TO THE COUNTESS OF GLOUCESTER.

MADAM,

THE most proper mark of respect that I can show to the Duke or to your Royal Highness on a subject of such momentous importance, is to use as few words as possible. I am not wise enough to advise, much less to decide upon it; nor do I know a man in England who I think could advise the Duke upon it with good effect. All I can do is to suggest what comes into my mind on the most intense thought and coolest reflection, submitting my sentiments, with the utmost deference, to his Royal Highness's judgment.

No man living has a higher opinion of the Duke of Richmond's unequalled honour and integrity than I have. I respect his spirit and abilities, and am as sure as I can be of any thing that he is incapable of an unworthy action. Still I should not recommend him for the mover, if the question is resolved upon. The D. of K. is particularly unwelcome to his Majesty; and the measure will be thought the more hostile if proposed by his Grace.

The question itself seems to me most unlikely of success. The Ministers will plead that when the King, however necessitous, does not ask for an increase of income, from the present distressed situation of the country, it cannot be reasonable to augment the revenue of his brothers. An increase of the King's own revenue might be supposed to include the charge of his own children; but an addition to that of his brothers, would not lessen the burden of his own issue. And it would infallibly be urged that so numerous a progeny as his Majesty's, makes it imprudent to establish a precedent of such large revenues for each Prince of the Royal Family.

In any case, so great is the power of the Crown, and so infamous the servility of Parliament, that there cannot be the shadow of hope that an increase could be obtained for the two Royal Dukes against the King's inclination.

But a question moved and lost, as undoubtedly this would be, could only make His Royal Highness's case worse, if possible, than it is at present. His Royal Highness's father, though heir-apparent to an old King, could not obtain an increase of income when parties ran high, and were almost equally divided. His Royal Highness, the Duke of Gloucester, can hold out neither hopes nor rewards, and, in the very low ebb of opposition, would obtain scarce any support. When so few pay common respect by waiting on him, though not discountenanced for it, would they vote for him? no, not all that now pay their duty to him.

The question moved and lost would change the state of the case to His Royal Highness's disadvantage. His treatment may now be thought hard. When he should have had recourse to opposition, which a parliamentary application would be called, the courtiers

would term it a hostile measure, and thus claim a sanction for their servility, by affecting to support offended majesty.

The King himself would then too plead that he only acted by the opinion of Parliament, who did not think it reasonable to increase the income of the two Princes. And the most moderate Ministers, if any such there are, who may have wished a reconciliation between the King and his brothers, will then oppose it, as concluding that, by voting against them, they have made the two royal dukes their personal enemies.

Thus every door to a reconciliation in the royal family would be shut, and no advantage gained. On the contrary, His Royal Highness would only let the world know how few friends stand by him. When so few even of the opposition wait on him, I doubt whether they would be heartier friends to his interest.

These seem to me insurmountable difficulties. duous for me to chalk out an alternative.

It is still more ar

I presumed to tell your Royal Highness, madam, when you first mentioned this great point to me, that I thought the first step in wisdom to be taken, was to engage the favour of mankind to the Duke's cause by showing he had done every thing rather than act in what might be called a hostile manner. His Royal Highness will, I flatter myself, forgive me if I use even an improper term. Will it be too free-spoken in so important a moment to say, that previous to an ap plication to Parliament, which should in prudence be the last resort, I would recommend even that application, if the Duke could show he had tried every method of softening his Majesty's displeasure! Nobody knows so well as His Royal Highness how to mix dignity with propriety. Could not His Royal Highness, madam, blend those two in a representation of his youthful error, of his concern for having afflicted an affectionate brother and king, of tenderness for a wife, and a sweet little innocent princess, calling on His Majesty's piety for forgiveness, and by touching his heart on his own conjugal and parental affections; and above all by stating his own anxious cares on the incertitude of the fate of persons so dear to him as your Royal Highness and the infant Princess, his daughter? These, madam, are noble motives, and would justify a tender and fraternal ap plication to his Majesty's heart, and would distress it far differently from a question in Parliament. They would engage the compassion of the disinterested world, and in the last resort would corroborate in the strongest manner all arguments in Parliament, where it would certainly be asked if his Royal Highness had used any intercession with the King, his brother. When the Duke had tried all other me thods in vain, such application could not be condemned; and the preference of all softer methods first would redound to His Royal Highness's honour.

