The most painful part in the office of Attorney General is the duty of prosecuting high criminals. The Earl of Macclesfield now put this duty to the test. A charge was laid against the Chancellor for corruption in the sale of masterships in Chancery, and the embezzlement of the suitors’ money in their hands. He was impeached by the Commons, and tried by the Lords, was found guilty, and fined £30,000. But on the questions being put that he should be rendered incapable of serving the king, or sitting in parliament, both were negatived; but, for the honour of parliament, the one only by forty-two to forty-two, the Speaker giving, of course, the vote in his favour; and the latter by forty-five to thirty-nine. The trial lasted twenty days, and naturally excited great attention. The ground of his escape from official ruin, (for nothing could save him from public shame,) was probably his favouritism at St James’s—a favouritism which, unluckily for the honour of the courtiers, seems to have remained undiminished.

The conduct of the Attorney General has been censured, as ungrateful to his early patron; but the censure is unfounded. He did all that he could: he refused to join in the prosecution, and avoided this duty with some difficulty. The Earl’s guilt was notorious; nothing could save him. It was no part of the Attorney General’s virtues to thwart public justice, nor was it in his power. He simply consulted the delicacy of old friendship, by refusing to urge its progress. It has been even asked, Why did he not resign? Such is the absurdity of querists. His resignation could not have saved the Chancellor, who, after all, escaped with the easy sacrifice of a comparatively small sum from a purse believed to be plethoric with the public money.

Yorke still continued to advance in reputation and office. The deaths of the Chancellor and the Chief Justice were followed by the appointment of Talbot to the woolsack, and of Yorke to the Chief Justiceship, with an increase of the salary from £2000 to £4000 a-year, and the peerage, by the title of Baron Hardwicke, from an estate which he had purchased in the county of Gloucester.

He was now on the verge of his highest promotion. The Chancellor Talbot died in February 1736, after five days’ illness, at the age of fifty-three.

An entry in Lord Hardwicke’s private journal gives a curious and characteristic account of his promotion. “On Monday the 14th of February, about five in the morning, died Charles Talbot, Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain. The same forenoon, being at the sittings in Westminster Hall, I received a letter from Sir Robert Walpole, desiring to speak with me on the event of that morning, and wishing that I would dine with him that day in private. I went accordingly, and after dinner he proposed the Great Seal to me in the king’s name. Thereupon I took occasion to state to him, that I was now in a quiet situation, which, by practice, was become easy to me; that I had no ambition to go higher; and, though I had the most grateful sense of his majesty’s goodness, desired to be left where I was.”

Sir Robert perfectly understood this “nolo episcopari” style, and pressed the appointment. We are a little ashamed for the delicacy of the future Chancellor; for he now told the minister, that the Chief Clerkship of the King’s Bench being likely to fall soon into his gift, which he might grant for two lives for the benefit of his family, he must have an equivalent! After some bargaining, Yorke offered to take the reversion of the Tellership of the Exchequer for his eldest son. Walpole objected, that the king “disliked reversions.” And well he might; for the Tellership of the Exchequer was said to have amounted (in subsequent times) to £40,000 a-year! The bargain was at length struck—the Tellership was given, and Hardwicke was Chancellor. A note in Horace Walpole’s Memoirs adds point to the transaction: it says that “Walpole, finding it difficult to make Hardwicke give up the Chief Justiceship, told him that, if he refused, he would give the Seals to Fazakerly. ‘What!’ exclaimed Hardwicke, ‘Fazakerly! he is a Tory, perhaps a Jacobite.’ ‘All very true,’ replied Walpole; ‘but if by one o’clock you do not accept my offer, Fazakerly, by two, becomes Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, and one of the stanchest Whigs in England!’”

The Chancellor, as a scholar and a man of the world, was consulted by his friends on occasional rules of life; and, in answer to a request of the Marchioness of Annandale to give his opinion on the course of education proper for her son, Hardwicke, in giving a detail of the studies proper for a nobleman, as classics, mathematics, law, &c., alludes to foreign travel.

He observes “that, in former times, the people of Britain were observed to return home with their affections more strongly engaged towards the well-tempered constitution and liberty of their own country, from having observed the misery resulting from the military governments abroad. But, by an unlucky reverse, it (now) sometimes happens that, from being taught to like the fashions and manners of foreign countries, people are led to have no aversion to their political institutions, and their methods of exercising civil power.”

He then adverts to the still more serious evil which our own generation feel every day:

“The Protestant religion being established here, is one great security, not only of our religious, but also of our civil liberty. That ocular demonstration of the gross superstitions and absurdities of Popery which travelling furnishes, was formerly thought to fix the mind in a more firm attachment to the former, and abhorrence of the latter.” He then adverts to the culpable change frequently wrought by foreign life on this wise and salutary feeling. “I fear the case is now somewhat otherwise; with this further ill consequence, that many of our young men, by a long interruption of the exercise of their own religion, become absolutely indifferent to all.”