of Parliament to consider his measures,-and his own right to advise the king to dissolve Parliament, if those measures were obstructed. The tact, judgment, courage, and commanding talents of Mr. Pitt inspired his party with confidence, and secured popularity for his cause; while, by maintaining a defensive attitude, he offered no diversion to the factious tactics of his opponents. His accession to office had been immediately marked by the defection of several members from the opposition,-a circumstance always calculated upon by a minister in those times, and was soon followed by the forbearance of others, who were not prepared to participate in the violent measures of their leaders. The influence of the court and government was strenuously exerted in making converts; and the growing popularity of their cause discouraged the less zealous of their opponents.

Mr. Pitt had waited patiently while the majorities against him in Parliament were falling away, and public opinion was declaring itself, more and more, in his favour. The results of the dissolution now revealed the judgment with which he had conducted his cause, and chosen his time for appealing to the people.1 Every preparation had been made for using best the influence of the crown at the elections: the king himself took the deepest personal interest in the success of the ministerial candidates2; and Mr. Pitt's popularity was at its height,

1 "The precedent of 1784 establishes this rule of conduct: that if the ministers chosen by the Crown do not possess the confidence of the House of Commons, they may advise an appeal to the people, with whom rests the ultimate decision. This course has been followed in 1807, in 1831, in

1834, and in 1841. In 1807 and 1831, the Crown was enabled, as in 1784, to obtain the confidence of the new House of Commons. In 1834 and 1841, the decision was adverse to the existing ministry."-Fox Mem., ii. 246.

2 Rose Corr., i. 61, 62.

Its results upon the

future po

state.

when Parliament was dissolved. His enemies were
everywhere put to the rout, at the hustings. To sup-
port Mr. Pitt was the sole pledge of the popular
candidates. Upwards of one hundred and sixty of his
late opponents lost their seats1; and on the assembling
of the new Parliament, he could scarcely reckon his
majorities. The minister was popular in the country,
all-powerful in Parliament, and had the entire confi-
dence of the court. If such was the success of the
minister, what was the triumph of the king! He had
expelled one ministry, and retained another, in defiance
of the House of Commons. The people had pressed
forward loyally to his support; and by their aid, he
had overborne all opposition to his will. He now
possessed a strong government, and a minister in whom
he confided; and he enjoyed once more power, freedom,
and popularity. Not only had he overcome and ruined
a party which he hated: but he had established the
ascendency of the crown, which henceforth, for nearly
fifty years, continued to prevail over
every other power
in the state.

Such results, however, were not without danger. - Already the king was too prone to exercise his power; licy of the and the encouragement he had received, was likely to Relations exalt his views of prerogative. But he had now a minister who with higher abilities and larger views of state policy-had a will even stronger than his own. Throughout his reign, it had been the tendency of the king's personal administration to favour men whose chief merit was their subservience to his own views,

of Mr. Pitt
to the
king.

1 Tomline's Life of Pitt, i. 469; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, i. 204 -207.

2 His India Bill was carried by a majority of 271 to 60. He was

defeated, however, on the Westminster Scrutiny, Parliamentary Reform, and the Scheme of Fortifications on the Coast.

instead of leaving the country to be governed,— as a free state should be governed, by its ablest and most popular statesmen.1 He had only had one other minister of the same lofty pretensions,--Lord Chatham; and now, while trusting that statesman's son,sharing his councils, and approving his policy,-he yielded to his superior intellect. Yet were the royal predilections not without influence on the minister. Reared in the Whig school, Mr. Pitt soon deserted the principles, as he had been severed from the connexions, of that party. He had been raised to power by royal favour,-maintained in it by prerogative, and was now in the ascendant, by having made common cause with the crown. Hence he naturally leant towards prerogative, and Tory principles of government. His contests with his great antagonist, Mr. Fox, and the Whig party, still further alienated him from the principles of his youth. Until the French Revolution, however, his policy was wise and liberal; but from that time his rule became arbitrary, and opposed to public liberty. And such were his talents, and such the temper of the times, that he was able to make even arbitrary principles popular. During his long administration, the people were converted to Tory principles, and encouraged the king and the minister to repress liberty of thought, and to wage war against opinion. If the king was no longer his own minister,--as in the time of Lord North, he had the satisfaction of seeing his own principles carried out by hands far abler than his own. In prosecutions of the press, and the repression of democratic movements at home2, the minister was, perhaps, as zealous as the king: in 1 See Lord J. Russell's Intr. to 2 See Chapter IX., Press and vol. iii. of Bedford Corr., pp. 1.-lxii. Liberty of Opinion.

The king's continued

carrying on war to crush democracy abroad, the king was more zealous than his minister. They laboured strenuously together in support of monarchy all over the world; and respected too little the constitutional liberties of their own people.

Nor did the king relax his accustomed activity in activity. public affairs. From the close of the American war until the breaking out of hostilities with France, his pleasure was taken by the Secretary-at-War upon every commission granted in the army; and throughout Mr. Pitt's administration, every act of the executive was submitted to him, for his judgment and approval.2 We find him combating the opinions of his cabinet concerning foreign affairs, in elaborate papers: criticising the policy of government measures,—commenting upon debates and divisions in Parliament: praising ministers, and censuring the opposition: approving taxes: discussing amendments to bills: settling the appointment and dismissal of officers, the grant of peerages, and the preferment of bishops.3 With his own hand he struck the name of Mr. Fox, from the list of privy-councillors.1

The influence of the Crown

augmented.

And if, during the administration of Mr. Pitt, the king's independent exercise of influence was somewhat less active, the power of the crown itself,— as wielded jointly by himself and his minister,was greater than at any former period. The king and his minister were now absolute. A war is gene

1 See Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, ii. 73; Ibid., App. xvii. xxvii. XXX.; iii., App. ií. iiî. xxi.

2 Mr. Wynn, 14th April, 1812; Hans. Deb., xxii. 334. On recovering from his illness, Feb. 23rd, 1789, the king writes, "I must decline entering into a pressure of business, and, indeed, for the rest of my life, shall expect others to fulfil the duties of their employments,

rally favourable to authority, by bringing together the people and the government, in a common cause and combined exertions. The French war, notwithstanding its heavy burthens and numerous failures, was popular on account of the principles it was supposed to represent; and the vast expenditure, if it distressed the people, multiplied the patronage of the crown,—afforded a rich harvest for contractors,—and made the fortunes of farmers and manufacturers, by raising the price of every description of produce. The "moneyed classes" rallied round the war minister,-bought seats in Parliament with their sudden gains,-ranged themselves in a strong phalanx behind their leader,-cheered his speeches, and voted for him in every division. Their zeal was rewarded with peerages, baronetcies, patronage, and all the good things which an inordinate expenditure enabled him to dispense. For years, opposition in Parliament to a minister thus supported, was an idle form; and if beyond its walls, the voice of complaint was raised, the arm of the law was strong and swift to silence it.1 To oppose the minister, had become high treason to the state. However great the king's confidence in a minister so powerful as Mr. Pitt, whenever their views of policy differed, his Majesty's resolution was as inflexible as ever. Nor were his ministers secure from the exercise of his personal influence against them, when he was pleased to use it. The first measure on which Mr. Pitt was likely to encounter objections from the king, was that for parliamentary reform. Having pledged himself to the principles of such a measure, while in opposition, he was determined not to be unfaithful to them now. But before he ventured to bring forward his plan, he prudently submitted it to the king, and depre1 See Chapter IX., Press and Liberty of Opinion.