Memoirs of the Court of George IV. 1820-1830 Part 34

P.S.--The King comes to town on the 18th to remain for some little time. Does not return to Brighton, but, on his leaving town, goes to the Cottage at Windsor.

The Catholic question as introduced this session by Mr. Canning, created more than its customary amount of political excitement, because, though one in which the Duke of Buckingham, his family and friends, had long taken a consistent interest, it was pressed forward by the Opposition to embarra.s.s the recent coalition and the Government.

The reader will shortly see the result.

THE RIGHT HON. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.

Whitehall, April 4, 1822.

MY DEAR B----,

I called to-day upon Plunket, and found him still in great doubt as to the course which it might be expedient for him to pursue on the Catholic question during the present session.

The bias of his own mind is evidently to defer the agitation of it till the next session, and he dwelt much on the disadvantage which might arise if Lord Londonderry, though supporting the measure, should cool in the active personal exertion to influence votes and to fix the wavering which he exhibited last session. Altogether, he considered the question as too important for him to decide upon singly, and therefore was disposed to request a meeting of its princ.i.p.al Parliamentary friends on Tuesday, the 16th, the day before the Houses re-a.s.semble. In the interim he hoped to hear again from Ireland, and to see Lord Grenville. He would also be very anxious to communicate with you on the subject. It is obvious that if it is to be brought forward, it must be before Canning's, as it would be absurd to carry up the general measure after the Lords have rejected the more limited one.

My uncle Tom is very favourably inclined to Canning's proposition, as he thinks that the admission of the general proposition is too great a change to expect at once from the House of Lords, while the proposition of the strongest of the detailed points, one by one, might be more likely to succeed. With this view, he told me that he had himself more than once suggested trying a personal Bill to enable the present Duke of Norfolk to sit and vote, and afterwards for the other peers, leaving the laws as they stand. This, I confess, I should not be so well inclined to. It will be an advantage, if we are to fight it in the proposed shape, that we are at once rid of all the details of oaths, securities, &c., for I conclude the consciences of the Roman Catholic Peers will, if the declaration be omitted, be disposed to swallow the Oath of Supremacy without a single wry face, which will be a most useful example to the other Catholics, and will of itself go far to bring the priests into order. Plunket does not apprehend any jealousy of the limited measure from Ireland, as he thinks that they will consider it as a stepping-stone, and will be much alive to the gain of six votes.

Plunket mentioned confidentially the opinion of Lord Wellesley in favour of deferring the general Bill till next year, for which likewise Lord Londonderry and Lord Melville seemed very anxious.

How far what has pa.s.sed in Parliament, and the eagerness of the Opposition, may drive the Catholics in Ireland forward, he could not calculate, but otherwise conceived them to be content to acquiesce in its postponement. At all events, I am most desirous that, whether you entirely approve of the manner in which the question is brought forward or not, you would acquiesce in the course to be determined upon, which I am sure is of the greatest importance to the public character of us all.

Ever most affectionately yours,

C. W. W.

LORD GRENVILLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.

Dropmore, April 8, 1822.

You know I have quite done with political speculations, and discussions of every kind. If Canning's motion succeeds (as I conclude it will) in the House of Commons, and comes up to the House of Lords, I can have no doubt of supporting it, as far as my vote, or more probably, my proxy, may extend, because it is one of the points that I have always most strongly urged, and particularly in my speech, even, of last year; and also because it really does seem to me that such a motion follows as a natural and undeniable consequence from any opinion entertained by the friends of the general measure, that next year would be more favourable than this for the discussion of the main question, in so far as it concerns the great body of the Irish Catholics.

The conduct of that body has certainly been often such as to show the utmost blindness as to what was likely to advance or obstruct their cause. But I cannot think them so ignorant as not to see the infinite advantage which the success of such a motion would give their friends in any future discussion.

My own opinion, indeed, is that it is in something of this piecemeal way that their object will ultimately be obtained; and I should not be without considerable hope of seeing Canning's measure carried, even in this year, if I felt quite sure that it would have fair play given it.

As to the prudence of postponing or bringing forward the main question this year I have formed no opinion, and I mean to form none. I have done with such speculations; I have entire confidence in Plunket's judgment and uprightness; and my greatest fear is that of seeing the measure taken out of his hands, to fall into worse, and worse I am sure they will be into whatever hands other than his it can fall. He is coming here on Friday, and if you wish to say anything to him on the subject, you cannot do better than meet him.

THE RIGHT HON. W. H. FREMANTLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.

Englefield Green, April 10, 1822.

