* I wish to acknowledge the permission of the marquess of Bute to consult and cite the Bute MSS at Mount Stuart (hereafter Bute MSS); the permission of the earl Fitzwilliam, earl Fitzwilliam's Wentworth Estates Company and the Sheffield City Librarian to consult the Wentworth-Fitzwilliam MSS and the permission of the Hon. Charles Strutt to consult the Strutt MSS at Terling Place. I also wish to thank Miss Catharine Armet, the archivist at Mount Stuart, for her kindness, help and co-operation, and my research supervisor Professor Plumb who read the drafts of this paper and provided most helpful advice and criticism.

¹ The relations between the king, Bute and Pitt can be followed in Taylor, W. Stanhope and Pringle, J. H. (ed.), Correspondence of William Pitt, Earl of Chatham (4 vols., London, 1840), I, 156–8, 169–71, 193–4;Google ScholarSedgwick, Romney, ‘Letters from William Pitt to Bute’, in Pares, Richard and Taylor, A. J. P. (ed.), Essays Presented to Sir Lewis Namier (London, 1956), pp. 108–66;Google ScholarNamier, L. B., England in the Age of the American Revolution (2nd edn., London, 1963), pp. 93–7.Google Scholar

² Boswell, James, Papers, Private, from Malahide Castle, in the collection of R. H. Isham; prepared for the press by G. Scott (and F. A. Pottle), and now first printed (18 vols., privately printed, 1928–1934), IX, 34–5;Google ScholarWalpole, Horace, Memoirs of the reign of George II, ed. Holland, Lord (3 vols., London, 1846), II, 204–5.Google Scholar

³ The alliance and friendship between Henry Fox, a man noted for his skills in political jobbery with the scrupulous Bute who found the art of distributing the ‘loafs and fishes … most repugnant’ (Bute to J. Campbell, 30 Jan. 1763, Bute MSS) is somewhat surprising but - perhaps united by the onslaught upon them both in the press - they remained faithful to one another and were always ready to acknowledge each other's honesty and mutual regard. (Bute to Campbell, 18 Nov. 1763, Bute MSS; Smith, W. J. (ed.), The Grenville Papers: being the correspondence of R. Grenville, Earl Temple, and the Rt. Hon. G. Grenville, their friends and contemporaries (4 vols., London, 1852–1853), II, 487–8;Google ScholarWalpole, Horace, Memoirs of the reign of King George the Third, ed. Marchant, Sir Denis Le (4 vols., London, 1845), II, 1).Google Scholar

⁴ The term is taken from the Prologue of The Butiad, or Political Register; being a Supplement to the British Antidote to Caledonian Poison (London, 1763),Google Scholar no pagination. For attacks on Bute in the 1770s see, inter alia, Almon, John, A Letter to Lord Bute (London, 1771);Google ScholarA Political Paradox (London, 1777);Google ScholarThe Favourite; a Character from the Life. Addressed to the Sovereign Minion of the Times, on the much-lamented Death of the Patriotic Earl of Chatham (London, 1778);Google ScholarHalsey, , ‘Impolitical Prints; the American Revolution as Pictured by contemporary English Caricaturists’, Bulletin of the New York Public Library (1939), p. 809.Google Scholar An unfortunate misunderstanding in 1778 between Sir James Wright and Dr Addington (better known as the physician of the younger Pitt who prescribed his patient a daily bottle of port) made it appear that Bute wanted to supplant North by the ageing Chatham and revived the ‘mouth of Hydra malice and venom’ against the favourite. (Wortley-Stuart, V., A Prime Minister and his son, from the correspondence of the 3rd Earl of Bute and of the Hon. Sir C. Stuart (London, 1925), p. 141.)Google Scholar The whole incident can be followed in B.M. Add. MSS 41,357, passim and in the two pamphlets written on the affair: An Authentic Account of the Part taken by the late Earl of Chatham in a Transaction which passed in the beginning of the Year 1778 (London, 1778);Google Scholar [Sir James Wright], Another Account of a Transaction which passed in the Beginning of the Year 1778 (London, 1778).Google Scholar

⁵ [John Almon], An Address to the Interior Cabinet (London, 1782);Google ScholarThe True State of the Question Stated (London, 1784);Google ScholarGeorge, M. D. (ed.), Catalogue of Prints and Personal Satires Preserved in the Department of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum, vol. v (London, 1935), nos. 5831, 5961, 5970, 5982, 6005, 6033, 6212.Google Scholar

⁶ Namier, , England, pp. 120–70, 283–418;Google ScholarSedgwick, Romney, Letters from George III to Bute, 1756–1766 (London, 1939);Google ScholarDobree, Bonamy (ed.), Chesterfield's Letters (6 vols., London, 1932), VI 2678.Google Scholar Although Sedgwick's editing is exemplary it should not be regarded as definitive. There are over 400 letters and notes from George to Bute covering the years c. 1756–65 in the Bute MSS in the Cardiff Public Library (hereafter Bute MSS (Cardiff) ) which were unlocated when Sedgwick published his edition.

⁷ Wortley-Stuart, , A Prime Minister and his son;Google ScholarLovat-Fraser, J. A., John Stuart, Earl of Bute (Cambridge, 1912).Google Scholar

⁸ Pares, Richard, King George III and the Politicians (Oxford, 1953), pp. 100–9.Google Scholar

⁹ See the figures given in Smith, William Anderson, Anglo-Colonial Society and the Mob, 1740–775 (Claremont Graduate School and University Center, unpub. Ph.D., 1965), p. 30.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Thomas Nuthall to Lady Chatham, 12 Nov. 1761, Chatham, , Correspondence, II, 166–8;Google ScholarWalpole, , Memoirs of George III, I, 89–90;Google ScholarElliot, G. F. S., The Border Elliots and the Family of Minto (Edinburgh, 1897), p. 370.Google Scholar Bute, as Horace Walpole intimates, seems to have tried to investigate the incident. Lord Cathcart, at least, questioned Beckford who denied all knowledge of the mobbing. (Bute MSS 1761/688; B.M. Add. MSS 36,796, fo. 122.) A remarkably similar incident seems to have taken place almost exactly a year later. (Thomas Birch to Royston, 13 Nov. 1762, Yorke, P. C., The Life and Correspondence of Philip Yorke, Earl of Hardwicke (3 vols., Cambridge, 1913), p. 432.)Google Scholar

