opposite danger, by arousing against them jealousy and distrust in the mind of the King.

The integrity and honour of Lord Townshend in this, as in every other transaction of his life, were, I believe, without a stain. His prudence, however, in one or two cases, seems to be far more questionable, and he committed errors which his more cautious colleague successfully avoided. He was persuaded by the Prince to write to Stanhope, pressing the King for a speedy decision as to His Majesty's coming over, and plainly disclosing His Royal Highness's desire to hold the Parliament.* Still more impolitic was the recommendation already mentioned in his despatch of the 2d of November, that a discretionary power should be vested in the Prince. That despatch was, in fact, as a modern writer well observes, the death-warrant of Lord Townshend's administration.† It seemed to add weight and confirmation to the charges of Sunderland of cabals with the Duke of Argyle and other discontented Whigs, and of an intention to set the son above the father. The King, however, suppressed his resentment at the moment, partly, I presume, on account of the arrival of Horace Walpole, and the justification of Lord Townshend precisely at that time from another imputation, and partly to obtain time to consult Bothmar and his other secret counsellors in England. The return of the post, about the middle of December, appears to have kindled His Majesty's latent indignation into open flame; and he vehemently declared his intention of dismissing Lord Townshend from his service.

Under these circumstances, Stanhope asserts that he first endeavoured to alter the King's resolution, and that, finding His Majesty immovable, he next applied himself to soften His Majesty's resentment, by representing the past services and high character of Lord Townshend, and the injustice of any open disgrace. These remonstrances wrought upon the King so far as to induce him to permit that Lord Townshend should be offered the appointment to another great and important dignity of state, the Lord Lieutenancy of Ireland; so that the loss of his office of Secretary might seem an exchange, or *Townshend to Stanhope, Sept. 25. 1716. O. S. Coxe's Walpole. † Coxe's Walpole, vol. i. p. 102.

1716.

66

66

LORD TOWNSHEND DISMISSED.

247

nominally even a promotion, instead of a dismissal. Accordingly, Stanhope wrote to Secretary Methuen, and likewise to Townshend, on the 15th of December, conveying that message from His Majesty in the most gracious terms, and without a single word expressive of the Royal indignation. To Robert Walpole he also wrote on the same day more at length:- "If I could "possibly have an hour's discourse with you, I am sure “I should make you sensible that the part I have had in "the last step hath been for my Lord Townshend's ser"vice. Every circumstance considered, I do in my con"science believe this was the only measure which could 66 secure the continuance of a Whig administration with 66 any ease to the King. His Majesty has been more uneasy of late than I care to say; and I must own I "think he has reason, even though I don't pretend to "know so much of the matter as the King does, His Majesty receiving many advices which come neither through my hands nor my Lord Sunderland's. But I "cannot help observing to you, that he is jealous of cer"tain intimacies with the two brothers (Argyle and "Isla). I hope His Majesty's presence in England, and "the behaviour of our friends in the Cabinet, will remove these jealousies. No one can contribute more "to this than yourself; and I must tell you that my Lord "Sunderland, as well as myself, have assured the King "that you will do so. You know that ill offices had "been done you here, which might have made some im66 pression, if my Lord Sunderland and I had not in good "earnest endeavoured to prevent it.*- You will, I am 'persuaded, believe that our endeavours were sincere, "when I shall have told you with the frankness I am going to do what our scheme is here for the Ministry. "In case my Lord Townshend accepts of Ireland, which, "for a thousand reasons, he ought to do, the Cabinet

66

66

66

66

* This assertion is confirmed by previous passages in Stanhope's correspondence. Thus, writing to Lord Townshend on the 16th of October, he begs of him to press Walpole to settle the Munster and Saxe-Gotha payments, and adds the following friendly caution,-"I "have more reason to press this than I care to say to you, but I fear "some people do ill offices to Walpole." See also his letter of the 6th of November to the same effect.

66

66

"Council will remain just as it was, with the addition of "the Duke of Kingston, as Privy Seal. Mr. Methuen " and I shall continue Secretaries. But if my Lord "Townshend shall decline Ireland, and if— which by some has been suggested, but which I cannot think "possible — he should prevail upon you to offer to quit your employments, the King, in this case, hath engaged "my Lord Sunderland and myself to promise that his Lordship will be Secretary, and that I, unable and un"equal as I am every way, should be Chancellor of the Exchequer for this Session; the King declaring, that as long as he can find Whigs that will serve him he "will be served by them, which good disposition His Majesty shall not have reason to alter by any back"wardness in me to expose myself to any trouble or "hazard. You know as much of our plan now as I do, “and are, I dare say, fully satisfied that I think it highly concerns me that you should stay where you are.

