise of his prerogatives. The chief obstacle to this new policy of the court was found in the established authority of responsible ministers, upheld by party connexions and parliamentary interest. Accordingly, the first object of the king and his advisers was to loosen the ties of party, and break down His deter the confederacy of the great Whig families.' The king mination to desired to undertake personally the chief administration govern. Lord Bolingbroke's theory. of public affairs, to direct the policy of his ministers, and himself to distribute the patronage of the Crown. He was ambitious not only to reign, but to govern. His will was strong and resolute, his courage high, and his talent for intrigue considerable. He came to the throne determined to exalt the kingly office; and throughout his long reign, he never lost sight of that object. Lord Bolingbroke had conceived the idea of a government under "a patriot king," who should "govern as soon as he begins to reign," who should "call into the administration such men as he can assure himself will serve on the same principles on which he intends to govern,”—and who should "put himself at the head of his people in order to govern, or, more properly, to subdue all parties."3 But it had been no part of Lord Bolingbroke's conception, that the patriot king should 1 See letter of Sir J. Phillips to 2 The Idea of a Patriot King, Works, iv. 274. 3 Ibid., 281, 282. suffer his favourites to stand between him and his "most able and faithful councillors." 1 the time of The ministry whom the king found in possession of Ministry at power at his accession, had been formed by a coalition the king's between the Duke of Newcastle and Mr. Pitt. The accession. former had long been the acknowledged leader of the great Whig connexion, and enjoyed extended parliamentary interest: the latter, by his eloquence and statesmanship, had become the most popular and powerful of the king's subjects. The ministry also comprised the Grenville and Bedford sections of the Whig party. It was so strong in Parliament, that for some years the voice of opposition had been scarcely heard; and so long as it continued united, its position was impregnable. secret But, strong as were the ministers, the king was re- The king's solved to wrest all power from their hands, and to counselexercise it himself. For this purpose he called to his aid lors. the Earl of Bute, and other secret counsellors, drawn from all parties. The greater number were of the Tory party, whose views of prerogative were Jacobite. According to Horace Walpole, "they abjured their ancient master; but retained their principles."" It was the king's object not merely to supplant one party, and establish another in its place; but to create a new party, faithful to himself, regarding his personal wishes, carrying out his policy, and dependent on his will. This party was soon distinguished as "the king's men,' or "the king's friends."3 Instead of relying upon the advice of his responsible ministers, the king took counsel with this "double" or "interior cabinet." Even his first speech to Parliament was not submitted to the cabinet. The Idea of a Patriot King, 3 Burke's Present Discontents, Works, ii. 240-242. Constitu tional rela tions of the king to his ministers. It had been drawn up by himself and Lord Bute; and when Mr. Pitt took exception to some of its expressions, the king long resisted the advice of his minister. It had been usual for ministers to rely upon the support of the Crown, in all their measures. They now found themselves thwarted and opposed; and the patronage, which they had regarded as their own, they saw divided by the king amongst his new adherents and their connexions. This "influence behind the throne" was denounced by all the leading statesmen of that time, by Mr. Grenville, Lord Chatham, the Marquess of Rockingham, the Duke of Bedford, and Mr. Burke. Occasionally denied, its existence was yet so notorious, and its agency so palpable, that historical writers of all parties, though taking different views of its character, have not failed to acknowledge it. The bitterness with which it was assailed at the time was due, in great measure, to political jealousies, and to the king's selection of his friends from an unpopular party; but, on constitutional grounds, it could not be defended. A constitutional government ensures to the king a wide authority, in all the councils of the state. He chooses and dismisses his ministers. Their resolutions upon every important measure of foreign and domestic policy are submitted to his approval; and when that approval is withheld, his ministers must either abandon their policy, or resign their offices. They are responsible to the king on the one hand, and to Parliament on the other; and while they retain the confidence of the king, by administering affairs to his satisfaction, they must act upon principles, and propose measures, which they can justify to Parliament. And here is the And here is the proper limit to the king's influence. As he governs by responsible ministers, he must recognise their responsibilities. They His atbreak up tempts are not only his ministers, but also the public servants of a free country. But an influence in the direction of public affairs thus limited, by no means satisfied the ambition of the king. His courtiers represented that the king was enthralled by the dominant party, which had become superior to the throne itself, and that in order to recover his just prerogative, it was necessary to break up the combination. But what was this in effect but to assert that the king should now be his own minister? that ministers should be chosen, not because parties. they had the confidence of Parliament and the country, but because they were agreeable to himself, and willing to carry out his policy? -And this was the true object of the king. It will be seen that when ministers, not of his own choice, were in office, he plotted against them and overthrew them; and when he had succeeded in establishing his friends in office, he enforced upon them the adoption of his own policy. to the king's tactics. The king's tactics were fraught with danger, as well Danger of to the Crown itself, as to the constitutional liberties of the people; but his personal conduct and character have sometimes been judged with too much severity. That he was too fond of power for a constitutional monarch, none will now be found to deny that he sometimes resorted to crafty expedients, unworthy of a king, even his admirers must admit. With a narrow understanding, and obstinate prejudices, he was yet patriotic in his feelings, and laboured, earnestly and honestly, for the good government of his country. If he loved power, he did not shrink from its cares and toil. If he delighted in being the active ruler of his people, he devoted himself to affairs of state, even more laboriously than his ministers. If he was jealous of the authority of the Crown, he was not less jealous of the honour and greatness of his people. A just recognition of the personal merits of the king himself, enables us to judge more freely of the constitutional tendency and results of his policy. To revert to a polity under which kings had governed, and ministers had executed their orders, was in itself a dangerous retrogression in the principles of constitutional government. If the Crown, and not its ministers, governed, how could the former do no wrong, and the latter be responsible? If ministers were content to accept responsibility without power, the Crown could not escape its share of blame. Hence the chief safeguard of the monarchy was endangered. But the liberties of the people were exposed to greater peril than the Crown. Power proceeding from the king, and exercised by himself in person, is irreconcilable with popular government. It constitutes the main distinction between an absolute, and a constitutional monarchy. The best and most enlightened of kings, governing from above, will press his own policy upon his subjects. Choosing his ministers from considerations personal to himself, directing their acts,-upholding them as his own servants,-resenting attacks upon as disrespectful to himself, committed to their measures, and resolved to enforce them,-viewing men and things from the elevation of a court, instead of sharing the interests and sympathies of the people,-how can he act in harmony with popular influences? them The system of government which George III. found in operation, was indeed imperfect. The influence of the Crown, as exercised by ministers, prevailed over the more popular elements of the constitution. The great nobles were too powerful. A Parliament, without adequate representation of the people, and uncontrolled by |