CHAP. CLXXXVI. The carried on without the intervention of Parliament. belief became general, which was verified by the event, that A D. 1810. his Majesty was now permanently disabled from personally performing the duties of his high office. Notwithstanding the democratic doctrine adopted in 1788, that on such an emergency the two Houses of Parliament were entitled to elect any individual at their pleasure as Regent, and to confer or withhold from him any of the prerogatives of the Crown, it was easily foreseen that the Heir Apparent would soon be to all practical purposes upon the throne. After a little vacillation, in consequence of a supposed revolutionary movement in the country at the commencement of the war, he had remained true to the political party to which he attached himself in his youth; and at this very time he was living on terms of the most familiar intimacy with the leaders of it — talking to them of the distribution of the great offices of state among them as soon as they were his to bestow. Erskine in particular was in high favour with him, and when they met, his Royal Highness, without loss of dignity, laying aside court etiquette, addressed him by the endearing appellative of TOM. If the Ex-Chancellor again desired the Great Seal, it seemed within his reach. Erskine's opinion on the right of the Heir Apparent. Upon the question as to the mode of proceeding to supply the deficiency in the exercise of the royal functions, he laid down what I consider the true doctrine- that the two Houses, as the states of the realm, should find and declare the fact of the incapacity of the Sovereign, and that then the Heir Apparent, by right of birth, should carry on the government while that incapacity continues. He said, “Not having been in Parliament in the year 1788, I had not then an opportunity publicly to declare my sentiments upon the subject, but I considered it most anxiously and deliberately, and I came to the conclusion that the power of election, arrogated to themselves by the two Houses of Parliament, is wholly inconsistent with the principles of hereditary monarchy, and may lead to all the horrors of civil war. There is no analogy between this case and the Revolution of 1688; for then the throne was vacant, and the two Houses were driven by ne CLXXXVI. cessity to fill it by calling in a new dynasty. But the throne CHAP. is not now vacant, and the two Houses have no jurisdiction to assume or to change the royal authority." This short A.D. 1810. statement seems absolutely conclusive against the proceeding by bill; for that proceeding cannot take place without the direct assumption of the royal authority, however strongly this usurpation may be disavowed. The Great Seal is not the organ of the two Houses, but of the King only. The Great Seal is used in judicial proceedings by virtue of the King's general authority; but for such solemn acts of state as opening Parliament, or giving the royal assent to bills, it is the symbol of the King's mind and intention, signified by the indispensable sign-manual. To employ the Great Seal for such purposes by the two Houses of Parliament is, therefore, a manifest violation of the Constitution. The proposed plan assumes the power of the two Houses to exercise the royal power during the King's incapacity-by which evil men may introduce confusion not to terminate with one generation. This is no visionary fancy; the Constitution has fallen a sacrifice to the principle of separating the political power from the natural person of the sovereign, and may again lead to the levy of armies in his name to fight against him."* poses re strictions When the restrictions to be put upon the Regent came to He opbe discussed, Erskine strenuously opposed them, contending that they were wholly unnecessary for the purpose of ensuring on the Regent. his Majesty's resumption of his royal authority on his recovery; and he denounced the prohibition against promotions in the peerage as particularly disrespectful to that House, because they conveyed an insinuation "that their Lordships were ready to barter their allegiance against additional balls or strawberry-leaves for their coronets." as to On the clause respecting the patronage of the household, Question the Government was beaten by a small majority in the com- proxies. mittee, where proxies could not be used; and proxies being called on the "Report" to reverse this decision, the question arose, whether, under the circumstances, the right of voting * 18 Parl. Deb. 72. CLXXXVI. A.D. 1810. CHAP by proxy at all existed. Erskine contended that their Lordships were not sitting as a House of Parliament under the sanction of the King, so that the custom of voting by proxy did not apply; and, at any rate, that the custom, being always under the control of the House, ought not to be permitted on this occasion; "for what could be more calculated to bring it into utter contempt, and to cover it with the derision of the public, than to see a most momentous question decided by a majority of the Lords present, at the end of long arguments, and in ten minutes afterwards to see that decision reversed by the very same assembly, without an additional living man coming into the House, by the proxies of absent lords, who, had they been present and heard the arguments, would very probably have confirmed the decision which they were supposed to condemn." The Earl of Liverpool was so much ashamed, or so much afraid, of an adverse division, that he withdrew his call for proxies, and the clause, as amended in the committee, stood part of the bill.