66

66

66

I

am very sorry that my Lord Townshend's temper hath "made it impracticable for him to continue Secretary. "The King will not bear him in that office, be the con66 sequence what it will. This being the case, I hope "and desire that you will endeavour to reconcile him to "Ireland, which I once thought he did not dislike, and "which, I think, he cannot now refuse, without declaring "to the world that he will serve upon no other terms "than being Viceroy over father, son, and these three kingdoms. Is the Whig interest to be staked in defence "of such a pretension? or is the difference to the Whig party, whether Lord Townshend be Secretary or Lord "Lieutenant of Ireland, TANTI?"

66

66

It is on this transaction that a charge of base dissimulation and treachery has been brought against Secretary Stanhope by Archdeacon Coxe. "As Brereton," he says, "who conveyed these despatches without being apprised "of their contents, could not have quitted Gohre more "than three days subsequent to the departure of Horace "Walpole, it was obvious that he (Horace Walpole) had * been duped and deceived, that the plan for the removal "of Sunderland had been then settled, and that the "solemn promises made by Stanhope were never in

1716.

STANHOPE ACCUSED OF TREACHERY.

249

"tended to be fulfilled."* But it will be found from the authentic letters which Coxe himself has published that his heavy accusation rests upon a gross error he has made as to the dates. It does him no great honour as an historian that we should thus be able to disprove the statements in his first volume by the documents in his second. The letters from Stanhope, announcing the removal of Townshend, are dated on the 15th of December. On the 8th Horace Walpole had already reached the Hague on his way home from Hanover, and wrote to Stanhope an account of his progress.† It is evident, therefore, that he must have quitted Hanover towards the beginning of that month. But further still, a passage in a subsequent letter from Robert Walpole to Stanhope indicates the 2d of December as the precise day when Horace began his journey homewards. Alluding to the friendly expressions of Stanhope to Horace, and to the subsequent dismissal of Townshend, Robert Walpole observes, "What could possibly create so great an alteration among you in the space of twelve days is in vain to guess." Thus, then, it appears that the real interval was no less than four times greater than that assigned by Archdeacon Coxe, and that therefore his charge of treachery deduced from the shortness of time completely falls to the ground.

66

66

Are there, however, any other grounds for accusing Stanhope of treachery in this transaction? I think none. How could he possibly have acted more kindly for his friend, or more patriotically for his country? When he found the King determined to dismiss his Prime Minister, and absolutely fixed in that determination, he could surely do no better for Lord Townshend than endeavour, as it were, to break the force of his inevitable fall, and obtain for him an appointment of still higher profit, * Memoirs of Walpole, vol. i. p. 101.

† See this letter in Coxe's Walpole, vol. ii. p. 137. It is to be remembered that all the letters of Horace Walpole from the Continent are, like Stanhope's, dated N. S. This is beyond question, he having left London express with Lord Townshend's despatch of Nov. 2., O. S., that is, Nov. 13. N. S., and his letters from the Hague and Hanover on his first arrival being dated Nov. 17. and 23.; and this is so stated by Coxe himself, vol. i. p. 99.

Coxe's Walpole, vol. ii. p. 145.

66

and scarcely inferior power. It may be said, however, that he ought rather to have resigned his own office than acquiesced in the loss of Lord Townshend's. But what would have been the consequence? Not, I am convinced, any change in the King's inflexible temper, but the dissolution of the whole Whig administration; thus either throwing the Government into the hands of a factious opposition, or leaving the country, at a most stormy crisis, without any efficient hands at the helm. Can this really be thought the duty of an honest public servant? Let me borrow Stanhope's own words in writing to Methuen : "The King thinks fit to remove one servant "from a worse to a better post. Is this a reason for "others to abandon him? I am sure that if it had "happened to yourself to be turned out, and without any "colour of reason, you would not in your own case let your resentment carry you to any indecent behaviour, "much less would you spirit up mankind to such divi"sions as must end in the destruction of your country if "not prevented. Do some people expect by their beha"viour to force the King to make my Lord Townshend "Secretary again? If they do, they don't know him. "If they do not, what do they propose ? .. Whoever wishes well to his King, to his country, and to my "Lord Townshend, ought to persuade him to accept of "Ireland. I hope Walpole, upon cooler thoughts, will use his endeavours to this end. If you have any in"terest or credit with them, for God's sake make use of "it upon this occasion. They may possibly unking their master, or (which I do before God think very possible) "make him abdicate England, but they will certainly "not force him to make my Lord Townshend Secretary. "I will not enter into the reasons which have engaged "the King to take this measure, but it is taken; and I "will ask any Whig whether the difference to the public "between one man's being Secretary or Lord Lieutenant "of Ireland is of such consequence that we ought to "hazard every thing for the resentment of one man?"*

66

66

66

The vindication of Stanhope appears to me complete ; and with respect to Sunderland also, I see no foundation

* Stanhope to Methuen, January 13. 1717. Coxe's Walpole.