Читать книгу Memoirs of the Reign of King George the Third (Vol. 1-4) - Horace Walpole - Страница 33

Table of Contents

1 Preface to the “Memoires of the Last Twelve Years of the Reign of George the Second,” p. xxvi.

2 Postscript to the “Memoires of George the Second,” p. 40.

3 Preface to the “Memoires of the Last Twelve Years of the Reign of George the Second,” p. xxxii.

4 Mr. Wright’s notes on Lord Chatham’s Correspondence and his edition of Cavendish’s Debates are also most useful aids to the student of English History. He died not many months ago, in circumstances which proved his labours to have been very inadequately rewarded by the public.

5 Mr. Clavering—he was a near relative of a North country baronet of the same name.—E.

6 Sir Henry Wilmot, Bart., M.D., Physician-general to the Forces, an eminent medical practitioner, and the son-in-law of Dr. Mead; he died in 1786, at a very advanced age.—E.

7 He was Serjeant-surgeon to the King, and had attended George II. at the battle of Dettingen.—E.

8 John Stuart, third Earl of Bute.—This nomination was severely criticised in publications of the day. It is treated by Mr. Adolphus as a simple nomination to the Privy Council, and is defended as such, on the ground that the Groom of the Stole had been always constituted a Privy Counsellor. This is a misconception. The empty honour of the Council could be grudged by no one to a great officer of the royal household. The real grievance was his admission into the Cabinet.—E.

9 The Duke very soon discovered his power to be gone. Lord Bute’s predilection for the Tories was undisguised, and it soon became evident that the Court had determined to break up the Whig party, the effect of which would be to reduce the Duke to insignificance. See an interesting letter from Mr. Rigby to the Duke of Bedford (19 Dec. 1760), giving an account of an interview of the former with the Duke of Newcastle.—Russell Correspondence, vol. ii. p. 467.

10 William Cavendish, fourth Duke of Devonshire, and Lord Chamberlain.

11 William Henry Nassau Zulestein, fourth Earl of Rochford. He was descended from General Zulestein, a natural uncle of William the Third; and his grandfather, the first Earl, had been one of the favourite generals of that Monarch. Lord Rochford had been minister at Turin from 1749 to 1755, when he was appointed Groom of the Stole, to the great disappointment of Earl Poulett, the first Lord of the Bedchamber, who in consequence resigned his employment. Walpole’s Memoirs, vol. i. p. 381.—E.

12 The Duke of Bedford was no favourite of Walpole, owing to a private quarrel. There is no reason for suspecting that it could have been intended to remove his Grace from the Government of Ireland, a post which he had occupied with great reluctance (Walp. Mem. vol. ii. p. 105), and was glad to vacate shortly afterwards.—E.

13 Granville Leveson, Earl Gower, brother of the Duchess of Bedford.

14 James Brudenel, brother of the Earl of Cardigan, to which title he afterwards succeeded. He died without issue in 1811, aged 86.—E.

15 Eldest daughter of John, Earl of Bute; afterwards married to Sir James Lowther.

16 Afterwards third wife of Granville Leveson, Earl Gower.

17 He had been dismissed for joining Mr. Pitt, and the Prince had at the time promised to restore him, upon coming to the throne.—Doddington’s Diary, Appendix.—E.

18 Richard Temple, Lord Cobham, who had been much engaged with Frederick Prince of Wales, being asked by Henrietta, Lady Suffolk, what was the real character of the Princess, replied, “She was the only woman he could never find out: all he had discovered was, that she hated those most to whom she paid most court.”

19 This criticism of Lord Bute is not borne out by facts. The fine collection of pictures made by his lordship at Luton, prove the munificence and discernment with which he patronized painting. Luton itself, the building, or rather the enlargement of which he is known to have personally superintended, with many faults had likewise many beauties, and was surpassed in taste by few of the mansions of that date, and certainly not by Strawberry Hill. He had, in fact, a genuine love both of painting and architecture, and his efforts to infuse the same into the mind of his royal pupil did not entirely fail, for George the Third’s example was unquestionably a great improvement in this respect on his immediate predecessors. Of the other charges here brought against Lord Bute, the Editor has spoken elsewhere.—E.