¹¹ Rigby to Bedford, 26 Nov. 1762, Russell, Lord John (ed.), The Correspondence of John, Fourth Duke of Bedford (3 vols., London, 1846), III, 160;Google ScholarGrenville, , Correspondence, I, 452;Google ScholarToynbee, Paget (ed.), The Letters of Horace Walpole (16 vols., Oxford, 1903–1925), v, 278.Google Scholar

¹² Sedgwick, , George III to Bute, pp. 167–9, 171;Google Scholar Sir William Breton MSS Diary, unpaginated; Bute to Fox, 27 Nov. 1762, B.M. Add. MSS 51,379, fos. 116–17. It would appear that on this occasion at least one of the members of the mob was caught, but magnanimously Bute let him go. (Bute MSS (Cardiff) 1/45.) When Bute next went down to the house George ‘order'd the Military to be ready in case called for by the Civil Magistrates’ (George III to Bute, n.d. (Nov. 1762?), Bute MSS (Cardiff) 8/196).

¹³ Edward Richardson to Charles Jenkinson, 11 Sept. 1762, Bute MSS 1762/420; The New Foundling Hospital for Wit (6 vols., London, 1784–1786), III, 113.Google Scholar Advertisements for an assassin were still being made in 1769. (Whately to Grenville, 5 Aug. 1769, Grenville, , Correspondence, IV, 435.)Google Scholar

¹⁴ M. Perrott to Lady Bute, Aug. 1792, Bute MSS. The letter includes an engraved plate of the assassin's weapon.

¹⁵ Accounts of Bute's departure differ widely: the Gentleman's Magazine and Bute's brother, Stuart Mackenzie, both denied that Bute had actually been attacked (Gentleman's Magazine (1768), p. 393;Google ScholarMure, , Selections from the Family Papers preserved at Caldwell. In two parts (Glasgow, 1854), Pt. II, ii, 144–5)Google Scholar, while the Political Register and an eye-witness who wrote to Lord Loudoun gave a rather more colourful account in which he was said to have been insulted both in Canterbury and Dover (Political Register, 3 (1768), p. 137;Google Scholar B.B. to Loudoun, 16 Aug. 1768, Loudoun MSS). It seems clear that although the London press exaggerated the incident, Mackenzie was only able to write as he did because Bute had successfully avoided the mob. Perhaps the most plausible account of the incident is in Whately to George Grenville, 10 Aug. 1768, Grenville, , Correspondence, IV, 340.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Jesse, J. H., Memoirs of the Life and Reign of King George III (3 vols., London, 1867), I, 163;Google Scholar see Bute MSS (Cardiff) 6/162 for a typical letter addressed to Bute when abroad as ‘Monsieur Stuart’.

¹⁷ Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, I, 330.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Walpole, ibid. II, 80; Walpole, , Letters, v, 407–8;Google Scholaribid, vi, 191; Gentleman's Magazine (1765), p. 96;Google ScholarCobbett, William (ed.), Parliamentary History of England from the Norman Conquest to the year 1803 (36 vols., London, 1806–1820), xv, cols. 1380–4.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Hardwicke to Royston, 5 Aug. 1763, Yorke, , Hardwire, III, 514;Google ScholarHMC Rutland, IV, 235;Google Scholar Bute MSS (Cardiff) 11/37; Gentleman's Magazine (1766), p. 290;Google Scholaribid. (1769), p. 361.

²⁰ Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, I, 280;Google ScholarB.M. Catalogue of Prints and Satires, IV, nos. 3870–5. Cf. nos. 3941, 3979.Google Scholar

²¹ Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, IV, 307.Google Scholar

²² Rudé, George, Paris and London in the 18th Century (London, 1970), pp. 30–1, 247–57, 304–16, 329–31.Google Scholar

²³ A scotch journeyman cabinet maker to Bute, n.d., Bute MSS, bundle marked anonymous letters.

²⁴ Rudé, George, Wilkes and Liberty, A Social Study of 1763 to 7774 (Oxford, 1962), pp. 43–4.Google Scholar

²⁵ Plumb, J. H., Sir Robert Walpole, the King's Minister (London, 1960), p. 270;Google ScholarWalpole, , Memoirs of George III, I, 191;Google Scholaribid, I, 155–9; ibid. II, 155–9; Wright, J. (ed.), Sir Henry Cavendish's Debates of the House of Commons, during the Thirteenth Parliament of Great Britain, commonly called the unreported Parliament (2 vols., London, 1841), I, 621.Google Scholar

²⁶ Bradshaw to Grafton [Mar. 1771], Grafton MSS 423/634, West Suffolk R.O.; Ehrman, John, The Younger Pitt. The Years of Acclaim (London, 1969), pp. 140–1.Google Scholar

²⁷ Plumb, , Walpole, p. 283.Google Scholar

²⁸ They were of course mistaken in the belief that Bute and the king had engineered Pitt's resignation. On the contrary Bute and his protégé were apprehensive at the untimely departure of the war minister. (Pares, George III and the Politicians, p. 102 and note.)

²⁹ Gazetteer, 11 Feb. 1763; Chase Price to Portland, 19 Aug. 1762, Portland MSS, PwF 7901, Nottingham University Library.

³⁰ Newcastle to Hardwicke, 11 Aug. 1762, B.M. Add. MSS 32,941, fos. 206–7; Hardwicke to Newcastle, 21 Aug. 1762, ibid. fo. 326; Gazetteer, 26, 30 Aug., 13, 20 Sept. 1762.