* Clause to exclude Lord El. don from the Queen's council. Another violent altercation took place on Lord King's motion, that Lord Eldon should be excluded from being a member of the Queen's council to assist her in taking care of the King's person, - on the ground that he had frequently obtained the King's signature for commissions when his Majesty, on account of mental disease, was under the care of physicians, who declared that he was incompetent to act. Erskine did not speak on this very delicate topic, but he voted for the motion, and joined in a strong protest against its rejection †, setting forth the instances in which this practice had been followed, and concluding with the allegation, that "John Lord Eldon, having so conducted himself, is not a person to whom the sacred trust of acting as one of her Majesty's council in the care of his Majesty's person, and in the discharge of the other most important duties committed to the said council, can with propriety or safety be committed.” The Regency Act having received the royal assent by means of the "phantom," or sham commission ordered by the two Houses of Parliament, in the King's name, the Whigs † 18 Parl. Deb. 1086. 18 Parl. Hist. 786. 805. 976. СНАР. CLXXXVI. The Regent con tinues the Tory Mi. nisters in office. expected to be in office next morning; but, instead of a summons to attend the Regent at Carlton House, they received certain intelligence that his Royal Highness had written Feb. 1811. a letter to Mr. Perceval, intimating that "he felt it incumbent upon him, in the present juncture, not to remove from their stations those whom he found there, as his Majesty's official servants." An attempt was made to soften this disappointment, by holding out a hope, which proved to be illusory, that, as soon as the period of restrictions had expired, and the Regent could freely follow his own inclination, he would get rid of the Ministers with whom he had been constantly at enmity, and by whom he considered himself personally ill used, for the purpose of forming a close and permanent connection with his early friends. Erskine was not deluded by any such prospects, and soon perceived that his old patron had now contracted a mortal aversion to the Whigs and their principles, and was as firmly resolved as ever his father had been to prevent them from obtaining power. CHAPTER CLXXXVII. CHAP. A D. 1811. Erskine withdraws from public life, and becomes an idler. CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD ERSKINE TILL THE GENERAL FROM this time our Ex-Chancellor seems to have renounced all CLXXXVII. thoughts of official employment, and to have become rather indifferent about the estimation in which he was held as a public man. He had paid very little attention to the judicial business of the House of Lords since his resignation, and now he was seldom present at its political discussions. Giving up all professional reading, and without any serious occupation, he led the idle life of a man of wit and pleasure about town, spreading hilarity and mirth wherever he appeared, seemingly cheerful and happy himself,--but spending many listless and melancholy hours in private, -sometimes mixing in scenes which his friends heard of with pain, and which brought upon him distress as well as discredit. account of one of his dinners. It He as yet retained his beautiful villa at Hampstead, near Caen Wood, called "Evergreen Hall." Here he gave gay parties, of which he was the life by his good-humour and whimsicalities. We have a lively description of one of these from Sir Samuel Romilly, to whose gravity they were not Romilly's quite suitable: "I dined to-day at Lord Erskine's. was what might be called a great Opposition dinner: the party consisted of the Duke of Norfolk, Lord Grenville, Lord Grey, Lord Holland, Lord Ellenborough, Lord Lauderdale, Lord Henry Petty, Thomas Grenville, Pigott, Adam, Edward Morris (Erskine's son-in-law), and myself. This was the whole company, with the addition of one person; but that one, the man most unfit to be invited to such a party that could have been found, if such a man had been anxiously looked for. It was no other than Mr. Pinkney, the American |