But Yorke, without spending either his or his wife’s fortune, had already taken the first step to official distinction by entering Parliament, May 2, 1719. He was chosen member for Lewes in Sussex. The simplicity of this transaction affords a curious contrast to the performances of the present day. The Duke of Newcastle sent a letter to the “free and independent electors,” evidently directing them to elect his friend Mr Yorke. The letter was duly answered by an address from one hundred and thirty-two electors, in this style:—
“We, whose names are hereunto subscribed, the constables and inhabitants of the borough of Lewes, having heard your Grace’s letter publicly read, do not only herein return your Grace our hearty thanks for the honour you have done us in recommending so fit a person as Mr Yorke, to serve as one of our representatives in parliament for this town, for the present vacancy, but also beg leave to assure your Grace, that we do unanimously and entirely approve of him, and shall be ready on all occasions to show the regard we have to the favour your Grace has pleased to lay upon us.
“Your Grace’s most obliged and
“Obedient humble servants.”
The orthography of those honest people differs from modern penmanship,—but the principle of the affair, even in our polished day of liberalism, probably differs no more than a close borough of the year 1719 differs from an open borough of 1848. The successful barrister, and promising member of parliament, now made the most important step which any man can make, and took to himself a wife. It would be unfair to say that in this instance he was guided by the calculations which are so often charged upon his profession. But there can be no doubt, that whatever might be the pleasure of his new connexion, it had all the merit of prudence. The lady was a widow, young and pretty, and with a fortune of £6000, which at that time was probably equal to twice the sum in our day. But probably a charm of no inferior importance was her being the niece of Sir Joseph Jekyll, Master of the Rolls. The whole transaction was sufficiently juridical. Sir Joseph had sent a letter with Yorke, to be presented to Mr Charles Cox, the father of the lady, who had married Mary, the eldest daughter of Lord Somers. On reading the letter, the old gentleman desired Yorke to “leave his rental and writings” with him; and upon Yorke’s acknowledging that he had neither, Cox expressed his astonishment that his brother-in-law, Sir Joseph, “should have recommended such a person to him.” On writing to Sir Joseph on the subject, he received an answer, “not to hesitate a moment in accepting the offer, for that the gentleman who made it, and was now content with his daughter’s £6000, would in another year expect three or four times the sum with a wife!” The letter had its effect, and the marriage took place.
Yorke then took a house in Lincoln’s Inn Fields, and began to go circuit; there his biographer stoutly and justly defends him against the imputation of “intriguing for business,” alleged in Lord Campbell’s “Lives of the Chancellors;” an imputation which has not been sustained by any part of his subsequent conduct. For, though charged with singular anxiety to realise a fortune, there is no evidence of any meanness in its pursuit. And his professional distinction, his natural talent, and his rank as a member of parliament, (a matter of high consideration in those days) rendered his possession of business natural and easy.
But he was soon to have official distinction. When going the Western Circuit, he received a letter from the Lord Chancellor, announcing to him “his Majesty’s pleasure to select him for Solicitor General;” an office into which he was sworn in March 1720, at the age of thirty!
Much professional dissatisfaction was exhibited on this promotion of so young a member of the bar; and for some period the attorneys exhibited an equal reluctance to employ him in important causes. But, as a leader, he soon showed qualities which had been partially concealed in his inferior rank, and reconciled at once the public and the profession to his precedency. It has been remarked, that some of the most distinguished judges have not been successful in the lower rank of their profession, while it has not rarely happened that the most distinguished advocates have failed as judges. The qualifications for the bench, and those for the bar, or even for the leadership of the bar, have considerable differences, and the management of the great principles of law is evidently a separate task from the dexterity of detail.
The father of the Solicitor General, who had the happiness to see his son’s promotion, died in the following year. It appears that Yorke, who was now Sir Philip, kept up a constant and kind correspondence with his family, which was, of course, strengthened by his having obtained the recordership of Dover, an appointment which he valued very highly, and retained through life.
The volume contains some striking remarks on the often discussed question—“why lawyers seldom succeed as parliamentary speakers.” And the reason assigned, and truly assigned, is, that lawyers have something else to do. The man who is occupied all day in the courts, has no time for parliamentary subjects. He comes into the House fatigued, and unsupplied with the detail which is necessary to give effect to any address in so business-like an assembly. He merely gives an opinion and sits down. If he attempts more, he generally fails; or his best success is an escape. Thus the two greatest advocates whom England and Ireland have ever seen, Erskine and Curran, were ineffective in parliament—the only distinction being, that Erskine was laughed at, while Curran was laughed with. With these extraordinary men, who had every quality of the orator, and whose vigour of argument took the bench by storm, while the flashes of their imagination threw brilliancy over the dreariest topics, there could be no conceivable source of failure, except in their want of preparation for the peculiar objects of debate.