426 GEORGE III in turn, and who sought to forward his own interests by I one opinion to prevail in the country,——that Pitt, not I falling in witl1 the king's prejudices. George III. at once tJOk up the position from which he never swerved. He declared that to grant concessions to the Catholics involved a breach of his coronation oath. All thinking men of a later generation are of opinion that the objection was un- tenable. But no one has ever doubted that the king was absolutely convincedof the serious nature of the objection, or that he believed the measure itself to be beyond measure in- jurious to church and state. Nor can there be any doubt that he had the English people behind him. Both in his peace ministry and in his war ministry Pitt had taken his stand on royal favour and on popular support. Both failed him alike now, and he resigned office at once. The shock to the king's mind was so great that it brought on a fresh attack of insanity. This time, however, the recovery was rapid. On March 14, 1801, 1’itt’s resignation was formally accepted, and the late speaker, Mr Addingt-on, was installed in oflice as prime minister. The king was well pleased with the change. He was never capable of appreciating high merit in any one; and he was unable to perceive that the question 011 which Pitt had resigned was more than an improper question, with which he ought never to have meddled. “ Tell him,” he said, in directing his physician to inform Pitt of his restora- tion to health, “I am now quite well, quite recovered from my illness; but what has he not to answer for, who has been the cause of my having been ill at all T’ Addington was a minister after his ow11 mind. Thoroughly honest and respectable, with about the same share of abili- ties as was possessed by the king himself, he was certainly not likely to startle the world by any flights of genius. But for one circumstance Addington’s ministry would have lasted long. So strong was the reaction against the Revolu- tion that the bulk of the nation was almost as suspicious of genius as the king himself. Not only was there no outcry for legislative reforms, but the very idea of reform was un- popular. The country gentlemen were predominant in parliament, and the country gentlemen as a body looked upon Addington with respect and affection. Such a minister was therefore admirably suited to preside over affairs at home in the existing state of opinion. But those who were content with inaction at home would not be content with inaction abroad. In time of peace Addington would have been popular for a season. In time of war even his warmest admirers could not say that he was the man to direct armies in the most terrible struggle which had ever been conducted by an English Government. For the moment this ditiiculty was not felt. On October 1, 1801, preliminaries of peace were signed between Eng- land and France, to be converted into the definitive peace of Amiens on March 27, 1802. The ruler of France was now Napoleon Bonaparte, and few persons in England be- lieved that he had any real purpose of bringing his aggres- sive violence to an end. “ Do you know what I call this peace?” said the king; “an experimental peace, for it is nothing else. But it was unavoidable.” The king was right. On May 18, 1803, the declaration of war was laid before parliament. The war was accepted by all classes as inevitable, and the French preparations for an invasion of England roused the whole nation to a glow of enthusiasm only equalled by that felt when the Armada threatened our shores. On October 26 the king reviewed the London volunteers in Hyde Park. He found himself the centre of a great national movement with which he heartily sympathized, and which heartily sympathized with him. On February 12, 1804, the king’s mind was again affected. When he recovered, he found himself in the midst of a ministerial crisis. Public feeling allowed but | Addington, was the proper man to conduct the administra- tion in time of war. Pitt was anxious to form an adminis- tration on a broad basis, including Fox and all prominent leaders of both parties. The king would not hear of the admission of Fox. Ilis dislike of him was personal as well as political, as he knew that Fox had had a great share in drawing the prince of Wales into a life of prolligaey. Pitt accepted the king's terms, and formed an administration in which he was the only man of real ability. Eminent men such as Lord Grenville refused to join a ministry from which the king had excluded a great statesman on purely personal grounds. The whole question was reopened on Pitt’s death on Janu- ary 23, 1806. This time the king gave way. The ministry of All the Talents, as it was called, included Fox alnongst its members. At first the king was observed to appear depressed at the necessity of surrender. But 1'”ox’s charm of manner soon gained upon him. “Mr Fox,” said the king, “I little thought that you and I should ever meet again in this place; bntlhave no desire to look back upon old grievances, and you may rest assured I never shall re- mind you of them.” On September 13 Fox died, and it was not long before the king and the ministry were openly in collision. The ministry proposed a measure enabling all subjects of the crown to serve in the army and navy in spite of religious discpialifications. The king objected even to so slight a modification of the laws against the Catholics and Dissenters, and the ministers consented to drop the bill. The king asked more than this. He demanded a written and positive engagement that this ministry would never, under any circmnstanccs, propose to him “any measure of concession to the Catholics, or even connected with the question.” The ministers very properly refused to bind themselves for the future. They were con- sequently turned out of office, and a new ministry was formed with the duke of Portland as first lord of the treasury and Mr Perceval as its real leader. The spirit of the new ministry was distinct hostility to the Catholic claims. On April 27, 1807, a dissolution of parliament was announced, and a majority in favour of the king’s ministry was returned iii the elections which speedily followed. The elections of 1807, like the elections of 1784, gave the king the mastery of the situation. In other respects they were the counterpart of one another. In 1784 the country declared, though perhaps without any clear con- ception of what it was doing, for a wise and progressive policy. I11 1807 it declared for an unwise and retrogres— sive policy, with a very clear understanding of what it meant. It is in his reliance upon the prejudices and ignor- ance of the country that the constitutional significance of the reign of George III. appears. Every strong Govern- ment derives its power from its representative character. At a time when the House of Commons was less rcally representative than at any other, a king was on the throne who represented the country in its good and bad qualities alike, in its hatred of revolutionary violence, its moral sturdiness, its contempt of foreigners, and its defiance of all ideas which were in any way strange. 'Iherefore it was that his success was not permanently injurious to the work- ing of the constitution as the success of Charles I. would have been. If he were followed by a king less English than himself, the strength of representative power would pass into other hands than those which held the sceptre. The overthrow of the ministry of All the Talents was the last political act of constitutional importance in which George III. took part. The substitution of Perceval for Portland as the nominal head of the ministry in 1809 was not an event of any real significance, and in 1811 the reign
practically came to an end. The king’s reason finally broke