20 Archbishop Secker has been in more than one instance misrepresented by Walpole. It is most improbable that he should have entertained the views here ascribed to him. As the head of the Church, it necessarily became his duty to attend frequently at Court on the commencement of a new reign, as has since happened to his successors without their incurring any such imputation.—E.

21 When Prince of Wales, Scott, his sub-preceptor, reproached him with inattention to his studies. The Prince pleaded idleness. “Idle! Sir,” said Scott; “your brother Edward is idle; but do you call being asleep, being idle?”

22 George Keppel, third Earl of Albemarle, a favourite of the Duke of Cumberland, and afterwards conqueror of the Havannah.

23 George, eldest son of Charles Lord Viscount Townshend (afterwards Marquis of Townshend). His name often appears in these Memoirs.

24 A Letter to the Honourable Brigadier General, Commander-in-Chief of his Majesty’s Forces in Canada.—London, 1760.—It is written with a point and spirit, and we may add, with a degree of malignity, closely akin to Junius, to whose pen, indeed, it has recently been ascribed. (See Preface by Mr. Simons to the new edition of this Pamphlet.) A reply, under the title of “Refutation of a Letter,” &c., composed, evidently, under the eye of Townshend or his family, appeared shortly afterwards, and is equally intemperate, but very inferior in ability. The controversy is so far prejudicial to Townshend, as convicting him of an ungenerous indifference to the memory of the great man who had led him to victory—his only excuse for the slight manner in which he notices Wolfe in the despatch being, not “want of esteem, but because of the impropriety of writing a panegyric to a Minister, when nothing but the situation and exigence of affairs is mentioned.” Townshend virtually admitted the justice of the charge, by subsequently publishing a studied panegyric on Wolfe in the form of a private letter, though it is more in the style of his brother’s parliamentary speeches, and was probably the composition of the latter. With respect to his opposition to Wolfe’s plan of attack, he stands entirely acquitted. The Protest made by him, in common with other officers, had been against a plan of attack which, in consequence of that Protest, was abandoned, and the dissentients on that occasion were those who proposed the very attack which proved so successful. The two generals were certainly not suited to each other. Townshend, though brave, clever, and not devoid of good feeling, was impatient of authority, and possessed in a singular degree the faculty of detecting and exaggerating the faults of his superiors. He had thus drawn upon himself the resentment of the Duke of Cumberland, to whom he was under great obligations, and had fallen into difficulties, out of which it required the all-powerful patronage of Pitt to extricate him. A partial friend (Mr. Glover) describes him as “often led into hasty and striking judgments of men either in approbation or censure.” Wolfe was not of a temperament to brook sarcasm, or even opposition, from a subordinate officer; and yet he had peculiarities which Townshend could scarcely overlook. One was a confidence in himself, which, as he took no pains to disguise it, led superficial observers to question the reality of his merit. Just before he quitted England for the last time, he called to take leave of Lord Temple, whom he found sitting with a colleague. The conversation turned on the prospects of the expedition; and some stress being laid on the resistance that might be expected from the numbers and gallantry of the French, Wolfe rose from his chair, and drawing his sword, exclaimed with a loud voice, and in a menacing attitude, that there was nothing to fear; for if he could only come within reach of the enemy, his success was not a matter of doubt, but of certainty. When he left the room the two Ministers looked at each other with astonishment, and agreed, that to entrust so hazardous an expedition to such a braggart, was indeed a fearful experiment. The feeling that at all times appeared uppermost in his mind, was an insatiable appetite for glory, and desire after posthumous fame. He idolized genius either in arts or arms. Even on the day of the attack, while sailing down the St. Lawrence, he read aloud Gray’s Elegy, and observed several times to the officers with him, that he did not know whether he would not rather be the author of that poem than the conqueror of Quebec. In truth his was a noble nature. His feelings were as genuine as they were ardent. He gave the most minute attention to the welfare and comfort of his troops; and instead of maintaining the reserve and stateliness so common with other commanders of that day, his manner was frank and open, and he had a personal knowledge of perhaps every officer in his army. We recollect a respectable veteran, who, after having served under him at Louisburgh and Cape Breton, commanded one of the first detachments that scaled the heights of Abraham. In that exploit Captain —— was shot through the lungs. On recovering his senses he saw Wolfe standing by his side. Amidst the anxieties of such a critical hour, the General stopped to press the hand of the wounded man—praised his services, encouraged him not to abandon the hope of life—assured him of leave of absence and early promotion; nay more, he desired an aide-de-camp to give a message to that effect to General Monckton, should he himself fall in the action; and, to the credit of General Monckton, the promise was kept. No wonder that these qualities coupled with brilliant success won the hearts of the soldiery: a sort of romance still clings to his name. He is the only British General belonging to the reign of George the Second who can be said to have earned a lasting reputation. Long as this note is, it would be incomplete without some notice of General Townshend. That officer was the son of Charles third Viscount Townshend, and the witty Ethelreda Harrison, and therefore the grandson of Charles second Viscount Townshend, the celebrated colleague of Sir Robert Walpole. He was not loved by either of his parents. His father, a man of dissolute habits, and an unnatural parent, made for him so mean a provision, that on leaving the University he joined the army abroad as a volunteer, and he served in that capacity at the battle of Dettingen. He was afterwards reduced to seek employment in the Dutch service, but, fortunately, was disappointed, as about this time he attracted the notice of the Duke of Cumberland, through whose interest he rose rapidly to the rank of Colonel. He attended the Duke during the remainder of the war, and distinguished himself at Fontenoy and Culloden. Subsequently, his marriage with Lady de Ferrars, the heiress of the Northamptons, placed him at once in opulent circumstances, and he was elected a representative for Norfolk without opposition, except from his father. The figure he made in the House, where he acquired considerable influence, especially over members in the agricultural interest, has caused him to be often noticed (generally with censure) in these Memoirs; but though Walpole paints him in no pleasing colours, on the other hand, another contemporary writer says that he was manly in person, demeanour, and sentiment, and exemplary as a husband and father, and, from his wit, agreeable to his friends and formidable to those he disliked. It cannot be denied, however, that he was too prone to mischief, and more worldly than seemed consistent with his love of pleasure and ease. His life was singularly prosperous, and prolonged to extreme old age. He became Viscount Townshend by the death of his father in 1764. In 1767 he was appointed Lord Lieutenant of Ireland; in 1787 he was created a Marquis, and in 1807, he died, aged 84, being then a Field Marshal, Governor of Jersey, and Colonel of a regiment of Dragoons. Memoirs of George the Second, vol. i. p. 33; vol. ii. p. 337. Memoirs of a distinguished Political and Literary Character, p. 71—E.