Having said thus much, madam, I think my conscience and duty oblige me to add, that I think it indispensably incumbent on those who have the honour to be related to your Royal Highness, to give you

no advice but such as may tend to repair the breaches which the Duke's tenderness for you has occasioned in the Royal Family. The good of his Royal Highness calls on you and on us to consult his welfare in the first instance. You have always told me how desirous you are of sacrificing yourself for him. I know the uprightness of your heart, madam, and I know you spoke truth. Advise him to whatever is most for his benefit and credit. Do your duty by him, and trust to a just God for your reward. In the presence of that God I have given you the best advice in my power. I am sure I have not disobliged you by my freedom: I hope I have not offended his Royal Highness, but I declare on my conscience and honour, that I know not what better advice to give, and sign it with my name, as the firm opinion of, madam, your Royal Highness's Most faithful and devoted humble servant,

Jan. 27, 1774.

TO GEORGE SELWYN.

HORACE WAlpole.

Paris, Sept. 16, 1775.

MR. BRODERICK brought me your letter yesterday, and I told him, as you may be sure, how glad I shall be to be of any use to him. I shall be of little, I believe, as his object is to see things, not persons. Madame Du Deffand would have been more pleased with your message, which I delivered immediately, if she had had greater faith in it: yet, when Crawford and I come so often, how can she doubt her power of attraction? If possible, she is more worth visiting than ever: so far am I from being ashamed of coming hither at my age, that I look on myself as wiser than one of the Magi, when I travel to adore this star in the East. The star and I went to the Opera last night, and when we came from Madame de Valière's, at one in the morning, it wanted to drive about the town, because it was too early to set. To be sure, you and I have dedicated our decline to very different occupations. You nurse a little girl of four years old, and I rake with an old woman of fourscore?* N'importe; we know many sages that take great pains to pass their time with less satisfaction.

We have both one capital mortification; have not you? That a great-grand-daughter of Madame de Sevigné pretends, for it is not certain, that she has been debauched by ancient Richelieu,† and half the world thinks that she is more guilty of forgery. The memoirs of the two parties are half as voluminous as those of Monsieur du Guines, and more are to appear.

* At this period Madame du Deffand had entered into her 79th year.-ED. The Marshal Duc de Richelieu, so celebrated for his wit, his gallantries, and military talents, was at this period in his eightieth year. He died in August, 1788, at the age of ninety-two.

You shall have some royal prints. New fashions in dress, furniture, baubles, I have seen none. Feathers are waning, and almost confined to filles and foreigners. I found out an Englishwoman at the Opera last night by her being covered with plumes and no rouge; so well our country women contrive to display their virtue!

I do not tell you about Mons. Turgot's regulations and reforma tions, because you care no more about their patrie than your own; but you shall hear a bon-mot of Madame du Deffand. Mons. Turgot has begun several reforms and retracted them: she said,-Dans le bon vieux tems on reculoit pour mieux sauter, au lieu que Mons. Turgot saute pour mieux reculer.