³¹ Gentleman's Magazine (1769), pp. 75, 78.Google Scholar

³² Sutherland, Lucy S. (ed.), The Correspondence of Edmund Burke, II (Chicago, 1960), 78;Google ScholarWalpole, , Memoirs of George III, III, 384–5;Google ScholarCobbett, , Parliamentary History, XVI, cols. 763–85;Google ScholarHMC 10th Report, Part I, p. 420.

³³ The Lynn Magazine; or, a collection of papers, published during the contest in that town begun December 12, 1766 (London, 1768), pp. 48–9, 102;Google Scholar [Richard Gardiner], Remarks on the Letter to John Buxton, Esq. (Norwich, 1768), pp. 15, 41;Google ScholarMiscellaneous pieces in prose and verse; relative to the contested election for Members of Parliament for the county of Norfolk, and the City and County of Norwich, A.D. 1768 (Norwich, 1768), pp. 6, 18, 50;Google ScholarThe Contest: or a collection of the most material papers, in prose and verse published during the controverted election for the county of Norfolk in 1768 (Norfolk, 1768), pp. 55, 99ff.;Google ScholarA New Song, Address'd to Sir Edward Astley, Bart and Wenham Coke, Esq; and to the Independent Electors, In the Interest of those Gentlemen, Bradfer-Lawrence MSS, VII, d, Norfolk R.O.; QUERIES … submitted to the opinion of the FREEHOLDERS and FARMERS, to be assembled at CHELMSFORD (Chdmsford, 1768),Google Scholar Strutt MSS. Three thousand copies of this handbill were distributed during the election. (Printer's Account, Strutt MSS.)

³⁴ Stephen Croft to Rockingham, 2 Jan. 1763, Rockingham 1–347, Wentworth-Woodhouse Muniments, Sheffield City Library; George Armytage to Rockingham, 2 Jan. 1763, ibid. 1–348; [Thomas Ramsden] to Charles Jenkinson, 17 Oct. 1762, Bute MSS 1762/538.

³⁵ Rev. Richard Kaye to Portland, 28 May 1763, Portland MSS, PwF 5893.

³⁶ Beaumont Hotham to Portland, 1, 18 Aug. 1765, Portland MSS, PwF 5237, 5239. It is interesting to notice that a town like Knaresborough by 1763 had a Coffee Room in which the four main London newspapers could be read. (Bute MSS (Cardiff) 10/161.)

³⁷ Chase Price to Portland, 6 Sept. 1763, Portland MSS, PwF 7908.

³⁸ Davidson, Philip, Propaganda and the American Revolution, 1763–1783 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1941), pp. 194–5;Google Scholar Parker MSS 920/27/22, Liverpool R.O.; Granger, B. I., Political Satire in the American Revolution, 1763–1783 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1960), pp. 66, 76–7, 106–7;Google ScholarBailyn, Bernard (ed.), Pamphlets of the American Revolution, 1750–1776, vol. I (Cambridge, Mass., 1965), pp. 75–6, 583. 590–3. 595.Google Scholar

³⁹ Rockingham to Newcastle, 4 July 1762, B.M. Add. MSS 32,940, fo. 242.

⁴⁰ Christie, Ian, Myth and Reality in Late-Eighteenth-Century British Politics and Other Papers (London, 1970), p. 30;Google ScholarWalpole, , Memoirs of George III, I, 222, 242–3;Google Scholaribid. II, 49, 168; ibid, III, 384–5; Grafton MSS 423/640; Cobbett, , Parliamentary History, XVI, cols. 98, 841–2.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Rockingham to Scarborough, 20 Nov. 1766, Rockingham 1–709; Rockingham to Dowdeswell, 9 Sept. 1767, ibid. 1–857; Rockingham to Portland, 15 Sept. 1767, ibid. 1–861; Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, II, 354.Google Scholar

⁴² Jucker, Ninetta S. (ed.), The Jenkinson Papers 1760–1766 (London, 1949), pp. 393–400;Google ScholarGrenville, , Correspondence, III, 41;Google ScholarWalpole, , Letters, v, 372.Google Scholar

⁴³ Fitzmaurice, , Life of Shelburne (2nd edn. revised, 2 vols., London, 1912), I, 202–3;Google ScholarBedford, , Correspondence, III, 286–8, 365;Google ScholarGrenville, , Correspondence, III, 194.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Namier, , England, pp. 121–2;Google ScholarHMC 9th Report App. Part III, p. 23;Google ScholarHMC 14th Report App. IX, Onslow Mss, p. 104;Google ScholarHMC Laing, II, 448;Google ScholarOsborn, E. F. D. (ed.), The Political and Social Letters of a Lady of the Eighteenth Century, (the Hon. Mrs. Osborn), 1721–1771 (London, 1890), p. 127;Google ScholarChatham, , Correspondence, II, 378 and note;Google ScholarMure, , Caldwell Papers, Part 2, II, 59–60, 81.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, III, 348–9.Google Scholar Walpole saw it as especially significant that a former minion of Bute should charge the favourite with ‘secret influence’, as he regarded it as tantamount to proof of the favourite's guilt.

⁴⁶ Sedgwick, , George III to Bute, pp. Ixvi–iii.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, I, 16;Google ScholarWalpole, , Letters, IV, 454;Google Scholaribid, v, 4; Newman, A. N. (ed.), ‘Leicester House Politics, 1750–60, from the papers of John, second Earl of Egmont’ in Camden Miscellany, XXIII (4th ser., VII) (1969), 227;Google ScholarIlchester, (ed.), Life and Letters of Lady Sarah Lennox (2 vols., London, 1901), I, 71;Google ScholarGazetteer, 9 Dec. 1762; B.M. Catalogue of Prints and Satires, IV, nos. 3824–5, 3843, 3846–51, 3853, 3857, 3873.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ The first pamphlet attack seems to have been An Answer to a Letter to the Rt. Hon. the Earl of B***; in which the false Reasoning and absurd Conclusions in that Pamphlet are fully detected and refuted (London, 1761).Google Scholar

⁴⁹ J. Wilkes to H. Cotes, 12 Dec. 1764, B.M. Add. MSS 30,868, fo. 164.