25 Charles Lenox, third Duke of Richmond.

26 William Keppel, third son of William Anne, second Earl of Albemarle, by Lady Anne Lenox, daughter of the first Duke of Richmond. He commanded a regiment at the conquest of the Havannah, and died a General officer, unmarried, in 1786.—E.

27 There is a slight inaccuracy in this statement. The Duke’s resentment was not so generous. The object of his interview with the King was to promote his own interest, not that of Colonel Keppel.—See the Duke of Richmond’s letter of 21st June, 1783, in the Appendix to Dodington’s Diary.—E.

28 William Petty, Lord Fitzmaurice, eldest son of the Earl of Shelburne, whom he succeeded in that title May 17, 1761; and by which title he will be frequently mentioned in the following Memoirs.

29 Lord George Lenox was only brother of Charles third Duke of Richmond. He had behaved with distinguished gallantry in the German wars. The late Duke of Richmond was his son.—E.

30 Charles Fitzroy, second son of Lord Augustus Fitzroy, second son of Charles second Duke of Grafton, and only brother of Augustus Henry third Duke of Grafton. He distinguished himself at the battle of Minden, where he served on the staff of Prince Ferdinand of Brunswick. He was created Lord Southampton in 1780, and died on the 21st of March 1797, aged 60.—E.

31 Augustus Henry, Duke of Grafton, afterwards First Lord of the Treasury.

32 Henry Fox had married Lady Caroline Lenox, eldest daughter of Charles, late Duke of Richmond, without the consent of her father and mother, who were some years unreconciled to her.

33 It was given under pretence of paying the late Prince her husband’s debts. Whether she did discharge any of them I neither know nor deny; some, I have heard, remained unpaid, not only at her death, but in the year 1788.