Of the house of Harrington I know as much as you do. Lady Barrymore is here † and my Lord and Lady Harriot ‡ are coming: the first is excessively admired. Lady Mary Coke, Henry Grenville and his wife, Crawford, Lord Coleraine, and Lord Duncannon, are here: the latter will carry this letter. There are many other English; but I did not come hither to get acquaintance of that sort. Madame du Deffand has filled up her vacancies, and given me enough new French. With one of them you would be delighted, a Madame de Marchais. She is not perfectly young, has a face like a Jew pedlar, her person is about four feet, her head about six, and her coiffure about ten. Her forehead, chin, and neck, are whiter than a miller's; and she wears more festoons of natural flowers than all the figurantes at the Opera. Her eloquence is still more abundant, her attentions exuberant. She talks volumes, writes folios-I mean in billets; presides over the Académie, inspires passions, and has not time enough to heal a quarter of the wounds she gives. She has a house in a nutshell, that is fuller of invention than a fairy tale; her bed stands in the middle of the room, because there is no other space that would hold it; it is surrounded by such a perspective of looking glasses, that you may see all that passes in it from the first ante-chamber. But you will see her if you come in spring, which you will not do, unless you bring Mie Mie and Raton, and one or two of Lord Carlisle's children; and that you will be afraid of doing, for Madame du Deffand has got a favourite dog, that will bite all their noses off, and

*The French Minister of Finance.-ED.

+Emilia, third daughter of William, second Earl of Harrington, and wife of Richard, sixth Earl of Barrymore. She died in 1780. Walpole writes to Genera! Conway on the 6th of this month: "Lady Barrymore has taken a house. She will be glutted with conquests: I never saw any body so much admired. I doubt her poor little head will be quite overset."-ED.

Lady Henrietta Stanhope, fourth daughter of Lord Harrington, married, in March, 1776, Thomas, fourth Lord Foley. She died in 1781.-ED.

. Henry Grenville, brother to Richard, first Earl Temple, had recently been ambassador at Constantinople. He married, October 11, 1757, Margaret, sister of John Hodgkinson Banks, Esq.-ED.

John Hanger, second Lord Coleraine in Ireland. He died 20 November, 1794. The well-known Tonton bequeathed by Madame du Deffand to Horace Walpole, and so frequently alluded to in his letters. Walpole writes to General Con

was very near tearing out one of Lady Barrymore's eyes the other night. Adieu! I shall see you by the middle of October the 21st,

Yours, &c.

P.S. Duncannon is not gone, but I can send my letter to-morrow, and shall.

To George Augustus Selwyn, Esq., in Stanhope Street, Berkeley Square, London.

TO THE DUKE OF GLOUCESTER.

January 17, 1775.

SIR,

YOUR Royal Highness's commands are so much a law to me that, though deeply conscious of the inequality of my understanding to so arduous a question, and full of fears lest a word should drop from me that should lead your Royal Highness into any step prejudicial to yourself, or to the Princesses, your daughters. I venture to lay my thoughts at your Royal Highness's feet; only entreating, if they appear to have any weight in them, that your Royal Highness would not adopt them till they have been approved by better judgments

than mine.

Before I speak, sir, on the question whether your Royal Highness should take any measure in Parliament for procuring a provision for your family, permit me, sir, to state an apprehension that has struck me, from the conversation I had the honour of having with you, the last time I saw you. Your Royal Highness expressed doubts whether there might not be some idea of calling the legitimacy of your children in question. Alas! sir, if it is possible that any human mind should have such an idea, would not a motion in Parliament be the likeliest method of bringing that horrid intention into execution? The Parliament is so infamous, that it could, I firmly believe, be brought to lend its assistance to any thing. As your Royal Highness's hint of carrying any part of your cause thither, has not alarmed-may one not suppose that, not alarming, it pleases? What will either House not do? what has either refused to do? Consider, sir, how many would be glad to colour over their mean desertion or neglect

way, on the eighth of September, 1775: "Tonton grows the greater favourite the more people he devours. As I am the only person who dare correct him, I have already insisted on his being confined in the Bastile every day after five o'clock. The other night he flew at Lady Barrymore's face, and I thought would have torn her eye out; but it ended in biting her finger. She was terrified; she fell into tears. Madame Du Deffand, who has too much parts not to see every thing in its true light, perceiving that she had not beaten Tonton half enough, immediately told us a story of a lady, whose dog, having bitten a piece out of a gentleman's leg, the tender dame, in a great fright, cried out, "Won't it make my dog sick?" Collective Edition of Walpole's Letters, vol. v. p. 428.