⁵⁰ See amongst others ’Bull, John’ in Gazetteer, I, 12 07 1762;Google Scholar ‘Poplicola’ in ibid. 12 July; ‘Civicus’ in St. James's Chronicle, 12 June 1762. For the importance of newspaper letters, see Walpole, , Letters, v, 372;Google Scholar Campbell to Bute, 28 Nov. 1761, Bute MSS 1761/663.

⁵¹ See inter alia, St. James's Chronicle, 2 June; Lloyd's Evening Post, 2 June; London Chronicle, 9 Sept. 1762; Gentleman's Magazine (1762), pp. 276–84, 303–4, 313–19, 325–8, 367–8, 377–9, 411–18, 435–7, 473–80, 491–3, 530–6, 578–86;Google ScholarNobbe, , The North Briton: a study in political propaganda (New York, 1939), pp. 37–8;Google ScholarPolitical Controversy ; or, weekly magazine of ministerial and anti-ministerial essays. With annotations, &c. by Wilkes, John Caesar (2 vols., London, 1763).Google Scholar

⁵² Annual Register (1764), p. 18.Google Scholar

⁵³ Rea, R. R., The English Press in Politics, 1760–1774 (Lincoln, Nebraska, 1963), p. 24.Google ScholarBM. Catalogue of Prints and Satires, IV, no. 3844.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ R. R. Rea, ibid. pp. 21–4; Ilchester, , Henry Fox, Lord Holland, His Family and Relations (2 vols., London, 1920), II, 154.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Fox to Francis [Dec. 1761], B.M. Add. MSS 51,405, fo. 2; Ralph to Bute [early Oct 1761], 7 Oct. [1761], 28 Oct. [1761], Bute MSS (Cardiff) 5/125, 126, 127.

⁵⁶ Campbell to Bute, 28 Nov. 1761, Bute MSS 1761/663, B.M. Add. MSS 36,796, fo. 121; Bute to Campbell, Friday [30 Oct. 1761], Bute MSS; Campbell to Bute, 28, 30, 31 Oct., 9 Nov., 26 Dec. 1761, Bute MSS (Cardiff) 1/162, 163, 164, 166, 167; Jenkinson to Bute [Dec. 1761], ibid. 3/116. At the same time Bedford and Devonshire were urging Newcastle to use the press against Pitt. (B.M. Add. MSS 32,929, fo. 54; 32,930, fo. 5.)

⁵⁷ For the pensions, see Bute to Campbell, Friday [30 Oct. 1761], Bute MSS 1761/663; Campbell to Bute, 31 Oct. 1761, Bute MSS (Cardiff) 1/164; Jucker, , Jenkinson Papers, p. 69;Google ScholarNamier, , The Structure of Politics at the Accession of George III (2nd ed., London, 1965), p. 229;Google ScholarRea, R. R., The English Press in Politics, pp. 23, 37, 102.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Bute to Campbell, Friday [26 Feb. 1762], Saturday night [10 Apr. 1762], Bute MSS; Campbell to Bute, 12 Apr. 1762, Bute MSS (Cardiff) 1/175.

⁵⁹ Bute to Campbell, Thursday [21 Jan. 1762], Sunday [10 June 1762?], Bute MSS; Campbell to Bute, 27 Feb., 16 Aug., 4, 22 Sept. 1762, ibid.; Campbell to Bute, 2, 10 Feb. 1762, Bute MSS (Cardiff) 1/172, 174; Campbell to [Jenkinson], 18 Nov., 6, 30 Dec. 1762, ibid. 1/181–3.

⁶⁰ Campbell to Bute, 5, 11, 16 June, 17 July, 10, 16 Aug., 4 Sept. 1762, Bute MSS; Campbell to Bute, 4, II Jan., 24 June, 17 Aug., 21 Oct. 1762, Bute MSS (Cardiff) 1/169, 170, 177, 178, 179.

⁶¹ Campbell to Bute, 16 June 1762, Bute MSS.

⁶² Campbell to Bute, 18 Feb., 18 Mar., 4 Apr., 20 July, 22 Aug., II Nov. 1763, Bute MSS (Cardiff) 9/45, 47, 48, 49, 53, 55, 56.

⁶³ Baillie to Bute, 13 Nov. 1762, Bute MSS (Cardiff) 1/44; Guthrie to Jenkinson, 22 Dec. 1763, Jucker, , Jenkinson Papers, p. 242.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Richardson to Jenkinson, 11 Sept. 1762, Bute MSS 1762/420. For Richardson's activities in the city, and the information he passed on to Jenkinson, see Bute MSS (Cardiff) 5/136, II/67; Jucker, , Jenkinson Papers, pp. 69–70, 71, 145–6, 162–3, 245–7.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Monitor, 18 Sept. 1762; North Briton, 11 Sept. 1762; Political Controversy, I, 320–2, 351–7.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Baillie to Bute, 21 Oct. 1762, Bute MSS 1762/556; Newcastle to Hardwicke, 29 Nov. 1762, B.M. Add. MSS 32,945, fo. 199. Cf. ibid. fos. 153, 160, 167, 178. For Baillie's work in the city, gathering political information, see Bute MSS 1762/285, 393 and Bute MSS (Cardiff) 1/46, 47.