34 George Henry Lee, Earl of Litchfield, High Steward, and afterwards Chancellor of the University of Oxford, had been a zealous partisan of the House of Stuart, of which he was an illegitimate branch, his grandfather, Edward the first Earl, having married a daughter of Charles the Second by the Duchess of Cleveland. Lord Litchfield was too much a man of pleasure to shine in politics, or he might at this crisis have taken a leading part in public affairs, for his abilities were considerable. The following ironical character of him is almost the only instance in which Wilkes has described an opponent with candour and truth:—“The Captain (Giddy) was a sprightly fellow in his youth, and is remembered about twenty years ago to have made a very good speech or two at some of your public meetings in London. From this time, however, the figure he hath made in the world hath not been much to his credit. The chief of his company, till within these two years, have been parsons and country squires. They used to lead him about to races, cock-matches, and country clubs, where he was apt sometimes to drink a little too freely. A course of life of this sort brought on a swimming in his head, so that he hath frequently been supposed not to be sensible where he was, or what he was about: hence he hath been known in the late times of party violence, in the same sort of company, and within a few days of each other, to drink ‘Exclusion to the House of Hanover, and confusion to the Stuarts.’” North Briton, No. 29.—Lord Litchfield died in 1772. The title did not go beyond the third generation, though the first Earl had thirteen sons, of whom six lived to manhood.—E.

35 Edward Harley, Earl of Oxford and Earl Mortimer, was grandson of the Lord Treasurer’s brother, on whom the title had been specially limited, on failure of issue male in the direct line. He died in 1790, aged 64.—E.

36 Thomas Brudenel Bruce, Baron Bruce, youngest brother of George, Earl of Cardigan, and of the Duke of Montague. He was the fourth son of George third Earl of Cardigan, by Elizabeth, only daughter of Thomas second Earl of Aylesbury and Baron Bruce. That barony afterwards devolved upon him by a special limitation in the patent obtained by his uncle Charles, the third and last Earl of Aylesbury, who also bequeathed to him the bulk of the family property. He was created Earl of Aylesbury in 1776, on the death of his uncle, and died in 1814. The present Marquis of Aylesbury is his son.—E.

37 James Douglas, Earl of March and Ruglen, afterwards Duke of Queensberry. He died in 1810, aged 86. He possessed uncommon shrewdness and penetration, but is now only remembered by the excessive profligacy which stained even the last years of his life.—E.

38 Alexander Montgomery, Earl of Eglinton, an intelligent, public-spirited nobleman. Scotland is greatly indebted to him for the agricultural improvements he introduced upon his estates in Ayrshire, and still more for the benefit of his example on other large landed proprietors. He was mortally wounded in an accidental scuffle with an officer of Excise, whom he found poaching in his park, and died on the 25th October, 1769. The murderer was convicted, and only escaped execution by hanging himself in prison. Wood’s Peerage of Scotland, vol. i.—E.

39 George Broderick, Viscount Middleton. He had married the eldest daughter of the Honourable Thomas Townshend, and great-niece of the Duke of Newcastle, and died in 1765, aged 35. He was the grandson of Lord Chancellor Broderick.—E.

40 Andrew Stone, of whom see more in the preceding reign, and infra.

41 Smith de Burgh, Earl of Clanrickard.

42 Richard Rigby, of Mistley, near Manningtree, in Essex, Secretary to the Duke of Bedford.

43 This tract may still be read with interest. It is a masterly production. The style is clear and persuasive, the tone calm, and the reasoning close and logical. The examples from English history with which the author supports his positions are skilfully chosen and agreeably introduced, and his strictures on the King of Prussia have a smartness and pungency that show no small command over the weapons of controversy. Mr. Mauduit was agent for Massachusetts. He wrote several tracts on the differences between England and her American Colonies, as well as on subjects connected with the Dissenting interests, of which he was a zealous and munificent promoter. He died unmarried, in June 1787, aged 72. See Nichols’s Literary Anecdotes, vol. viii. p. 466; and Chalmers’s Biographical Dictionary, Art. Mauduit.—E.

44 Basil Fielding, Earl of Denbigh, Lord of the Bedchamber.

45 Son of Mr. Grenville, of Wooton, and afterwards First Lord of the Treasury. He had for some time been looked upon as a very promising statesman. Mr. Glover, in writing of him a few years before, says, “George Grenville will, I believe, make the most useful and able Parliament man of the three, though not of equal eloquence with Pitt.”—Mem. of a Distinguished Pol. and Lit. Character, p. 20.

