FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170  
171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   >>   >|  
Lord Thurlow.] [Footnote 91: "The Grenville Papers," iii., 374. It may, however, be remarked, as tending to throw some doubt on Mr. Grenville's statement, that Lord Campbell asserts that "Lord Mansfield, without entering into systematic opposition, had been much alienated from the court during Lord Rockingham's first administration."--_Lives of the Chief-justices_, ii., 468.] [Footnote 92: Vol. ii., pp. 229-232.] [Footnote 93: It will be seen hereafter that this doctrine was admitted in the fullest degree by Sir Robert Peel in the winter of 1884, when he admitted that his acceptance of office made him alone responsible for the dismissal of Lord Melbourne, though, in fact, he was taken entirely by surprise by the King's act, being in Italy at the time.] [Footnote 94: Lord John Russell, in his "Memorials of Fox" (ii., 253), affirms that "Lord Temple's act was probably known to Pitt;" but Lord Macaulay, in his "Essay on Pitt" (p. 326), fully acquits Pitt of such knowledge, saying that "he could declare, with perfect truth, that, if unconstitutional machinations had been employed, he was no party to them."] [Footnote 95: On Lord Effingham's motion, in condemnation of some of the proceedings of the Commons, which was carried February 4, 1784, by 100 to 53.] [Footnote 96: "Parliamentary History," xxiv., 383-385--debate of January 20, 1784.] [Footnote 97: _Ibid_, p. 283--January 12.] [Footnote 98: _Ibid_., pp. 251-257.] [Footnote 99: "Parliamentary History," xxiv., 478--February 2.] [Footnote 100: _Ibid_., p. 663.] [Footnote 101: "Parliamentary History," xxiv., 687, 695, 699.] [Footnote 102: The numbers were 201 to 189. The week before, on Mr. Powys's motion for a united and efficient administration, the majority had been 20--197 to 177. On a motion made by Mr. Coke, February 3, the majority had been 24--211 to 187. At the beginning of the struggle the majorities had been far larger--232 to 143 on Fox's motion for a committee on the state of the nation, January 12.] [Footnote 103: 191 to 190.] [Footnote 104: From December 19, when Pitt accepted office, to March 24, when the Parliament was dissolved.] [Footnote 105: "Memorials and Correspondence of C.J. Fox," by Earl Russell, ii., 229, 248.] [Footnote 106: _Ibid_., p. 280.] [Footnote 107: That of April, 1831, after the defeat of the Government on General Gascoyne's amendment] [Footnote 108: Lord Macaulay, "Miscellaneous Essays," ii., 33
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170  
171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Footnote

 

motion

 

January

 

February

 
Parliamentary
 
History
 

administration

 

admitted

 

Russell

 

Macaulay


Memorials

 

Grenville

 

office

 

majority

 

united

 

numbers

 

debate

 
carried
 

beginning

 

Parliament


dissolved
 
Correspondence
 

amendment

 

Miscellaneous

 

Essays

 

Gascoyne

 

General

 
defeat
 

Government

 

accepted


Commons

 
struggle
 

majorities

 
larger
 

December

 

committee

 
nation
 
efficient
 

justices

 

Rockingham


Robert

 

winter

 

degree

 

fullest

 

doctrine

 

alienated

 
remarked
 

tending

 
Thurlow
 

Papers