on the 12th June, his Lordship said, "I came to the subject unfettered in every way; not an individual was named for a Seal; and no place was pointed out even for myself." How then, my Lords, could I take it for granted that his Majesty had nominated the Right Honourable gentleman to be his First Minister, only because the Right Honourable gentleman informed me that his Majesty had signified to him his commands to lay before his Majesty a plan of arrangements for the reconstruction of the administration? It is obvious that I could not give the Right Honourable gentleman an answer to his proposition, that I should be one of the Cabinet, till I should ascertain who was to be the Prime Minister; and the necessity of ascertaining this point was my only motive for asking the question. I will now show from the best authority possible (that of the Right Honourable gentleman himself) that the question might be asked without offence. On the of May, 1812, Mr. Perceval having just then been assassinated, Lord Liverpool waited upon the Right Honourable gentleman, by command of his Majesty, then Prince Regent, to invite the Right Honourable gentleman to become a member of his Majesty's councils. The first question which it appears from a memorandum drawn by the Right Honourable gentleman himself, which the Right Honourable gentleman asked was, Who is to be the First Lord of the Treasury? and it does not appear that the noble Lord rebuked the Right Honourable gentleman for asking that question. The negotiation failed for other reasons not worth discussing at present, excepting to observe that the Right Honourable gentleman then thought that the influence of the head of the government was likely to be paramount in the discussion of the Roman Catholic question. Surely, my Lords, I could not merit a rebuke for asking the Right Honourable gentleman, in 1827, the same question which he, under nearly similar circumstances, asked Lord Liverpool in 1812. But, my Lords, there is another view of the case, which ought to be taken. Although I was rebuked on the 11th for asking this question on the 10th, and was told that the practice was so generally understood that it did not occur to the Right Honourable gentleman to add that his Majesty did not intend to depart from the usual course of proceeding on such occasions; the fact is, that the Right Honourable gentleman was not appointed his Majesty's minister till the afternoon of the 12th, according to what he has stated himself in another place. Indeed, my Lords, it appears very clearly, from the Right Honourable gentleman's letter to me of the 11th, that till he had laid my letter of the 10th before his Majesty he had not been appointed his minister. If he had, he might, without reference to his Majesty, have stated the fact with as much of rebuke as he might think proper to use. I cannot believe that the Right Honourable gentleman laid my letter of the 10th, and his answer of the 11th, before his Majesty, in order to cover the rebuke which this answer contained with his Majesty's sacred name and protection. I say it unfeignedly, that I believe the Right Honourable gentleman is as incapable of doing so as I believe I am myself. My Lords, the conclusion is obvious, the step of laying these letters before his Majesty must have been taken, because, in fact, the Right Honourable gentleman was not his Majesty's minister at the moment he received my question, as appears indeed quite clearly from his own statement in another place. Upon the whole, then, I considered when I received that letter of the 11th, that my situation, in relation both to his Majesty and the Right Honourable gentleman, was so altered, as that not thinking it proper, for the reasons stated in my letter of the 11th, to remain in the Cabinet, I did not think I could continue in command of the army with advantage to his Majesty's service. If I was hasty in coming to this decision, or the decision was founded in error, I ought to have been informed. I had always been on the best terms of goodwill and confidence with all my colleagues; and I believe there was nobody who enjoyed more of the confidence, even of the Right Honourable gentleman himself, than I did. I would appeal to the noble Lords (the ministers present) whether I ever made difficulties, or ever acted otherwise than with a view to accommodate differences of opinion. Then, my Lords, if I took a hasty or intemperate view of this case, I ask them why they did not come forward and render me the service, which I had more than once rendered to others, of representing to me that I was wrong? [722.] Such a step has never been taken by them; and the reason is obvious, it did not suit the Right Honourable gentleman's views that I should remain in command of the army unless I should belong to his Cabinet. I beg pardon for troubling your Lordships at such length upon a question personal to myself; and I return my best thanks for the attention with which you have listened to what I have had occasion to address to you. Viscount Palmerston* to Field Marshal the Duke of Wellington. War Office, 2nd May, 1827. MY DEAR LORD, New Street, Spring Gardens, 2nd May, 1827. In reply to your letter respecting the proper mode of accomplishing the Duke of Wellington's resignation as Commander-in-Chief, I lose no time in stating that an office held by Patent during the King's pleasure may be vacated either by the grant of a new Patent to another officer, or by a simple act of revocation signed by his Majesty, or by a surrender of the office by deed, under the hand and seal of the patentee, if it be his Majesty's pleasure to accept it. For the last, no formal words are essential, but it will be best to prepare the instrument in the accustomed manner. For which purpose if you do not countermand me, I will take your letter as