His memory is embalmed in the brilliant panegyric of Mr. Burke (speech on American Taxation); and a more sober, though not less friendly estimate of his merits, has been since given by Mr. Knox. (Cited in an interesting note to the Chatham Correspondence, vol. iii. p. 486.) These prove how highly he was esteemed by his friends; and it will be perceived in the course of this work that Walpole was not always blind to his great knowledge of the Constitution, his capacity for business, and his powers as a speaker in Parliament. The unfavourable opinion, however, expressed of Mr. Grenville in the text was by no means confined to Walpole, his unpopularity being remarkable. Justice, indeed, was never shown to his abilities by the public—even Dr. Johnson wrote of him, “Let him not be depreciated in his grave. He had powers not universally possessed; could he have enforced payment of the Manilla ransom, he could have counted it.” (Cited in Boswell, vol. ii. p. 113.)—E.

46 Archibald Campbell, Duke of Argyle, died suddenly, March 15, 1761.

47 The King.

48 Sir Henry Erskine, though a moderate poet, was not meanly accomplished. He cultivated literature, and was a very lively companion. He spoke frequently in the House of Commons, and always fluently and with spirit, but in a style better suited to the hustings than to a deliberative assembly. His career was singular. He was the second son of Sir John Erskine, Bart., of Alva, and succeeded to his title on the death of his brother, Major Sir Charles Erskine, at Holst, just before the battle of Lafeldt. He accompanied the expedition to L’Orient, as Deputy Quarter-Master General of the Forces, under his uncle, General St. Clair. Devoting himself afterwards to politics, he shared the proscription which fell on the adherents of Leicester House, and was dismissed the service. The new reign amply restored his fortunes. With his commission he soon received the command of the Royal Scots; and in four years he had already attained the rank of Lieutenant-General, when he died, in 1765, in middle life. His marriage with Miss Wedderburn, little as it promised at the time of worldly advantage, brought wealth and rank into his family; the earldom and property of her brother, Lord Chancellor Rosslyn, having devolved subsequently on their eldest son, owing to the death of that nobleman and his brother, General Wedderburn, without issue.—E.

49 John Home, author of the tragedies of Douglas, Agis, and Siege of Aquileia; of which none save Douglas (says Sir Walter Scott) were exhibited with remarkable applause, and one or two with marked disapprobation. Mr. Home, though not a first-rate dramatist, was a pleasing writer, well-informed, and very agreeable in society. George the Third became much attached to him, and provided for him on coming to the throne. He died in 1808, aged 84. His memoirs have been elegantly written by Mackenzie, and form the subject of one of Walter Scott’s beautiful criticisms in the Quarterly Review for June 1827.—E.

50 Thomas Worseley, Surveyor General of the Board of Works.

51 George Cooke, prothonotary of the Common Pleas, and member for Middlesex. Walpole calls him elsewhere a “pompous Jacobite.” He conducted the celebrated Westminster Petition against Lord Trentham in 1751; afterwards attaching himself to Mr. Pitt, he was appointed joint Paymaster-General in 1766, and died in 1768.—E.

52 Thomas Coventry, member for Bridport. A barrister, and director of the South Sea Company. He was son of Thomas Coventry, who was brother of William fifth Earl of Coventry.—E.

