and a friend of the Protestant succession. He character could drag down such parts; and was an orator, a courtier, a wit, and a man of Winnington, whose private morals lay, justly or etters. He was at the head of ton in days unjustly, under imputations of the worst kind. when, in order to be at the head of ton, it was The discontented Whigs were, not perhaps not sufficient to be dull and supercilious. It in number, but certainly in ability, experience, was evident that he submitted impatiently to and weight, by far the most important part of the ascendency of Walpole. He murmured the Opposition. The Tories furnished little against the Excise Bill. His brothers voted more than rows of ponderous fox-hunters, fat against it in the House of Commons. The with Staffordshire or Devonshire ale-men minister acted with characteristic caution and who drank to the king over the water, and becharacteristic energy;--caution in the conduct lieved that all the fundholders were Jewsof public affairs; energy where his own ad- men whose religion consisted in hating the ministration was concerned. He withdrew Dissenters, and whose political researches had his bill, and turned out all his hostile or waver- led them to fear, like Squire Western, that their ing colleagues. Chesterfield was stopped on land might be sent over to Hanover to be put the great staircase of St. James's, and sum- into the sinking-fund. The eloquence of these moned to deliver up the staff which he bore as patriotic squires, the remnant of the one for Lord Steward of the Household. A crowd of midable October Club, seldom went beyond a noble and powerful functionaries-the Dukes hearty Ay or No. Very few members of this of Montrose and Bolton, Lord Burlington, party had distinguished themselves much in Lord Stair, Lord Cobham, Lord Marchmont, Parliament, or could, under any circumstances, Lord Clinton-were at the same time dis- have been called to fill any high office; and missed from the service of the crown. those few had generally, like Sir William

Not long after these events, the Opposition | Wyndham, learned in the company of their was reinforced by the Duke of Argyle, a man new associates the doctrines of toleration and vainglorious indeed and fickle, but brave, elo-political liberty, and might indeed with strict quent, and popular. It was in a great mea-propriety be called Whigs.

sure owing to his exertions that the Act of Set- It was to the Whigs in opposition, the patlement had been peaceably executed in Eng-triots, as they were called, that the most disland immediately after the death of Anne, and that the Jacobite rebellion which, during the following year, broke out in Scotland, was suppressed. He too carried over to the minority the aid of his great name, his talents, and his paramount influence in his native country.

tinguished of the English youth, who at this season entered into public life, attached themselves. These inexperienced politicians felt all the enthusiasm which the name of liberty naturally excites in young and ardent minds. They conceived that the theory of the Tory Opposition, and the practice of Walpole's government, were alike inconsistent with the principles of liberty. They accordingly re

up. While opposing the Whig minister, they professed a firm adherence to the purest doctrines of Whigism. He was the schismatic; they were the true Catholics, the peculiar people, the depositaries of the orthodox faith of

amidst the corruptions generated by time, and by the long possession of power, had preserved inviolate the principles of the Revolution. Of the young men who attached themselves to this portion of the Opposition, the most distinguished were Lyttleton and Pitt.

In each of these cases taken separately, a skilful defender of Walpole might perhaps make out a case for him. But when we see that during a long course of years all the foot-paired to the standard which Pulteney had set steps are turned the same way-that all the most eminent of those public men who agreed with the minister in their general views of policy left him, one after ancther, with sore and irritated minds, we find it impossible not to believe that the real explanation of the phe-Hampden and Russell; the one sect which, nomenon is to be found in the words of his son, "Sir Robert Walpole loved power so much that he would not endure a rival."* Hume has described this famous minister with great felicity in one short sentence-“moderate in exercising power, not equitable in engrossing it." Kind-hearted, jovial, and placible as Walpole was, he was yet a man with whom no person of high pretensions and high spirit could long continue to act. He had, therefore, to stand against an Opposition containing all the most accomplished statesmen of the age, with no better support than that which he received from persons like his brother Horace, or Henry Pelham, whose industrious mediocrity gave him no cause for jealousy; or from clever adven- to the patriots. turers, whose situation and character diminish- Nothing is more natural than that, in a mo ed the dread which their talents might other-narchy, where a constitutional Opposition ex wise have inspired. To this last class belonged Fox, who was too poor to live without office; Sir William Yonge, of whom Walpole himself said, that nothing but such parts could buoy up such a character, that nothing but such a

*Memoirs, vol. i. p. 201.