MY DEAR DUKE,

The note you have enclosed me makes the thing more embarra.s.sing, and I have been puzzling my brain how I can possibly promote the object; but I really know not in what way I could move. I could write a _private and confidential letter_ to Lord Conyngham (whom I know intimately), stating the case, and expressing your embarra.s.sment about it; but I don't know whether you would approve of this, and I cannot think of any other means. Let me know by return of post, and I will act accordingly. Perhaps you would write yourself to him, quite as a private friend (if you know him well enough), but if you had rather I should, only say so. I am quite sure, from Bloomfield's letter, it is meant to be done; but the _chief_ is so strange and inconsistent, and I suppose so perfectly incapable of going through with his business, that unless he has a man at his elbow constantly to jog him on, he is not to be depended on for one moment.

I shall remain here till the day before the meeting. I dread any confusion that may arise from the jumble of the Catholic question.

Be a.s.sured, whatever one may think of this question, it is not one that the public will go with you upon, in any measure of hostility to the Government, much less of separation, and as to our carrying it, or preventing its being carried, the question rests so entirely on the House of Lords, that it is there and there only that it will be decided; and as long as we have the present Chancellor and Lord Liverpool, it is out of the question, unless the King were to take a part, which he certainly will not. Why, then, what would be the result? We should separate, the Government would go on, and we should have another sixteen years of opposition. I am arguing only on the idea of our taking a line different or more violent than the other best supporters of the measure. I mean Plunket, Londonderry, Canning, &c. &c. My idea is that the latter does not mean mischief so much as the regaining some little character and importance which he has so justly lost.--The King comes to the Cottage here as early as he possibly can after Easter. I believe him to be _decidedly_ ill; his legs swell, and when they are reduced, he has violent attacks in his chest and head. His appet.i.te is bad, and he is very low about himself.

Faithfully yours,

W. H. F.

P.S.--In looking at Bloomfield's letter again, I see he says _the King said he had given the necessary orders_. Surely this would justify you in writing to the Duke of Montrose to ask the question.

THE RIGHT HON. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.

East India Board, April 12, 1822.

MY DEAR B----,

I yesterday communicated your sentiments on the proposed manner of bringing forward the Catholic question to Plunket, who expressed himself highly flattered by the confidence which you placed in his opinion. He has to-day gone down to Dropmore, and returns to-morrow. The outline of the plan which he is disposed to recommend to remedy the most pressing grievances on the subjects of the t.i.the, is to enable inc.u.mbents to agree for a composition for twenty-one years with the _landlords_, and the t.i.thes then to be collected as county rates, and the receipts to be good in payment of rent. This is the outline; but the detail must be matter of great difficulty, since, though this may apply to future contracts, I fear that as the majority of the peasantry are for election purposes life tenants, it will not be easy to increase their rent to the landlords by the amount of what will be payable for t.i.thes. As yet this has only been discussed by him with Lord Liverpool and Goulburn, so of course you will feel the necessity of not communicating upon it with any one.

Ever affectionately yours,

C. W. W.

THE RIGHT HON. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.

East India Board, April 16, 1822.

MY DEAR B----,

The proposed meeting on the course which it might be expedient to adopt respecting the Catholic question, took place this morning. As the persons invited to it were only those members of the House of Commons who had last year been named to bring in the Bill, I advised Fremantle not to come, since it would only excite jealousy to see us endeavouring to secure a majority by introducing any one who had not on former occasions been called into council on the subject.

The persons present were Tierney, Newport, Parnell, Canning, Grant, Phillimore, Plunket, and myself.

Tierney expressed a very strong opinion as to the detriment the general question had received from not having been taken up immediately upon the meeting of Parliament, from Lord Londonderry's declaration on the first day against any discussion of it, and from Plunket's language on Canning's notice, but declined giving any advice as to the course to be pursued under existing circ.u.mstances at so late a period of the session, and after Canning's notice of the limited motion.

Newport, though agreeing in regretting that earlier measures had not been taken, yet distinctly admitted that the question had so much varied by what had taken place, that it could not now be agitated with advantage.

Grant thought that in the first instance the general motion had better have been brought forward, but that Lord Londonderry's declaration and Plunket's opinion, to which he was disposed implicitly to defer, were sufficient reasons for delaying it till next year. Altogether the result will be that Plunket will declare his decided intention of postponing it till next year.

Canning is sanguine in his expectation of increased support or rather neutrality of former adversaries, but Tierney doubts whether members of the House of Commons will be as ready to come to town on the limited as the general measure. He admitted, however, that the call which has been ordered for the 24th may go far to remove this objection.

I find the Orange party are loud in their abuse of Lord Wellesley for shutting himself up at the Phoenix Park, lying in bed all day, seeing n.o.body, and only communicating with Secretary Gregory by letter. Indeed, I believe that the latter is more than he often favours Secretaries Peel and Goulburn with.

Ever affectionately yours,

C. W. W.

Your account of the King's health rather surprises me, as we all thought him, when last in town, to be looking decidedly better than he had been, for some time.

THE RIGHT HON. W. H. FREMANTLE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.