53 Alderman William Beckford, of Jamaica, member for the City of London.

54 Henry Bilson Legge, a younger son of the first Earl of Dartmouth, was at this time Chancellor of the Exchequer. It should be remembered that Mr. Legge had abandoned Lord Winchelsea, and attached himself to Mr. Pelham in the Cabinet schism of 1744. He shared, with many respectable statesmen of that day, the charge of having served several masters, the partial changes so frequently made in the Government having rendered coalitions almost inevitable, especially at a time when, owing to the decline of Jacobitism, the lines of demarcation between the different political parties had become very indistinct. None, however, with whom he acted, could deny his eminent qualifications as a man of business, or as a debater in the House of Commons on all questions of trade and finance. His political integrity is less commendable. Dodington says, that his thoughts were “tout pour la trippe”—all for quarter-day (Diary, 407); and has, in common with Walpole, reproached him with perfidy, in disclosing to the Duke of Newcastle the negotiations of Leicester House with the Court in 1757. The more detailed account of the transaction, since published in the posthumous memoirs of Mr. Glover, makes it far more probable that the secret was insidiously drawn from him by the Duke, whose skill in imposing on men of superior ability to his own, is one of the most remarkable traits of his character; and that Mr. Legge was very open to such arts, may reasonably be inferred, from the well-known fact of his having incurred the serious displeasure of George the Second by an indiscreet slip in conversation, when minister at Berlin. He had the laxity of principle that belonged to the school of Walpole, but there is no ground for believing him to have been actually dishonest; and Mr. Pelham, who knew him well, said, “that he thought him as good as his neighbours: more able, and as willing, to serve them that served him as anybody he had been acquainted with for some time.” Whatever may have been his delinquencies in this respect, they would certainly have been overlooked by the Court, had he added to them by adopting the course which was urged on him by Lord Bute in the Hampshire election. This is proved by their published correspondence, in which he had a great advantage over Lord Bute. When that minister had the assurance to ask him to support Sir Simeon Steuart, who had come forward on the opposite interest, he honestly answered, “If the Whigs and Dissenters, who are very numerous in this country, will make it a point of opposing him, it will be impossible for me to declare for him, and abandon those who have supported me, to take part with those against whom they have supported me.” Lord Bute’s rejoinder is admirable! he protests against any desire on the Prince’s part to require the sacrifice of Mr. Legge’s honour, but besought him out of real friendship, to consider seriously whether he could not still, as far as was in his power, co-operate with the Prince’s wishes for the return of two candidates, and required a categorical answer. This was at once given in the negative by Mr. Legge, who added, that he would submit to any consequences rather than incur such a disgrace. Hence his dismissal. See more of Mr. Legge infra.—E.

55 Daniel Finch, Earl of Winchelsea and Nottingham, Knight of the Garter. Lord Winchelsea is one of the few statesmen of the reign of George the Second whose character is worthy of a purer age. He was the son of Lord Winchelsea, the great Tory leader, whose disgrace he shared when that nobleman was dismissed for espousing the cause of the Jacobite peers involved in the rebellion of 1715. He subsequently became reconciled to Sir Robert Walpole, and in 1742 was appointed First Lord of the Admiralty. Lord Waldegrave says of his conduct at that period, “That it was so unexceptionable that faction itself was obliged to be silent.”—Walpole Memoirs, p. 139. Horace Walpole is equally warm in his praise. This is the testimony of political friends, but it stands uncontradicted. Indeed Lord Winchelsea appears to have enjoyed the respect of all parties. His public career, to use the words of Lord Mahon, “without being illustrious, was long, useful, and honourable.” He died in 1769, aged 81.—E.

56 William Wildman Shute Barrington, Viscount Barrington, Treasurer of the Navy.

57 Robert Darcy, Earl of Holderness. This is an exaggeration of Lord Holderness’s incapacity; for it appears by the Mitchell papers, that he had attended closely to the business of his office, and performed it respectably. His talents, however, were not above mediocrity. His foreign connexions had recommended him to George the Second, whom he attended as Lord of the Bedchamber at the battle of Dettingen, and he was afterwards minister at Turin and at the Hague. The Duke of Newcastle succeeded in making him Secretary of State, against the opinion of Mr. Pelham, when scarcely thirty years of age. His qualifications for that high office are thus summed up by the Duke, in a letter, urging the appointment:—“He is indeed, or was thought, trifling in his manner and carriage; but believe me, he has a solid understanding, and will come out as prudent a young man as any in the kingdom. He is good-natured, so that you may tell him his faults, and he will mend them. He is very taciturn, dexterous enough, and most punctual in the execution of his orders. He is got into the routine of business, and knows well the present state of it.” (Letter from Duke of Newcastle to Mr. Pelham, in Coxe’s Life of Pelham, vol. ii. p. 387.) A portrait not less characteristic of the Duke than of Lord Holderness. His lordship married a lady of the Fagel family, and his mother was daughter of the last Duke of Schomberg. He died 1778, without issue male, and his earldom became extinct. See more of him in Walpole’s Memoirs, vol. i. p. 172; and Lord Waldegrave’s Memoirs, p. 121.—E.

58 James Grenville, second brother of Earl Temple. He had already been Deputy Paymaster General, and one of the Lords of Trade, and, lastly, of the Treasury.—E.