When Pitt entered Parliament, the whole political world was attentively watching the progress of an event which soon added great strength to the Opposition, and particularly to that section of the Opposition in which the young statesman enrolled himself. The Prince [of Wales was gradually becoming more and more estranged from his father and his father's ministers, and more and more friendly

ists, the heir-apparent of the throne should put himself at the head of that Opposition. He is impelled to such a course by every feeling of ambition and of vanity. He cannot be more than second in the estimation of the party which is in. He is sure to be the first mem

ber of the party which is out. The highest

U

favour which the existing administration can expect from him is, that he will not discard them. But, if he joins the Opposition, all his associates expect that he will promote them; and the feelings which men entertain towards one from whom they hope to obtain great advantages which they have not, are far warmer than the feelings with which they regard one who, at the very utmost, can only leave them in possession of what they already have. An heir-apparent, therefore, who wishes to enjoy, in the highest perfection, all the pleasure that can be derived from eloquent flattery and profound respect, will always join those who are struggling to force themselves into power. This is, we believe, the true explanation of a fact which Lord Granville attributed to some natural peculiarity in the illustrious house of Brunswick. "This family," said he at Council, we suppose after his daily half-gallon of Burgundy, "always has quarrelled and always will quarrel, from generation to generation." He should have known something of the matter; for he had been a favourite with three successive generations of the royal house. We cannot quite admit his explanation; but the fact is indisputable. Since the accession of George the First, there have been four Princes of Wales, and they have all been almost constantly in opposition.

of politicians, who had considered themselves as placed under sentence of perpetual exclu sion from office, and who, in their despair, had been almost ready to join in a counter-revolution, as the only mode of removing the proscription under which they lay, now saw with pleasure an easier and safer road to power opening before them, and thought it far better to wait till, in the natural course of things, the crown should descend to the heir of the house of Brunswick, than to risk their lands and their necks in a rising for the house of Stuart. The situation of the royal family resembled the situation of those Scotch families in which father and son took opposite sides during the rebellion, in order that, come what might, the estate might not be forfeited.

In April, 1736, Frederic was married to the Princess of Saxe-Gotha, with whom he afterwards lived on terms very similar to those on which his father had lived with Queen Caroline. The prince adored his wife, and thought her in mind and person the most attractive of her sex. But he thought that conjugal fidelity was an unprincely virtue; and, in order to be like Henry the Fourth and the Regent Orleans, he affected a libertinism for which he had no taste, and frequently quitted the only woman whom he loved for ugly and disagreeable mistresses.