⁶⁷ Philo-Patriae to Bute, 23 Feb. 1763, Bute MSS; Dodington to Bute, 18 June, 10 July 1762, Bute MSS (Cardiff) 2/92, 93; Dodington, Bubb, Melcombe, Lord, Political Journal, ed. Carswell, J. and Dralle, L. A. (Oxford, 1965), pp. 438–9;Google Scholar Courteville to Bute, 11 Feb., 17 Mar. 1763, Bute MSS (Cardiff) 9/84, 87; Courteville to Jenkinson, 15, 18 Feb. 1763, ibid. 9/85, 86. The only occasion on which the post office helped Bute, other than in the distribution of the Wandsworth Letter (if true), was when Todd gave unsolicited aid in Mar. 1763 when he persuaded the proprietors of the Public Ledger to omit the banner ‘Liberty, property, and no Excise’ from their edition of 26 Mar. (A. Todd to Bute, 29 Mar. 1763, ibid. 11/163.)

⁶⁸ Campbell to Bute, 5 June 1762, Bute MSS; Ralph to Bute, 13 Dec. 1761, Bute MSS 1761/695; William Guthrie to Bute, 30 Dec. 1762 (copy), Bute MSS (Cardiff) 3/44; Emery, J. P., Arthur Murphy (Philadelphia, 1946), p. 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Bute also tried to gain the services of Shebbeare, who was extremely reluctant to commit himself to what he regarded as such a dangerous and tiresome enterprise. (Shebbeare to [Jenkinson], 30 July [1762], Bute MSS 1762/254.)

⁶⁹ For characteristically sober defences of Bute, see A Serious Address to the Vulgar (London, 1762);Google ScholarA Speech Without Doors, by a hobby-Member (London, 1762);Google ScholarA Letter to Her R---l H-----s The P-----s D-w-g-r of W---- On the Approaching Peace (London, 1762);Google ScholarThe Appeal of Reason to the People of England, on the Present State of PARTIES in the Nation (London, 1763).Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Auditor, 7 Oct. 1762. The importance of such prints should not be underestimated. The duke of Newcastle, for example, appreciated their importance: ‘I own, I don't understand any of those Prints, & Burlesques; I am too dull to taste them; And, if they are not decypher'd for me, I could not, in the least guess, what they mean … I detest the whole Thing: But yet, They have their real Consequences, And there is an amazing Tameness, in not daring to take any Notice of Them.’ (Newcastle to Hardwicke, 30 Sept. 1762, B.M. Add. MSS 32,942, fo. 429.)

⁷¹ George, Dorothy, English Political Caricature; a study in opinion and propaganda (2 vols., Oxford, 1959), I, 6, 118–25, 133–8, 150–2, 158, 160, 178.Google Scholar

⁷² Boswell to Johnston, 9 July 1763, Walker, Ralph S. (ed.), The Correspondence of James Boswell and John Johnston of Grange (London, 1966), pp. 86–7.Google Scholar

⁷³ St. James's Chronicle, 4 Sept. 1762; New Foundling Hospital for Wit, IV, 123.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Beatty, J. M., ‘The Political Satires of Charles Churchill’, Studies in Philology, XVI (1919), 303–20;Google ScholarBrown, Wallace Cable, Charles Churchill (Lawrence, Kansas, 1953), pp. 97–8, 103, 123;Google ScholarLonsdale, R. (ed.), The Poems of Thomas Gray, William Collins, Oliver Goldsmith (London, 1969), pp. 259–64.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ George, , English Political Caricature, I, 118, 120, 127, 129;Google ScholarGeorge, , ‘America in English Satiric Prints’, William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., x (1953), 512;Google ScholarBritish Antidote to Caledonian Poison: Consisting of the most humourous satirical political prints for the year 1762 (2 vols., London, 1763);Google ScholarThe Scots Scourge: or Pridden's Supplement to the Antidote to Caledonian Poison (2 vols., London, 1763).Google Scholar The British Museum Catalogue records five editions of the Antidote for the year 1763. For the Butiad, see note 4. After 1767 prints also started to appear regularly in the monthly periodicals. (George, , English Political Caricature, I, 141.)Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Annual Register (1765), p. 45.Google Scholar For writings attacking Grenville's connexions with Bute and maintaining that the Rockinghams were free of any such imputation, see [Sir Grey Cooper], The Merits of the New Administration truly stated in Answer to several pamphlets and papers published against them (London, 1765), pp. 5, 12, 19;Google Scholar [Cooper], A Pair of Spectacles for Short Sighted Politicians; A Candid Answer to … An Honest Man's Reasons for Declining to take any Part in the New Administration (London, 1765),Google Scholar passim; A Candid Refutation of the Charges brought against the Present Ministers, In a late pamphlet… In a letter to the supposed author (London, 1765), pp. 11–12, 26, 29;Google ScholarBurke, Edmund, ‘A Short Account of a late Short Administration’, in Worlds and Correspondence (8 vols., London, 1852), III, 2.Google Scholar Support for Grenville and criticism of Rockingham's putative alliance with Bute are to be found in [Charles Lloyd], An Honest Man's Reasons for Declining to take part in the New Administration (London, 1765),Google Scholar passim; [Lloyd], A Critical Review of the New Administration (London, 1765), pp. 18, 19, 44–5;Google Scholar [John Almon], A History of the late Minority, Exhibiting the Conduct, Principles and Views of that Party during the years 1762, 1763, 1764, 1765 (London, 1766), p. 332;Google Scholar [Temple?], The Principles of the late Changes Impartially Examined: In a Letter from a Son of Candor to the Public Advertiser (London, 1766), pp. 16, 46, 73–4, 76;Google ScholarA Short History of the Conduct of the Present Ministry, with regard to the American Stamp Act (London, 1766), pp. 15–16;Google Scholar Hervey MSS (West Suffolk R.O.) 50/5/387. 389.

⁷⁷ ‘Anti-Sejanus’ in A New and Impartial Collection of Letters from the Public Papers… From the Accession of his present Majesty in September 1760 [sic] to May 1767 (2 vols., London, 1767), II, 3ff.;Google Scholar Hervey MSS 50/5, passim, ‘Augustus Hervey R.N. Notes 1743–1779’.