59 John Manners, Duke of Rutland, Knight of the Garter, died in 1779, at the age of 83, having survived his gallant and amiable son, the Marquis of Granby.—E.

60 Samuel Lord Sandys, formerly the indefatigable opponent of Sir Robert Walpole; but his importance had greatly diminished since that minister’s downfall. He died in 1770.—E.

61 Thomas Osborne, Duke of Leeds, Knight of the Garter. He married Mary, daughter and co-heir of Francis Earl of Godolphin, and died in 1783, aged 76.—E.

62 Charles Townshend, second son of Charles Viscount Townshend.

63 Gilbert Elliot, afterwards Sir Gilbert.

64 George Bussy Villiers, Viscount Villiers, only son of the Earl of Jersey, whom he afterwards succeeded. He held the post of Lord Chamberlain from 1765 to 1769, and subsequently filled other high offices in the royal household. He died in August, 1805, aged 70.—E.

65 T. Pelham, of Stanmore, afterwards Lord Pelham.

66 George Rice married Cecil, only child of William Lord Talbot, and a great heiress. He was Lord Lieutenant of the county of Carmarthen, and a Privy Councillor. He died in 1779. The present Lord Dynevor is his son.—E.

67 John Spencer, only son of John Spencer, brother of Charles Duke of Marlborough. He was a person of very resolute, independent spirit, and warmly attached to the Whig interest, as he too well proved at the celebrated Northampton election, which seriously impaired even his immense fortune, while it made Lord Northampton an exile for the remainder of his life, and obliged Lord Halifax to sell Horton and his principal estates. With the exception of a very brief interval, Lord Spencer remained all his life in Opposition. He died greatly respected in 1783, aged 49. The present Earl Spencer is his grandson.—E.

68 Sir Thomas Robinson, created Lord Grantham, had been minister at Vienna, and Secretary of State. He was the fourth son of Sir William Robinson, Baronet. His fortunate connexion with Horace Lord Walpole, to whom he had been Secretary in 1723, quickly raised him to eminence. He was an excellent man of business, and highly esteemed as a diplomatist. His despatches are written with great spirit and clearness. In the House of Commons he failed, as might have been expected from his previous pursuits, and his talents have in consequence been much underrated. He died in 1770. The Earl de Grey and the Earl of Ripon are his grandsons.—E.

69 Sir Nathaniel Curzon, (fifth Baronet, and M. P. for Derbyshire,) created Lord Scarsdale. He afterwards was appointed Chairman of the Committee of the House of Lords, and died at an advanced age, in 1804.—E.

70 Sir William Irby, created Lord Boston. He had been Page to George I. and George II., and Equerry to the Prince on the arrival of the latter in England. He married a niece of Mr. Selwyn, and died in 1773, aged 66.—E.

71 George Bubb Dodington, created Lord Melcomb.

72 William Pulteney, Earl of Bath.

73 Son of the Lord Chancellor. He had in his youth been one of Sir Robert Walpole’s most violent opponents. The Count de Fuentes, in a letter to Mr. Wall, of 27th March, says that this appointment was ascribed to the Princess of Wales: of whom he adds, “they speak with too much liberty.”—Chatham Corresp. vol. ii. p. 106. The adherence of Lord Talbot to the Leicester House party certainly entitled him to consideration, but he was now much overpaid; and this was felt even by his patron Lord Bute, who wanted firmness to resist pretensions which were urged with impetuosity, amounting almost to passion.—(Dodington’s Diary, cited in note to the letter supra.) Lord Talbot had talents, was resolute and ready; and his speeches had an air of independence and a plausibility that made him rather a favourite with the public, notwithstanding his vices, until his duel with Wilkes brought ridicule upon his name, not to be effaced.—E.

74 Son of Selina Countess of Huntingdon. He remained Groom of the Stole till 1770. Akenside, who was one of the least adulatory of poets, addressed to him, in 1747, a didactic ode on his setting out on his travels. He was an amiable and accomplished nobleman, though it requires some partiality to believe of his early youth that his “breast the gifts of every Muse had known.” Delicate health prevented his taking an active part in public business, and in 1766 he declined the embassy to Spain, which was pressed on him by Lord Chatham. He died in 1790, aged 62, without having been married, and the title was for some years supposed to be extinct. In 1819 the father of the present Earl established a claim to it, and took his seat in the House of Lords accordingly.—E.