Whatever might have been the motives The address which the House of Commons which induced Prince Frederic to join the presented to the king on occasion of the party opposed to Sir Robert Walpole, his sup- prince's marriage, was moved, not by the miport infused into many members of that party nister, but by Pulteney, the leader of the Whigs a courage and an energy, of which they stood in opposition. It was on this motion that Pitt, greatly in need. Hitherto, it had been impos- who had not broken silence during the session sible for the discontented Whigs not to feel in which he took his seat, addressed the House some misgivings when they found themselves for the first time. "A contemporary historian," dividing night after night, with uncompromis- says Mr. Thackeray, "describes Mr. Pitt's first ing Jacobites, who were known to be in con- speech as superior even to the models of anstant communication with the exiled family; cient eloquence. According to Tindal, it was or with Tories who had impeached Somers, more ornamented than the speeches of Dewho had murmured against Harley and St. mosthenes, and less diffuse than those of CiJohn as too remiss in the cause of the Church cero." This unmeaning phrase has been a and the landed interest; and who, if they were hundred times quoted. That it should ever not inclined to attack the reigning family, yet have been quoted, except to be laughed at, is considered the introduction of that family as, strange. The vogue which it has obtained at best, only the less of two great evils-as a may serve to show in how slovenly a way necessary, but a painful and humiliating pre- most people are content to think. Did Tindal, servative against Popery. The minister might who first used it, or Archdeacon Coxe, or Mr. plausibly say that Pulteney and Carteret, in Thackeray, who have borrowed it, ever in their the hope of gratifying their own appetite for lives hear any speaking which did not deserve office and for revenge, did not scruple to serve the same compliment? Did they ever hear the purposes of a faction hostile to the Pro- speaking less ornamented than that of Detestant succession. The appearance of Fre-mosthenes, or more diffuse than that of Cideric at the head of the patriots silenced this cero? We know no living orator, from Lord reproach. The leaders of the Opposition might Brougham down to Mr. Hunt, who is not en now boast that their proceedings were sanc-titled to the same magnificent eulogy. It would tioned by a person as deeply interested as the king himself in maintaining the Act of Settlement; and that, instead of serving the purposes of the Tory party, they had brought that party over to the side of Whigism. It must indeed be admitted that, though both the king and the prince behaved in a manner little to their honour-though the father acted harshly, the son disrespectfully, and both childishly-the royal family was rather strengthened than weakened by the disagreement of its two most distinguished members. A large class

be no very flattering compliment to a man's figure to say, that he was taller than the Polish Count, and shorter than Giant O'Brien ;-fatter than the Anatomie Vivante, and more slender than Daniel Lambert.

Pitt's speech, as it is reported in the Gentle man's Magazine, certainly deserves Tindal's compliment, and deserves no other. It is just as empty and wordy as a maiden speech on such an occasion might be expected to be But the fluency and the personal advantages of the young orator instantly caught the eat

and eye of his audience. He was, from the day of his first appearance, always heard with attention; and exercise soon developed the great powers which he possessed.

But it was not solely or principally to out ward accomplishments that Pitt owed the vast influence which, during nearly thirty years, he exercised over the House of Commons. He was undoubtedly a great orator; and, from the descriptions of his contemporaries, and the fragments of his speeches which still remain, it is not difficult to discover the nature and extent of his oratorical powers.

He was no speaker of set speeches. His few prepared discourses were complete failures. The elaborate panegyric which he pronounced on General Wolfe was considered as the very worst of all his performances. "No man," says a critic who had often heard him, "ever knew so little what he was going to say." Indeed his facility amounted to a vice. He was not the master, but the slave of his own speech. So little self-command had he when once he felt the impulse, that he did not

was full of an important secret of state. “I must sit still," he once said to Lord Shelburne on such an occasion; "for when once I am up, every thing that is in my mind comes out."

In our time, the audience of a member of Parliament is the nation. The three or four hundred persons who may be present while a speech is delivered may be pleased or disgusted by the voice and action of the orator; but in the reports which are read the next day by hundreds of thousands, the difference between the noblest and the meanest figure, between the richest and the shrillest tones, between the most graceful and the most uncouth gesture, altogether vanishes. A hundred years ago, scarcely any report of what passed within the walls of the House of Commons was suffered to get abroad. In those times, therefore, the impression which a speaker might make on the persons who actually heard him was every thing. The impression out of doors was hard-like to take part in a debate when his mind ly worth a thought. In the Parliaments of that time. therefore, as in the ancient commonwealths, those qualifications which enhance the immediate effect of a speech, were far more important ingredients in the composition of an orator than they would appear to be in Yet he was not a great debater. That he our time. All those qualifications Pitt pos- should not have been so when first he enter sessed in the highest degree. On the stage, heed the House of Commons, is not strange. would have been the finest Brutus or Coriolanus ever seen. Those who saw him in his decay, when his health was broken, when his mind was jangled, when he had been removed from that stormy assembly of which he thoroughly knew the temper, and over which he possessed unbounded influence, to a small, a torpid, and an unfriendly audience, say that his speaking was then, for the most part, a low, monotonous muttering, audible only to those who sat close to him-that, when violently excited, he sometimes raised his voice for a few minutes, but that it soon sank again into an unintelligible murmur. Such was the Earl of Chatham; but such was not William Pitt. His figure, when he first appeared in Parliament, was strikingly graceful and commanding, his features high and noble, his eye full of fire. His voice, even when it sank to a whisper, was heard to the remotest benches; when he strained it to its full extent, the sound rose like the swell of the organ of a great cathedral, shook the house with its peal, and was heard through lobbies and down staircases, to the Court of Requests and the precincts of Westminster Hall. He cultivated all these eminent advantages with the most assiduous care. His action is described by a very malignant observer as equal to that of Garrick. His play of countenance was wonderful; he frequently disconcerted a hostile orator by a single glance of indignation or scorn. Every tone, from the impassioned cry to the thrilling aside, was perfectly at his command. It is by no means improbable that the pains which he took to improve his great personal advantages had, in some respects, a prejudicial operation, and tended to nourish in him that passion for theatrical effect which, as we have already remarked, was one of the most conspicuous blemishes in his character.