⁷⁸ Rea, , English Press in Politics, p. 140.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Lovat-Fraser, , Bute, p. 24;Google ScholarDutens, Louis, Memoirs of a Traveller now in Retirement, written by himself (5 vols., London, 1806), IV, 184.Google Scholar When Bute retired from office George advised him not to read any papers (Grenville, , Correspondence, II, 209)Google Scholar but Fox was soon trying to dissuade Bute from prosecuting writings that made him angry. (Fox to Bute, 15 June 1764, Bute MSS.)

⁸⁰ Campbell to Bute, 4 Sept. 1762, Bute MSS; William Guthrie to Bute, 2 Sept. 1762, Bute MSS 1762/389, where Guthrie, after skating round the subject with some agility, is forced to conclude that ‘the Capriciousness of this public is not only unaccountable, but dangerous’.

⁸¹ For an excellent and entertaining account of the corruption of a coffee-house politician who is recruited to the side of opposition to Bute by the newspapers, see the Briton, 9 Oct. 1762.

⁸² But see Robert Darnton, ‘Reading, Writing, and Publishing in Eighteenth-Century France: A Case Study in the Sociology of Literature’, Daedalus (winter, 1971), pp. 214–56Google Scholar, for the obscenity of the libelles and ‘livres philosophiques’ of the illicit book trade in France. For the press and political sophistication in England as compared with the continent, see Mornet, D., Les Origines Intellectuelles de la Revolution Francaise (1715–1787) (2nd edn., Paris, 1934), p. 343;Google ScholarRudé, Paris and London, p. 46.Google Scholar The German review Allgemeine Deutsche Bibliothek and the Göttingen historian Schlözer's, A. L. vonStaatsanzeigen though highly successful by European standards never reached the circulation of the Gentleman's Magazine. (Klaus Epstein, The Genesis of German Conservatism (Princeton, N.J., 1966), p. 39;Google ScholarBruford, W. H., Germany in the eighteenth century: the Social Background of the Literary Revival (Cambridge, 1959), pp. 286–7.)Google Scholar For the obscenity of the English press, see note 47 above; Gisbal, an Hyperborean Tale: Translated from the Fragments of Ossian, the son of Fingal (London, 1762), p. 8;Google ScholarThe British Coffee House (London, 1764), passim.Google Scholar

⁸³ Wrigley, E. A., ‘A Simple Model of London's importance in changing English Society and Economy 1650–1750’, Past and Present, 37 (07 1967), p. 49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸⁴ Rudé, , Paris and London, pp. 46–7;Google Scholar Lucy Sutherland, ‘The City of London in Eighteenth-Century Politics’ in Pares, Richard and Taylor, A. J. P., Essays to Namier, pp. 49–74.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ For a typical comment, see Blackstone, Sir William, Commentaries on the Laws of England (20th edn., 4 vols., London, 1841), I, 121.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Rudé, , Paris and London, pp. 323–6, 331–9.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Scots Scourge, II, II; Butiad, p. 4.

⁸⁸ Fitzmaurice, (ed.), Life of William Earl of Shelburne (2nd edn., 2 vols., London, 1912), I, 68.Google Scholar Compare the remarks in Sir Robert Wilmot to Portland, 23 Dec. 1766, Portland MSS, PwF 9518, and the anecdote ‘Scotch loyalty, always the same’ in New Foundling Hospital for Wit, II, 119.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Political Disquisitions proper for public Consideration, in the present State of Affairs, In a Letter to a Noble Duke (London, 1763), p. 34;Google ScholarEngland's Constitutional Test for the Year 1763: In which are discussed, I. Authorship. II. Popularity. III. Liberty of the Press. IV. The Dignity of London furies (London, 1763), pp. 7, 12.Google ScholarThe Political Register, I (1767), p. 212,Google Scholar warned its readers that Scots ‘are born under the influence of despotism and nursed with the milk of tyranny and arbitrary power, in the family of the Stuarts’.

⁹⁰ Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, IV, 282–3;Google ScholarHayes, W. J., ‘Scottish Officers in the British Army, 1714–1763’, Scottish Historical Review, 37 (1958), p. 26.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Crisp Molyneux to Peter Frankly, 5 Apr. 1771, Molyneux Letter Book, Typescript Norfolk R.O. Cf. the song ‘English Liberty opposed to Scotch Oppression’ in Wilkes MSS, Guildhall Library, London, 3332/1/427.

⁹² North Briton, 2 (12 June), 16 (18 Sept. 1762), 38 (19 Feb.), 44 (2 Apr. 1763); Political Register, 5 (1769), pp. 155–6;Google Scholaribid. 6 (1770), pp. 76, 265–7; Neville, Sylas, Diary, 1767–1788, ed. Cozens-Hardy, B. (London, 1950), p. 17.Google Scholar It was even suggested that Bute's trip to Italy, made to recover his health, was to hatch a plot at Rome for the return of England to the Catholic fold. (Political Register, 7 (1770), pp. 16, 209.)Google Scholar

⁹³ [Owen Ruffhead], Considerations on the present Dangerous Crisis (2nd edn., London, 1763), p. 10.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ An Ode to Lord B***, on the Peace. By the Author of the Minister of State, a Satire (London, 1762), p. 9;Google Scholar[Howard, Henry], The Masquerade or the Political Bagpiper (London, 1762),Google Scholar passim; [Almon, John], A Review of Lord Bute's Administration (London, 1763), pp. 112–14;Google ScholarScots Scourge, II, 62–3;Google Scholar ‘John Bull’ in the Gazetteer, 1 July 1762; North Briton, 34 (22 Jan. 1763); B.M. Catalogue of Prints and Satires, IV, nos. 3823, 3829, 3843, 3849, 3851, 3853, 3856, 3857, 3859, 3862, 3863.Google Scholar So pervasive was this belief that it engaged some Scots in political debate. As Caleb Whitefoord wrote, ‘What first engaged me in political Controversy, was a desire of undeceiving the Publick, as to the notion which prevailed two years ago, that most places of Trust and Profit in England were engross'd by Scotchmen’. (Whitefoord to Knight, 15 Feb. 1766, Hewins, W. A. S. (ed.), The Whitefoord Papers being the Correspondence and other Manuscripts of Colonel Charles Whitefoord and Caleb Whitefoord from 1739 to 1810 (Oxford, 1898), p. 143.)Google Scholar One placehunter, Edward Macro, ingeniously suggested that Bute grant him preferment because he was an Englishman, thereby dispelling the rumour that ‘the Scotch by Lord Bute are to depress the English’. (Macro to Bute, 30 July 1761, Bute MSS 1761/495.)

