lished at Leicester house, the correspondence of Walpole and the contemporary memoirs afford a curious picture. The feud was terminated by the death of the prince in 1751, an event which grievously disconcerted a large tribe of courtiers, and was an especial disappointment to Bub Doddington, afterwards Lord Melfort, who had almost settled himself in the place of prime minister to the coming king, and was tempted to set down his intrigues and mortifications in a diary which throws a curious light on the political morality of the times. During a considerable period of this dispute the king was in the hands of a safe and quiet minister, Pelham. He died, however, in 1754, and, on hearing of the event, the king emphatically remarked—"Now I shall have no peace." The influence of the elder Pitt, depending not on birth or territorial possession or court connection, but on totally distinct and self-constituted elements of power, was becoming so strong that it was necessary to have his services in the ministry. But he would not be a mere slave, selling his talents and influence to aggrandize others; he would be master or nothing. A stirring period of cabinet convulsions followed, and in 1757 he was admitted, not as sole minister—since the old interests were represented by his colleague Newcastle—but at all events as the actual wielder of British power in European politics. Thus began the greatest era of national aggrandizement which Britain has experienced—the conquest of French America—the acquisition of the chief colonies—the establishment of the mighty empire in the East. So stood the country when the king died on 25th October, 1760.—J. H. B—n.
George III. (George William Frederick), King of Great Britain and Ireland, and elector of Hanover, was born in 1738, on the 4th of June, which became afterwards a household day, from the many demonstrations of loyalty connected with it during his long reign. He was the grandson of George II., and the eldest son of Frederick-Louis, prince of Wales, and of the Princess Augusta, daughter of Frederic, duke of Saxe-Gotha. The prince of Wales died in 1751, an event which created consternation in a circle of politicians, who were scheming for the ascendency when he should become king. Walpole, with unusual friendliness, says the young prince, "cried exceedingly" on hearing of his father's death. He says there was much fear that the duke of Cumberland would as regent, or in some other shape, rule the country if the king were to die soon; and illustrates, by a brief anecdote, the prejudice against his uncle inculcated on the young prince. "Prince George, making him a visit, asked to see his apartments, where there are few ornaments but arms. The duke is neither curious nor magnificent. To amuse the boy he took down a sword and drew it. The young prince turned pale and trembled, and thought his uncle was going to murder him. The duke was extremely shocked, and complained to the princess of the impressions that had been instilled into the child against him." With the court and the predominant political party, a dread of jacobitism was far more powerful than the passing prejudice against the victor of Culloden. That the mind of the heir-apparent himself might be poisoned by this influence, was, however strange it may seem, then a prevalent fear. It was considered that his mother was especially unworthy of confidence in this respect, from the character of the persons to whom she gave her confidence. By a careful selection, the earl of Harcourt was chosen the prince's governor, with Dr. Hayter, bishop of Norwich, as preceptor, and these had under them Mr. Stone and Mr. Scott as sub-governor and sub-preceptor. Harcourt, according to Walpole, was minute and strict in trifles; "thinking that he discharged his trust conscientiously, if on no account he neglected to make the prince turn out his toes." Under superintendence so careless in essentials, it was alleged that the leaven of jacobitism had been introduced by the subordinates. Stone lay under especial suspicion. It was stated that in his youth he had drank the Pretender's health on a public occasion—a charge in which Mansfield was believed to be so far involved with him that Chatham could frighten him in the house of lords by hinting at the revelations that might be made about it. The worst fears suggested by such a charge seemed to be confirmed when the bishop of Norwich found the prince reading Father Orleans' Revolutions de L'Angleterre—a book reported to have been written by desire of the exiled King James, in justification of the conduct which had lost to him the throne. The charge against Stone was pushed so strongly by Lord Ravensworth that a cabinet council sat investigating it for several days. Whatever real ground there might be for the charge, it had become old; for twenty years had elapsed since Stone, Murray, and Johnston, made bishop of Gloucester, were said in their convivialities to have pledged the offensive toast. The affair, however, broke up the corps of governors and instructors placed around the prince, and he was put into the hands of Lord Waldegrave, who has left a very amusing volume of his experiences. As the prince advanced towards manhood, the earl of Bute had the chief influence in forming his mind, so far as it was not self-formed. This unpopular nobleman was deep in the confidence of the widowed princess. The letters and memoirs of this period, subsequently published, are full of malignant insinuations about the intercourse of Bute and the princess; and there is no doubt that the worst interpretation was put on it. Whatever their own conduct may have been, however—and indeed, whatever is insinuated, nothing against them is known—there is no doubt that they used all efforts to rear the prince in rigid virtue, and their efforts were seconded by his own natural disposition. There was strenuous rejoicing through the country on the 4th of June, 1759, when he became of age. There were several reasons for rejoicing. His grandfather's life had fortunately been so prolonged that no regent had been necessary. The prince had all the advantages of the parliamentary settlement, strengthened by three generations in hereditary descent in his favour. He was an Englishman, born and bred; and his good morals and even temper were well known and appreciated.
When his grandfather, therefore, died on the 25th of October, 1760, George III. ascended the throne with a general feeling of calm satisfaction, such as had scarcely been experienced on the accession of any monarch since King James went to inaugurate the dynasty of the Stewarts. There is a legend woven by Sir Walter Scott, into his romance of Red Gauntlet, that at the coronation some adventurous jacobites disturbed the equanimity of the court attendants by depositing a cartel of defiance in the name of the exiled house; but there was nothing of a serious character to cloud the prospect, which was brightened by the signal success which had attended the British arms both by sea and land. Clouds, however, soon began to gather. Pitt who was in power at the death of George II., held himself to be the author of the great triumphs of his country both in war and diplomacy. He soon felt, however, that there was another interest prevailing against him, and on being outvoted on the question of a war with Spain, he resigned. Lord Bute, succeeded him as prime minister. There could not be a more favourable opportunity for drawing a contrast between two rulers—the one a tried statesman, revered at home as the protector of his country, and feared abroad as its champion; the other, a mere courtier, whose name and rank were known only to the heralds and the pages of the palace. Lord Bute had not been trained to public business, and though an energetic and able man, he found the reins too heavy for his hands. His short administration, however, had a marked influence on British politics, and that influence arose from the fact of his being the personal favourite of the young king. His premiership broke up the powerful phalanx of great whig families, who had ruled since the accession of the house of Hanover. It is remarkable, indeed, that the change which was attacked as the reign of tyranny and arbitrary prerogative, inaugurated some of the most valuable of our constitutional safeguards. One of these was the direct doing of the young king and his favourite. Though the judges were no longer dismissable by the crown at pleasure, they held their commission only during the reign of the king who appointed them. By the special desire of George III. a measure was passed for rendering them entirely independent of the crown, and removable only on a representation by both houses of parliament. For the other constitutional improvements in his reign, he was not entitled to the same merit. They arose, indeed, from a reaction against the stretches of the prerogative, which were provoked by the conduct of Wilkes and other demagogues. The result of the conflict with these was an increased efficacy to the habeas corpus act; a powerful restraint on any remnant of arbitrary power remaining in the crown, by the prohibition of general warrants granted by the secretary of state, as things illegal; and the security of the right of representation by every constituency in the house of commons, however offensive might be the person elected by them.
The establishment of the newspaper called the North Briton, by Wilkes, in 1762, was an epoch, not only in public affairs, but