Scarcely any person had ever become so without long practice an many failures. It was by slow degrees, as Burke said, that the late Mr. Fox became the most brilliant and powerful debater that ever Parliament saw. Mr. Fox himself attributed his own success to the resolution which he formed when very young, of speaking, well or ill, at least once every night. "During five whole sessions," he used to say, "I spoke every night but one: and I regret only that I did not speak on that night too." Indeed, it would be difficult to name any great debater, except Mr. Stanley whose knowledge of the science of parliamentary defence resembles an instinct, who has not made himself a master of his art at the expense of his audience.

But as this art is one which even the ablest men have seldom acquired without long practice, so it is one which men of respectable abilities, with assiduous and intrepid practice, seldom fail to acquire. It is singular that in such an art, Pitt, a man of splendid talents, f great fluency, of great boldness-a man whose whole life was passed in parliamentary conflict-a man who, during several years, was the leading minister of the crown in the House of Commons-should never have attained to high excellence. He spoke without premedi tation; but his speech followed the course of his own thoughts, and not the course of the previous discussion. He could, indeed, trea sure up in his memory some detached expres sion of a hostile orator, and make it the text for sparkling ridicule or burning invective. Some of the most celebrated bursts of his eloquence were called forth by an unguarded word, a laugh, or a cheer. But this was the only sort of reply in which he appears to have excelled. He was perhaps the only great Eng lish orator who did not think it any advantage

to have the last word; and who generally international law-if right, where societies of spoke by choice before his most formidable men are concerned, be any thing but another pponents. His merit was almost entirely name for might-if we do not adopt the doc rhetorical. He did not succeed either in ex- trine of the Buccaniers, which seems to be position or in refutation; but his speeches also the doctrine of Mr. Thackeray, that treaabounded with lively illustrations, striking ties mean nothing within thirty degrees of the apophthegms, well-told anecdotes, happy allu- line-the war with Spain was altogether unsions, passionate appeals. His invective and justifiable. But the truth is, that the promoters sarcasm were tremendous. Perhaps no Eng- of that war have saved the historian the trouble lish orator was ever so much feared. of trying them: they have pleaded guilty. "I But that which gave most effect to his de- have seen," says Burke, "and with some care clamation, was the air of sincerity, of vehe- examined, the original documents concerning ment feeling, of moral elevation, which be- certain important transactions of those times. longed to all that he said. His style was not They perfectly satisfied me of the extreme inalways in the purest taste. Several contem- justice of that war, and of the falsehood of the porary judges pronounced it too florid. Wal-colours which Walpole, to his ruin, and guided pole, in the midst of the rapturous eulogy by a mistaken policy, suffered to be daubed which he pronounces on one of Pitt's greatest orations, owns that some of the metaphors were too forced. The quotations and classical stories of the great orator are sometimes too trite for a clever schoolboy. But these were niceties for which the audience cared little. The enthusiasm of the orator infected all who were near him, his ardour and his noble bearing put fire into the most frigid conceit, and gave dignity to the most puerile allusion.

