My dinner yesterday with Fawkener and Warner at Mr. Crespigni's was a very agreeable one indeed; la chere plutot bonne quexquise; excellent vin. You will not forget Warner, I hope, when the opportunity offers, afin qu'il soit dans le cas d'en tirer de sa propre cave. We generally close the evening around the fire in the card room at White's, a forte feu de fraix; Williams, Lord Ashburnham, Vary, Fawkener, etc.; that is, those who either sup, game, or sit up. The season of all that is over with me, and I have little inclination left for either of them. I am quite well, vu mon age, and as likely to see you again as any other who is a sexagenaire, et meme davantage. It is the chief part of my Litanie.
I talked of Caroline last night with Lady Ann, till I could ask no more questions about her. I am glad that her dancing is admired. We have here Mademoiselle Theodore, who takes Mr. Willis'(?) place till the season is over. She has half a guinea a lesson, but it is to stay an hour. There is a good account of Johnson's prices, but he himself is gone to Lisbon to be married; whether that will be a prize, is a Scavoir. That of the Duke of Newcastle's(195) (sic) is already condemned, at least by his Grace, but he nuptie sunt vere nevertheless. Lord Cornwallis is, I believe, going to inhabit my house till midsummer. That has been a heavy charge upon my hands, instead of a profit.
(193) Francis Russell, fifth Duke of Bedford (1765-1802)5 succeeded his grandfather in 1771. He was badly educated, indifferent to public opinion, liberal and independent in political views, a consistent follower of Fox. In later life he showed great interest in the advancement of agriculture, by practice and experiment.
(194) See note (196) to letter of Feb. 8 below.
(195) Thomas, third Duke of Newcastle (1752-1795). He married in this year, the second daughter of the Earl of Harrington.
We have now nearly reached the climax of the political interest and excitement which had been growing greater since the memorable session of 1781 began. To appreciate the letters which follow, it is necessary to bear in mind some of the main parliamentary incidents of this particular period. On February 7, 1782, the House of Commons resolved itself into a Committee to inquire into the present state of naval affairs. Fox in an elaborate speech reviewed their course for the preceding five years, and concluded by moving "that there has been gross mismanagement of the naval affairs of Great Britain during the course of the year 1781." The supporters of the Government were as little satisfied with the administration of the navy as the Opposition, and the debate, which was concluded by another remarkable speech from Fox, resulted in a virtual defeat of the Administration. The Opposition were in a minority only of 18 votes. On February 22nd a different ground was chosen by the Opposition for their attack, General Conway moving an address that the war in America should no longer be pursued. The noticeable change in the feeling in the House of Commons, crammed as it was by place-men, is clearly exemplified by the result of the division. On this occasion the Government were only able to defeat the Opposition by one vote, 194 to 193. On February 27th a similar address was again moved by Conway and an attempt by the Government to adjourn the debate was defeated by 234 to 215 votes. The address was then carried without a division. Selwyn looking at events from what was, politically speaking, a somewhat non-party point of view, is obviously puzzled as to how the crisis would end. He tells us, too, of the formation of a group of young politicians under Pitt. He ascribes to the future Prime Minister the organisation of a party, though hitherto these meetings at Goosetree's have been regarded chiefly as social gatherings.
(1782,) Feb. 8, Friday, the Fast Day.—We were not up last night till near three this morning; our numbers were 205 and 183. Our majority was but mince, but it was a popular Question, but Lord Sandwich is not a popular man; but I have lived long enough to have remembered other ministers less popular, if possible, and who have been since reverenced, and by the most respectable among those who had traduced them. Charles made two speeches; the last was much animated. Admiral Keppell spoke, and so did Sir E. Dering, drunk, sicut suus mos est; but he says in that ivresse des verites vertes et piquantes. He is a tiresome noisy fool, and I wish that he never spoke anywhere but in the House of Commons.
Saturday.—I was prevented from continuing this letter yesterday, by a visit from Lord Digby, who assured me that to the best of his judgment you had nothing to fear from that quarter which has now and then alarmed me not a little. I dined at Lord Ash[burnham's]: Lord Frederick, Williams, Sir J. Peachy(?) and old(?) Elison. I do not perceive that Lord Carm(arthen) has got any repu(ta)tion from his violence against Lord George.(196) The attack surprised, (and) had not been concerted with anybody; he had revealed his design but to one, as he said, and that I am told was Lord Pembroke, une tete digne de cette confidence.
It was a Motion cruel and ill-mannered, and not becoming one man of quality to another; at the same time an unpardonable insult to the Crown. Lord de Ferrars, I hear, has found out a precedent for it, as he thinks, in King James 1st('s) time, but a precedent of what? of ins(o)lence to the Crown; it was in that reign begun, with impunity. If there could be any hesitation in this peerage, this motion must have confirmed it.
Lord Abingdon spoke like a perfect blackguard, and Lord Shellbourne, in a speech which Lord Cov(entry) calls such a model of perfect oratory, to exemplify the contempt which the late King had of Lord George, quoted not only his own words, but imitated his manner—two of his grand-children, the Princes, in the House. This part of his speech was a pantomime fitter for the treteaux des boulevards than for a chamber of Parliament. However, Lord George will take his seat next week, and what he will do, or be, afterwards, God knows. Ellis(197) has his place.