do no wrong was by doing nothing at all. Yet this was not as yet clearly understood. When, in 1758, the Attorney General Pratt introduced a bill to extend the benefits of habeas corpus, it was thought a noble sight to behold the first advocate of the Crown appearing as the foremost champion against prerogative. For he was still regarded as the servant of the Crown rather than as the servant of Parliament.

Even statesmen failed to comprehend the security which they felt against any abuse of the royal power. "What I am going to say," writes Lord Hervey, “may sound paradoxical: but it is my firm opinion, though I know not how to account for it, that although money and troops are generally considered the nerves and sinews of all the royal power, and that no King ever had so large a civil list, or so large an army in times of peace, as the present King, yet the Crown was never less capable of infringing upon the liberties of the people than at this time; and that the spirit of liberty was so universally breathed into the breasts of the people that if any violent act of power had been attempted, at no era would it have been more difficult to perpetrate any undertaking of that kind."1

But if the statesmen and the people did not understand the change that was taking place, George II. occasionally gave evidence that he did. "Ministers are

1 Hervey, "Memoirs," Vol. I. p. 319.

the king in this country!" he exclaimed.

And again,

"This Constitution may be a very good one for the people, but it is a very bad one for the King."

APPENDIX A

Some historians assert that neither George I. nor George II. was ever present at a Cabinet meeting. Others maintain that Lord Waldegrave gives an instance of the presence of George II. Now Waldegrave makes no distinct statement on the subject, but what he does say would imply that the King was not present. The Princess of Wales and her son had requested that Lord Bute be appointed Groom of the Stole. A Cabinet meeting was held to consider the matter. Waldegrave, as the Prince of Wales's governor, was present, and gives an account of it. "It was unusual," he says, "for the King himself to be present at such consultations; but he had already declared his opinion by speaking of the Princess's favorite, and her partiality toward him, with the greatest contempt." In the story which follows of the deliberations of this meeting, the King is nowhere mentioned as being present, or as giving an opinion.

We do, however, have an account of two Cabinet meetings at which George I. was present. Coxe gives us an anecdote which was communicated to him by Lord Sydney, Lord Townshend's grandson. Some evidence implicating Sir William Wyndham in a Jacobite

N

plot had been laid before the Cabinet. Wyndham's father-in-law, the Duke of Somerset, who was Master of the Horse, and a member of the Cabinet, offered to be responsible for him. The ministers were much afraid of offending a man of the duke's prominence, and one who was so influential in the Whig party. Lord Townshend, however, felt that, as the evidence against Wyndham was so strong, the government ought not to appear afraid to arrest such an offender, let his rank or connections be what they might. He accordingly moved that he be taken into custody. There was ten minutes of absolute silence, no one venturing to agree with Townshend. Then two or three rose at the same instant to second his motion, and the arrest was decreed. The King, who had been present at the meeting, took Townshend's hand as he retired into the closet, and said, "You have done me a great service to-day."1

Townshend, in a letter to Stanhope, recalls to his memory that the King was also present at the Cabinet meeting which, at the time of the Pretender's landing in Scotland, advised that a body of foreign troops be taken into the English service. "You must, I am persuaded, remember as well as I," he says, "that upon the Pretender's landing in Scotland, no one imagining he would have engaged in such an undertaking without foreign assistance, the Parliament gave the King unlimited power

1 Coxe, "Walpole," Vol. I. p. 71, note.

to raise what number of men he should think fit for the defence of the kingdom. And further, the Lords of the Cabinet Council, his Majesty being present, did unanimously advise and desire him to secure or take into his service a body of troops from abroad, and orders were accordingly given to the King's German ministers to hire the troops above mentioned."

Probably at the beginning of his reign, George I. expected to come to Cabinet meetings just as his predecessors had done. But finding his inability to understand the language rendered his presence useless, after attending a few times, he made a practice of absenting himself.

APPENDIX B

An interesting conversation took place between the King and Hardwicke in June, 1745. It has been quoted from more than once in the text, but since the whole conversation bears upon the subject, it is here inserted in full.

King. I have done all that you asked of me. I have put all my power into your hands, and I suppose that you will make the most of it.

Chancellor. The disposition of places is not enough, if your Majesty takes pains to show the world that you disapprove your own work.

King. My work! I was forced! I was threatened! Chancellor. I am sorry to hear your Majesty use these

expressions. I know of no force. I know of no threats. No means were employed but what have been used at all times, the humble advice of your servants, supported by such reasons as convinced them that the measure was necessary for your service.

King. Yes, I was told that I should be opposed.

Chancellor. Never by me, or by any of my friends. If changes were to be made in order to gain strength, such persons must be brought in as could bring that strength along with them. Otherwise it would have been useless. On that account it was necessary to take in the leaders with the concurrence of their friends, and if your Majesty looks round the House of Commons, you will find no man of business or even of weight left capable of conducting an opposition.

Pause -the King silent.

Chancellor. Sir, permit me to say the advantage of such a situation is a real advantage, gained by the Crown. Ministers may carry their position in Parliament, and frequently do so by a small nominal majority, and in this way they may struggle on long, but by the same way the Crown always loses both its lustre and its strength. But when things are put on a national foot by the concurrence of the heads of all parties, and yet so as not to disengage your old friends, then a real solid strength is gained for the Crown, and the King has both more power to carry his present measures for the sup