⁹⁵ Hardwicke to Newcastle, 14 Feb. 1761, B.M. Add. MSS 32,918, fo. 513.

⁹⁶ George Springlove to Wilkes, n.d., B.M. Add. MSS 30,867, fo. 209; John Amies to Wilkes, 14 June 1764, Add. MSS 30,868, fo. 89; Pottle, F. A. (ed.), Boswell's London Journal 1762–3 together with the Journal of my Jaunt. Harvest 1762 (London, 1950), pp. 71–2;Google ScholarPerry, Thomas W., Public Opinion, Propaganda and Politics in 18th Century England: a study of the Jew Bill of 1753 (Cambridge, Mass., 1962), pp. 35–6.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Gentleman's Magazine (1770), p. 388;Google ScholarThe Contest … prose and verse published during the controverted election for the county of Norfolk, p. 55.Google Scholar Such anti-Scottish toasts can be compared to the Wilkite anti-Bute ‘Arithmetical’ toast drunk at a ‘public meeting in Holborn, where a large company assembled, on Saturday the 28th October 1769 to celebrate Mr. Wilkes's Birth Day’. It proclaimed ‘Addition to his Majesty's Subjects/Subtraction to the Boot and Petticoat,/Multiplication to Mr. Wilkes's friends, /Division to his Foes,/Reduction to the National Debt, and/ practice to Jack Ketch’. (Wilkes MSS, Guildhall, 3332/1/391.)

⁹⁸ Rev. Paul Shenton to Pitt, 4 Dec. 1764, Chatham, , Correspondence, II, 299–301;Google ScholarGentleman's Magazine (1762), p. 550;Google Scholaribid. (1769), p. 364. Bute's honour also provoked a duel between two officers in the Yeomanry, and Bute's protagonist, who badly wounded his opponent, wrote asking for help from the favourite. (E. Bland to Sir Harry Erskine [29 Nov. 1762], Bute MSS (Cardiff) I/97.)

⁹⁹ Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, I, 75, 140;Google ScholarIlchester, (ed.), Life and Letters of Sarah Lennox, I, 22.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ Rockingham to Forrester [draft post 29 Oct. 1761], Rockingham 1–204; Winchelsea to Rockingham, 19 Mar. 1768, ibid. 1–1016; ‘Substance of what passed with HRH the Duke of Cumberland at Windsor Lodge, October 19, 1762’, B.M. Add. MSS 32,943, fos. 313–14; Randolph Bentinck to Portland, 30 Dec. 1770, Portland MSS, PwF 1017, and notes 88, 95 above.

¹⁰¹ Bedford to Forester, 12 Oct. 1761, Bedford, , Correspondence, III, 55;Google Scholar Hume to Sir Gilbert Elliot, 10 Sept. 1767, Greig, J. Y. T., The Letters of David Hume (2 vols., Oxford, 1932), II, 161;Google Scholar John Stewart to Mure, 27 Oct. 1769, Mure, , Caldwell Papers. Part 2, II, 157;Google ScholarSedgwick, , George III to Bute, p. 199.Google Scholar

¹⁰² Hume to Andrew Millar, 28 Mar. 1763, Letters of Hume, I, 382;Google Scholar John Bindley to Portland, 12 Oct. 1764, Portland MSS, PwF 1339.

¹⁰³ Rudé, , The Crowd in History, 1730–1848 (London, 1964), p. 63.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ A Speech Without Doors, p. 12;Google Scholar Charles Steuart to James Parker, 11 Sept. 1763, Parker MSS 27/2; A Letter to her R---l H---s THE P-----s D--w-g-r, pp. 50–1.

¹⁰⁵ Briton, 4 Sept., 2 Oct. 1762; ‘David Macgregor’ in St. James's Chronicle, 22 June 1762; ‘Scotius’ in ibid. 5 Aug. 1762.

¹⁰⁶ Positions varied widely on the question of exploiting ‘national distinctions’. Hardwicke, of course, rejected the idea of opposition to Bute on the grounds of his nationality (Yorke, , Hardwicke, III, 415)Google Scholar, Chatham was always at pains to denounce ‘national reflections’ (Chatham, , Correspondence, III, 475–6;Google ScholarCobbett, . Parliamentary History, xv, col. 1364;Google Scholaribid. xvi, col. 98), and even Temple was publicly prepared to deny his hostility to the Scots (William Strahan to Ralph Allen, 1 Dec. 1763, Peach, R. E. M., The Life and Times of Ralph Allen (London, 1895), p. 195;Google ScholarWalpole, , Memoirs of George III, I, 329)Google Scholar. But the pamphleteers were less fastidious. Junius defended, in an admittedly ambiguous fashion, the right to cast aspersions on the Scots (Everett, C. W. (ed.), The Letters of Junius (London, 1927), pp. 14–15)Google Scholar, and Wilkes, who was indubitably the most frequent and successful exponent of anti-Scottish feeling, wrote a long and elaborate defence of national distinctions. In his personal copy of Almon's History of a late Minority, Wilkes wrote, ‘It has been said that it is unfair to make national reflections. I cannot imagine upon what account. They are remarks upon what has been generally seen by strangers of the body of the people, and not of two or three individuals. Is not the national character of levity among the French just, of artifice, among the Italians? Nations very often change their character; but this is not the question; there is always some characteristic, which distinguishes every people on the face of the earth. The old Romans were remarkable for the love of liberty and their country. The modern Romans are distinguish'd for luxury, effeminacy, and superstition. The Genoese are the same as in the times of Virgil and Ausonius … The ancients had no scruple of employing national reflections, and Punica fides was as often in the writings of the Romans, as French faith in those of the English’. [Almon, J.], The History of the late Minority (3rd impression, 1766), pp. 404–5Google Scholar (Wilkes's pagination), B.M. class mark G.13453.)

