A Royal Politician
By C. E. VULLIAMY IF King George III had been allowed by providence to lead the life he might so reasonably have desired—that of a plain country squire with a few good farms, a stable and a Workshop—he would have been a very happy, inconspicuous and useful man. He would have been able to indulge his delight in horses or dogs or a field of miraculous turnips. We may suppose that he would have retained the fun use of his ordinary, though respectable, faculties to the end of a cheerful and healthy existence. But he was called on to play the ,part of a king ; a part for which he considered himself eminently well qualified, but which he played incon- gruously and even disastrously ; a part in which he appears often as a buffoon and often as a tragic or pathetic figure. Only the bias of pure superstition can enable us to perceive in this homely king any qualities which are not extremely commonplace ; and even then it is not easy to ignore the Plain evidence of the royal face, inexorably preserved, like Other royal faces, in so many pictures, medals, coins, brazen images and waxworks, and in a more popular style on dishes, tea-pots, jugs and a great variety of mantelpiece ornament.
In order to uphold the royal prerogative, King George enclosed himself in a shell of unyielding obstinacy ; it was, indeed, his natural and inevitable defence, his necessary Protection, against intelligent or subtle adversaric3. He °PPosed, uncomprehending, the irresistible current of human affairs, until he finally sank into the total darkness of im- becility. It is quite useless to pretend that he was an ilnpressive monarch or a powerful ruler. He was a dull, honourable gentleman, kindly, simple, fussy over trifles, pompous in one place, awkwardly condescending in another, pottering ; a gentleman who might have been very lovable and amusing in private life, but who was totally incapable of supporting the full weight of a crown. We have therefore to make very considerable allowances, Both for character and for circumstance, when we are reading the letters of George III. Mr. Dobree's collection is not intended for the student ; it is definitely prepared for the casual reader. Those who wish to see the original. text, °haltered and entire, of the letters written during the critical Period between 1760 and 1783 will refer to. the great work at Sir John Fortescue. Indeed, Mr. Dobree admits quite frankly that he has tampered with the punctuation and has
This the spelling—I am quoting his own words.
his kind of thing, of course, is not only allowable, but eminently desirable, in a popular work. But we may perhaps venture to ask if Mr. Dobree has not occasionally gone too r when he indulges in the arbitrary use of capitals and italics, at variance with his quoted sources, or when he slips ill word on his own responsibility. It seems a pity, also, give up the extremely characteristic use of initial capitals. "e may perhaps doubt if Jesse is a sufficiently reliable authority, particularly when he himself is quoting from another printed source, as in the case of the King's letter (13 the Archbishop of Canterbury (Cornwallis), where the rtlial authority is 'a work so questionable as The Life and of Selina Countess of Huntingdon. Some of the taronological transpositions are a trifle disconcerting, and t"` must confess to being taken aback by Mr. Dobree's assurance Pat " nothing of importance occurred " between November, t775, and September, 1776: I should have been tempted ° Consider the Declaration of Independence as a matter of some interest, to say nothing of the evacuation of Boston 123' Howe, followed by the hasty dispatch of 18,000 Hessian
ps to America.
The Letters of King George III. Edited by Bellamy Dobree. (Cassell. 10s. Od.) Mr. Dobree has the great advantage of being able to take his King seriously, and so to give even his dullest letters an effect of importance. This makes him an ideal editor, facile and adroit in interpretation, lucid and energetic in the pro- vision of notes. Indeed, the notes are infinitely more amusing and more interesting than any of the letters, for they contain (as we should have expected) a vast amount of knowledge and a frosty sparkle of rather perverse brilliance. Mr. Dobree is wise in not attempting to solve the many problems relating to Bute ; he is less wise, perhaps, in passing so lightly over the Middlesex election—one of the most important events in English political history. In several passages we encounter startling euphemisms ; as, for instance, when Mr. Dobree placidly admits that the North administratioa had to be kept together by " a certain art." That is a very elegant way of describing wholesale, continuous bribery. The process of editorial smoothing has in many cases obscured the original effect of the letters, which arc frequently inco- herent and sometimes unintelligible. We find it impossible to avoid an occasional doubt, a doubt which can only be dispelled by reference to the" quoted source : Dobree or not Dobree ; that is the question.
But the general reader, for whom, after all, this volume is intended, will find the collection full of extraordinary interest. If some of the editor's admirable notes convey the idea that King George possessed a far greater degree of intelligence and of character than he did actually possess, that idea will be dissipated by the letters themselves. A good many of the papers are here printed for the first time, and if they do not illuminate history—for George was not an illuminator—they have a definite biographical value, especially those written in the later years of the King's life. It is of course true that most of these letters are political, revealing the King in his least favourable aspect. They show him catastrophically honest in his intention of being a king and a ruler, but they rarely show his amiability or simple charm. No such qualities, indeed, are likely to be revealed in political writings. But if • it were not for the allowance which has to be made for mental instability, it would be no easy matter to find excuses for the King's treatment of men who displeased him or to explain the paltry malevolence, the shocking insensibility, of certain references and remarks— particularly in the case of his references to Chatham. An attentive study of King George's letters to North will show, I think, a visible decline of royal confidence after 1778. The appearance of inflexibility, pathetically varied by appeals to the loyalty of the Minister, begins to have an effect of isolation. The King's personal influence in polities was undoubtedly shaken by the course of events in America ; and although he succeeded in breaking up the hateful Coalition in 1783 (by methods for which the term uncon- stitutional is far too polite), it would be less true to say that he brought William Pitt into power than it would be to say that he resigned himself and the affairs of the nation to the guidance of that astonishing and inhuman youth. Most of the readers of this book will find themselves chiefly interested, if I am not mistaken, in the letters relating to this critical period—from 1775 to 1788. Mr. Dobree's index is one of the most valuable and informative portions of his book. There is a useful list of authorities ; but I do not follow Mr. Dobree's reason for making separate references to Donne (who is out of date) and to the Roxburghe Club edition, where he might with far greater convenience have referred only to the six-volume Fortescue. Like the other volumes in this very attractive series, the book is elegantly produced.
Previous page
