When the Methuen Treaty was made, it was our object to excite every nation in Europe against the Bourbons. But I doubt the wisdom of persevering in this measure. If we took our wines and brandies from France, she would be under the necessity of taking large quantities of our manufactures in return. But there is another circumstance which deserves consideration: if we took wines and brandies from France, it would be extremely inconvenient to France to be at war with England: a large proportion of her population would be distressed by such a war; for wine and brandy are not only a manufacture in France; the growth of wine affects a great part of her agriculture. The principle of the commercial treaty with France was judicious. I regret that it could not have been extended further; but, perhaps, the jealousy of the mercantile interest in England rendered such an extension impracticable.

The great political measure of 1787 was the invasion of Holland by a Prussian army, with the concurrence of the British Government. The measure was attended with suc

cess: the expense to England amounted to no more than 350,000l. and it was applauded by the Opposition, which had at that time as its leader, a member of the Bentinck family. But I doubt the wisdom of this measure: it was extremely perilous; and if the influence which Austria at that time possessed in the French cabinet had not induced that government to neglect its obvious interests, it must have been followed by a general war, the burden of which would have fallen upon England.

During the latter part of the contest with America, those who were eager for continuing the war had chosen to commence hostilities against Holland: perhaps they had resolved on this from a reliance on their influence over the Stadtholder. In this reliance they were not disappointed: he betrayed his masters, and kept their fleets unemployed. On the re-establishment of peace, the Dutch felt strong resentment against the Stadtholder, and put some affronts upon him: it would have been wise in him to have submittted for a time to those humiliations; the displeasure of the Dutch nation

would have gradually subsided; but this did not suit the proud imperious mind of the Stadtholder's wife. She was sister to the King of Prussia, and had been educated in sentiments ill suited to a republic. Under the direction of Lord Malmsbury, the British minister at the Hague, a Prussian army invaded Holland. It is true they succeeded, but their robberies and plunder have never been forgotten by the Dutch; the remembrance of them destroyed all affection of the Dutch people to the family of the Stadtholder. The invasion of the Prussian army produced another bad consequence : it showed how easily Holland might be overrun; it destroyed her strength, by destroying her reputation for strength.

In the autumn, 1788, King George III. was, for the first time, afflicted with that malady which became constant during the last ten years of his life. I shall speak on this subject with much reluctance, because I am aware that my opinions are not the same with those of the generality of my countrymen, I love the magistracy of royalty, because I think it highly beneficial to

the people: it protects them from the usurpation of oligarchs, a government, of all others, the most oppressive. Oligarchy is also the government which Englishmen have the most reason to fear, for the proprietors and patrons of boroughs have already usurped a power which the law has forbid them to possess; if they are allowed to extend that power a little further, royalty, a house of lords, and a house of commons, may remain as splendid pageants, but the real efficient power will be in that usurping oligarchy, the patrons and proprietors of boroughs. I love royalty as a magistracy, not as a property. With these sentiments, I acknowledge that I thought that after the King's first seizure, he should never have been allowed to exercise the powers of royalty. Let me suppose that a chief justice of the King's Bench were afflicted with the same disease, and for the same period; would any man think that he ought to be replaced in the exercise of his office? Yet surely the judicious exercise of the magistracy of royalty, is of more importance to the country, than the judicious exercise of the powers of a chief justice. But these sentiments are

no longer fashionable. German principles have now brought us to consider royalty as property.

pre

I think the interregnum which took place during the King's illness was highly injurious to the country. I think the same of Mr. Pitt's proposal to establish regency in the Prince of Wales with curtailed rogatives. I regret that the minds of Englishmen have been accustomed to the idea; I fear that mischief may hereafter follow from it. But I will have done with reflections which I know will be odious: I will now speak of the matter historically.

Mr. Fox was out of England when the King was taken ill: Lord Thurlow the Chancellor, availed himself of this circumstance; he studiously sought intercourse with the Prince of Wales, that he might have an opportunity of conveying to him his sentiments on His Royal Highness's situation. He recommended to him to lie upon his oars, to show no impatience to assume the powers of royalty. of royalty. He pointed out to him, that, if the King's illness were