His powers soon began to give annoyance to the government, and Walpole determined to make an example of the patriotic cornet. Pitt was accordingly dismissed from the service. Mr. Thackeray absurdly says that the minister took this step, because he plainly saw that it would have been vain to think of buying over so honourable and disinterested an opponent. We do not dispute Pitt's integrity; but we do not know what proof he had given of it, when he was turned out of the army; and we are sure that Walpole was not likely to give credit for inflexible honesty to a young adventurer who had never had an opportunity of refusing any thing. The truth is, that it was not Walpole's practice to buy off enemies. Mr. Burke truly says, in the Appeal to the old Whigs, "Walpole gained very few over from the Opposition." He knew his business far too well. He knew that for one mouth that is stopped with a place, fifty other mouths will instantly be opened. He knew that it would have been very bad policy in him to give the world to understand that more was to be got by thwart ing his measures than by supporting them. These maxims are as old as the origin of parliamentary corruption in England. Pepys learned them, as he tells us, from the counsellors of Charles the Second.

Pitt was no loser. He was made Groom of the Bed-chamber to the Prince of Wales, and continued to declaim against the minister with unabated violence and with increasing ability. The question of maritime right, then agitated between Spain and England, called forth all his powers. He clamoured for war with a vehemence which it is not easy to reconcile with reason or humanity, but which appears to Mr. Thackeray worthy of the highest admiration. We will not stop to argue a point on which we had long thought that all well-informed people were agreed. We could easily how, we think, that, if any respect be due to

over that measure. Some years after, it was my fortune to converse with many of the prin cipal actors against that minister, and with those who principally excited that clamour. None of them, no, not one, did in the least de fend the measure, or attempt to justify their conduct. They condemned it as freely as they would have done in commenting upon any proceeding in history in which they were totally unconcerned." Pitt, on subsequent occasions, gave ample proof that he was not one of those tardy penitents.

The elections of 1741 were unfavourable to Walpole; and after a long and obstinate strug gle he found it necessary to resign. The Duke of Newcastle and Lord Hardwicke opened a negotiation with the leading patriots, in the hope of forming an administration on a Whig basis. At this conjuncture, Pitt, Lyttleton, and those persons who were most nearly connected with them, acted in a manner very little to their honour. They attempted to come to an understanding with Walpole, and offered, if he would use his influence with the king in their favour, to screen him from prosecution. They even went so far as to engage for the concur rence of the Prince of Wales. But Walpole knew that the assistance of the Boys, as he called the young patriots, would avail him nothing if Pulteney and Carteret should prove intractable, and would be superfluous, if the great leaders of the Opposition could be gained. He, therefore, declined the proposal. It is remarkable that Mr. Thackeray, who has thought it worth while to preserve Pitt's bad college verses, has not even alluded to this story-a story which is supported by strong testimony, and which may be found in so common a book as Coxe's Life of Walpole.

The new arrangements disappointed almost every member of the Opposition, and none more than Pitt. He was not invited to become a placeman; and he, therefore, stuck firmly to his old trade of patriot. Fortunate it was for him that he did so. Had he taken office at this time. he would in all probability have shared largely in the unpopularity of Pulteney, Sandys, and Carteret. He was now the fiercest and most implacable of those who called for vengeance on Walpole. He spoke with great energy and ability in favour of the most unjust and violent

Letter on a Regicide Peace.

propositions which the enemies of the fallen minister could invent. He urged the House of Commons to appoint a secret tribunal for the purpose of investigating the conduct of the late First Lord of the Treasury. This was done. The great majority of the inquisitors were notoriously hostile to the accused statesman. Yet they were compelled to own that they could find no fault in him. They therefore called for new powers, for a bill of indemnity to witnesses; or, in plain words, for a bill to reward all who might give evidence, true or false, against the Earl of Orford. This bill Pitt supported-Pitt, who had offered to be a screen between Lord Orford and public justice! These are melancholy facts. Mr. Thackeray omits them, or hurries over them as fast as he can; and, as eulogy is his business, he is in the right to do so. But, though there are many parts in the life of Pitt which it is more agreeable to contemplate, we know none more instructive. What must have been the general state of political morality, when a young man, considered, and justly considered, as the most public-spirited and spotless statesmen of his time, could attempt to force his way into office by means so disgraceful?

in consideration of "the noble defence he had made for the support of the laws of England, and to prevent the ruin of his country."

