Part 36 (1/2)

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

Stanhope Street, May 7, 1822.

MY DEAR DUKE,

I am sure it must give you pleasure, as it does me, to hear from all sides, and all sorts of persons, one uniform expression of approbation of your conduct. When one is forced to take a step which places one's character before the public tribunal, it is most gratifying to feel afterwards that the step has been approved and sanctioned; that this is the case, I have not the shadow of a doubt, and I would not say so to you, if I had not received the most unequivocal proofs of it. I hear that even at Brookes' the comparison is greatly in your favour. No one can deny that your adversary has retracted his words, though he has done so in the only manly and honourable manner he could do it. Yesterday Charles Long conversed with me a great deal upon it, and said you had not only done benefit to the general cause of Government, but that you had served to put down that personal and unjust mode of proceeding which was gaining ground every day. He attacked the conduct of the Duke of B----, as being most improper and unjust; he said he had had an opportunity of repeating the same language the day before to the Duke of York, who, although a great personal friend of the Duke of B----, could not but admit that you were compelled to act as you had done, and that you had done so in the most dignified and gallant manner.

I wish I could speak as flatteringly of the general conduct of the Government, but I own every day lessens my confidence in them; there is such a complete want of steadiness, and of an open manly uniformity of conduct, that I see no hopes of its going on.

Although I have sealed my letter, I write to tell you a thing I forgot--namely, that Talbot of Malahide came to me yesterday, saying he considered the question to be of a personal nature, and feeling the highest regard, affection, and grat.i.tude to your family, he could not think of voting upon it. That his party making it a general question, he could not vote against it, but that he should go away, which he did. I thought this a very handsome conduct, and said I should certainly take care to communicate it to you.

W. H. F.

DR. PHILLIMORE TO THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM.

Whitehall, May 11, 1822.

MY DEAR LORD DUKE,

Lest Wynn or Fremantle should not write to-day (for it has so happened that I have seen neither of them), I just send your Grace a few lines to say that the Catholic cause prospered last night, the numbers being for the second reading of the Bill, 235; Noes, 223. Lord Duncannon told me that he had _never_ known a greater exertion made against any measure than against the second reading of this Bill. There were twenty-seven pairs in the House--_i.e._, of persons who appeared in the House. My own idea is that all further opposition to the measure in our House will be abandoned.

It certainly is most satisfactory to find the House of Commons so steady on this point; but I must own I think the experiment has been a hazardous one; if the measure had failed, the general question must have been damaged. However, the result is most favourable, and I should not be very much astonished if this Bill was to pa.s.s your House. The most remarkable incident of last night was the declaration of Mr. Skeffington (Lord Oriel's son), that he had come to the conviction that the Catholic question must be carried sooner or later.

I hear from all quarters that the Duke of York's canva.s.s against the Bill has been most active. Peel certainly took a higher tone than he did last year. You will have heard from Wynn that the Swiss mission, the general question respecting missions, and the repeal of the Act which commuted offices for pensions, are to be made vital questions (as the phrase is). At this I exceeding rejoice.

The post is going out.

Believe me,

Your Grace's most faithfully,

J. PHILLIMORE.

The long threatened inquiry into the diplomatic appointment given to Mr. Henry W. Wynn came on on the 14th of May, when Mr. Lennard in the House of Commons moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the diplomatic expenses of the Government. The result is thus described:--

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

Friday.

MY DEAR B----,

It was yesterday determined that the motion respecting Henry's mission on Tuesday, and the foreign missions in general for the following day, should both be considered as vital questions, decisive of the existence of the Administration. The case on the former is very strong. Londonderry will state that at the Congress of Vienna it had been decided that each of the great Powers should keep Ministers of calibre (_quere_, great bores) there. The reason of this was princ.i.p.ally with the design of preventing the Cantons from falling back into their former dependence on France, in compliance with which it will be seen that each of them has Ministers there of the same rank with Henry. The general diplomatic arrangement was then laid before Parliament by estimate, in 1815 referred to a Committee, and acted upon. When Stratford Canning came away, the mission was first intended for Foster, then for Clanwilliam; and if Henry had declined, it would have been given to another person.

With respect to the general question, it will be found that the expenditure is reduced 20,000_l._ below the estimate of 1815, and besides that, there will this year be the 10 per cent. upon all salaries. Lord Londonderry has to-day a meeting of all men in office to communicate this resolution to.

It is singular enough that in each of the three first divisions, upon propositions the most adverse--viz., Webb Hall's, Ricardo, and Althorpe's--the minority should have been 24, 24, and 25, though composed of perfectly different persons.

Peel shows, I think, more spirit and good judgment as to the course which we ought to pursue, than any man in the Cabinet.