authority to direct the clerk in the Patent Office, Mr. Dealtry, to prepare a deed of resignation in the usual form, and without delay. I am, my dear Lord, yours faithfully, J. SCARLETT. To Viscount Palmerston. London, 3rd May, 1827. MY DEAR LORD PALMERSTON, * Secretary-at-War. send it to me; and I beg you to return me his Majesty's acceptance of it, and in the mean time I shall have no objection to confirm any court-martial, or to perform any other act which may be required. You may also rely upon me at all times to do everything in my power to maintain the order, discipline, and subordination of the army, and to assist you in any way in which you may require my assistance. Ever, &c., Sir George Murray to Field Marshal the Duke of Wellington. MY DEAR LORD, Dublin, 3rd May, 1827. I did not trouble you with a letter of congratulation when you were appointed to the chief command of the army, because I then anticipated having an early opportunity of seeing you; and I was satisfied you would, at all events, give me full credit for the same sentiments with which I had witnessed every foregoing step of elevation to which you had attained. I will not, however, allow any delay to take place in telling you with what sincere regret I have received the intimation of your resignation. I am sorry for it, on account of its withdrawing you from a high situation which I am sure you would have discharged in a most distinguished manner; and also on account of the apprehensions I entertain that the change will prove very injurious to that branch of the public service. It is impossible, I believe, that his Majesty can have all the details of the military business which passed through the Commander-in-Chief's office brought under his own immediate notice; and I much fear that in a State, the government of which is constituted as ours is, abuses very detrimental to the army will gradually creep in, unless there be a vigilant and powerful guardian appointed to watch and to oppose them. I know nothing of the political causes which have led to the present changes. I have been very little of a politician; and it is possible that my opinions upon some questions, if I were called upon to express them, might not have an exact concurrence with yours. But in whatever situation you may be placed, my personal feelings towards you can never alter. They have been founded upon long experience of your friendship, upon a knowledge of your great qualities, which is the more fixed and certain because it had begun to be formed before you had mounted to so great a height as you have since reached; and because, even after that had taken place, I had the best opportunities of being a very close observer of them; and, lastly, because I believe there is no one who either sets a greater value upon your services to the country, or who can estimate more truly how much they are exclusively attributable to your own character and talents. I remain always, my dear Lord, most sincerely yours, G. MURRAY. Lord Ashley to Field Marshal the Duke of Wellington. MY DEAR DUKE, Thursday, 3rd May, 1827. You have in so many instances shown me such kind attention and friendship, that I can hardly look upon myself as taking too great a liberty when I venture to express the enthusiastic delight with which I heard your manly and impressive speech of yesterday evening. It seemed to me that whatever there is open, true, honourable, and dignified, was set forth in the simplicity of your justification, and you would not think this a mere compliment on my part if you could have seen how deeply I felt it. I may perhaps be going rather far in assuming a kind of intimacy by writing to you thus unreservedly, but the fact is, that I have, as an Englishman, great gratitude for your public services, and as an individual, for your frequent kindnesses. I am, my dear Duke, with sincerest respect, very truly yours, ASHLEY. The Right Hon. George Canning to Field Marshal the Duke of Wellington. MY DEAR DUKE OF WELLINGTON, Downing Street, 5th May, 1827. I have read the report of your Grace's speech in the House of Lords, from which I learn, in confirmation of rumours (hitherto incredible to me), that your resignation is attributed by you in part, at least, to the letters which I addressed to your Grace on the 10th and 11th of last month. As I am sure that the misrepresentations with which the statements recorded in the newspapers abound must have been involuntary, I offer to your Grace some explanations upon them, without any apprehension that the motives of my doing so should be mistaken. In the first place, you are made to say, "I was not desired by the Right Honourable gentleman to come, nor was I referred to anybody for explanation. To me the Right Honourable gentleman neither came nor sent, but I have since heard that explanations were given to others of our colleagues. The Right Honourable gentleman either invited all to call upon him, or else he waited upon them, or sent a friend." Now this is entirely an error. I received the King's commands to form an administration so late in the afternoon of Tuesday, the 10th, that (the day fixed for the adjournment of Parliament being Thursday the 12th) I had not an instant to lose in proceeding to the execution of those commands. Lord Granville, Mr. Huskisson, and Mr. Planta happening to be at my office when I returned from the King, I requested Lord Granville to convey to Lord Harrowby, Mr. Huskisson to Lord Melville and Mr. Wynn, and Mr. Planta to Mr. Robinson verbally the same announcement which I addressed, at the same time, in writing to Lord Bathurst, to Lord Westmorland, to Lord Bexley, and to your Grace. I wrote also to the Lord Chancellor to ask leave to call upon his Lordship in the evening, and I wrote to Mr. Peel to ask him to call here; but * The Earl of Shaftesbury, K.G. |