The will was made in August. The Duch. ess died in October. In November Pitt had become a courtier. The Pelhams had forced the king, much against his will, to part with Lord Carteret, now Earl Granville. They proceeded, after this victory, to form the govern. ment on that basis, called by the cant name of the "broad bottom." Lyttleton had a seat at the treasury, and several other friends of Pitt were provided for. But Pitt himself was, for the present, forced to be content with promises. The king resented most highly some expres sions which the ardent orator had used in the debate on the Hanoverian troops. But Newcastle and Pelham expressed the strongest confidence that time, and their exertions, would soften the royal displeasure.

Pitt, on his part, omitted nothing that might facilitate his admission to office. He resigned his place in the household of Prince Frederic, and, when Parliament met, exerted his eloquence in support of the government. The Pelhams were really sincere in their endeavours to remove the strong prejudices that had The bill of indemnity was rejected by the taken root in the king's mind. They knew Lords. Walpole withdrew himself quietly that Pitt was not a man to be deceived with from the public eye; and the ample space ease, or offended with impunity. They were which he had left vacant was soon occupied afraid that they should not be long able to put by Carteret. Against Carteret Pitt began to him off with promises. Nor was it their intethander with as much zeal as he had ever rest so to put him off. There was a strong tie manifested against Sir Robert. To Carteret between him and them. He was the enemy of he transferred most of the hard names which their enemy. The brothers hated and dreaded were familiar to his eloquence-sole minister, the eloquent, aspiring, and imperious Granville. wicked minister, odious minister, execrable They had traced his intrigues in many quarters. minister. The great topic of his invective was They knew his influence over the royal mind. the favour shown to the German dominions of They knew that, as soon as a favourable opporKing George. He attacked with great vio-tunity might arrive, he would be recalled to the ence, and with an ability which raised him to head of affairs. They resolved to bring things the very first rank among the parliamentary to a crisis; and the question on which they took speakers, the practice of paying the Hanove-issue with their master was, whether Pitt should rian troops with English money. The House or should not be admitted to office! They of Commons had lately lost some of its most distinguished ornaments. Walpole and Pulteney had accepted peerages; Sir William Wyndham was dead; and among the rising men none could be considered as, on the whole, a match for Pitt.

During the recess of 1744, the old Duchess of Marlborough died. She carried to her grave the reputation of being decidedly the best hater of her time. Yet her love had been infinitely more destructive than her hatred. In the time of Anne, her temper had ruined the party to which she belonged, and the husband whom she adored. Time had made her neither wiser nor kinder. Whoever was at any moment great and prosperous, was the object of her fiercest detestation. She had hated Walpole -she now hated Carteret.

Pope, long before her death, predicted the fate of her vast property :

"To heirs unknown descends the unguarded store, Or wanders, Heaven-directed, to the poor."

Pitt was poor enough; and to him Heaven directed a portion of the wealth of the haughty dowager. She left him a legacy of £10,000, VOL. II.-30

chose their time with more skill than generosity. It was when rebellion was actually raging in Britain, when the Pretender was master of the northern extremity of the island, that they tendered their resignations. The king found himself deserted, in one day, by the whole strength of that party which had placed his family on the throne. Lord Granville tried to form a government; but it soon appeared that the parliamentary interest of the Pelhams was irresistible; and that the king's favourite statesman could count only on about thirty Lords, and eighty members of the House of Commons. The scheme was given up. Granville went away laughing. The ministers came back stronger than ever, and the king was now no longer able to refuse any thing that they might be pleased to demand. All that he could do, was to mutter that it was very hard that Newcastle, who was not fit to be chamberlain to the most insignificant prince in Germany should dictate to the King of England.

One concession the ministers graciousiy made. They agreed that Pitt should not be placed in a situation in which it would be necessary for him to have frequent interviews

U 2