¹⁰⁷ Bute to Bedford, 10 Oct. 1761, Bedford, , Correspondence, III, 50.Google Scholar Compare Bute to George III [24Mar. 1761], B.M. Add. MSS 36,797, fo. 48.

¹⁰⁸ ’Anti-Sejanus, ’ in New and Impartial Collection of Letters, II, 28.Google ScholarCf. An Application of some General Political Rules, to the Present State of Great Britain, Ireland and America. In a Letter to the Right Honourable Earl Temple (London, 1766), pp. 28–9.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ [Temple?], Principles of the late Changes Impartially Examined, p. 35.Google Scholar All of the contemporary literature abounds with historical examples of favourites who created trouble or came to a sticky end. Bute was compared to Cromwell (The Triumphs of Bute. A Poem (London, 1770), p. 12);Google Scholar Hubert de Burgh (Monitor, 24 July 1762); Sejanus, Wolsey, Fleury and Dymoche (North Briton, I (5 06 1762);Google Scholar’Anti-Sejanus, ’ in New and Impartial Collection of Letters, II, 28)Google Scholar; Carr, (BM. Catalogue of Prints and Satires, IV, no. 3845)Google Scholar; Simon de Montfort, the earl of Essex (ibid. no. 3867); the earl of Mar (North Briton, 2 (12 06 1762);Google Scholar William dc la Pole (ibid. 8, 24 July 1762); Tarquin (ibid. 12, 21 Aug. 1762) and Walpole (Butiad, p. 12). Especially popular were favourites or first ministers like Mortimer and Mazarin, whose dalliance with the monarch's mother could be used to libel Bute and the Princess Dowager. (An Enquiry into the Conduct of a late Right Honourable Commoner (3rd impression, corrected, London, 1766), pp. 48–9;Google ScholarNorth Briton, 5 (3 07 1762)Google Scholar; The Fall of Mortimer. An Historical Play. Revived from Montfort, with Alterations. Dedicated to the Sight Honourable John, Earl of Bute (Dublin, 1763)Google Scholar, passim). The only favourite or first minister ever invoked by the supporters of Bute was Sully. (Foord, Archibald S., His Majesty's Opposition, 1714–1830 (Oxford, 1964), pp. 278–9.)Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ A Parallel Drawn between the Administration in the Four Last Years of Queen Anne, and the Four First Years of George III. By a Country Gentleman (London, 1766), p. 20;Google Scholar [Ruffhead], Considerations on the present Dangerous Crisis, p. 11.Google Scholar This was a lesson learnt from whig experience. From Oct. 1761 until his resignation in the following May Newcastle complained bitterly (and with some justification) of the way Bute was squeezing him out of government by confining ‘the first Concoction of Affairs, to Himself, Lord Egremont, and Mr. G. Grenville’ (Newcastle to Devonshire, 31 Oct. 1761, B.M. Add. MSS 32,930, fo. 221) and believed the favourite was also intending to control all appointments as well (Newcastle to Devonshire, 9 Oct. 1761, B.M. Add. MSS 32,929, fo. 140). It should, however, be recalled that although Bute certainly sought to undermine Newcasde's position while the latter was still in power, he also loathed what he called ‘the eternal round of clashing business’ (Bute to Campbell (20 June 1762?), Bute MSS), and his inactivity and reclusiveness (see B.M. Add. MSS 32,918, fo. 84; Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, I, 171)Google Scholar - it is extraordinary how frequently even the so-called King's Friends were ignorant of Bute's activities - helped increase rather than allay Newcastle's fears.

¹¹¹ North Briton, 8 (24 July 1762); [Buder], Letter to the Cocoa Tree, p. 10; Political Disquisitions proper for public Consideration, p. 4.

¹¹² Le Montagnard Parvenu: or, the New Highland Adventurer in England: His Accidental Rise from Obscurity; his glaring Progress to Power: the WAYS and MEANS (London, 1763), p. 32;Google ScholarThe Favourite, with a Dedication to my Lord B*** (London, 1765), p. 6;Google ScholarPolitical Register, 2 (1768) p. 399;Google Scholar Hervey MSS 50/5/318–9. MSS copy of A Letter to Lord Bute relative to the late Changes that have happened in A--------n. Bute seems to have recognized this as an accurate description of his position and dilemma. Thus he gave as one of his reasons for resigning in Apr. 1763 that this would successfully abate antipathy to the government, and simultaneously wrote to Campbell, ‘I am an object too colossal to be seen even by those my hands have raised, without envy … what is a Minister, a powerful favourite minister? Why the object of Publick Calumny, a poor criminal ty'd to a stake to be bated every day ‘. (Bute to Campbell, 30 Jan., 27 Nov. 1763, Bute MSS.)

¹¹³ Political Disquisitions proper for public Consideration, p. 61;Google Scholar [Almon], Review of Lord Bute's Administration, pp. 9–10;Google Scholar’Anti-Sejanus, ’, New and Impartial Collection of Letters, II, 54–5;Google ScholarBritish Antidote to Caledonian Poison, I, 7;Google Scholar'A Letter to the Earl of B---’ in the Gentleman's Magazine (1765), pp. 351–2;Google ScholarThomas, P. D. G. (ed.), ‘Parliamentary Diaries of Nathaniel Ryder, 1764–7’, Camden Miscellany, XXIII (4th ser., VII), 346;Google Scholar Crisp Molyneux to George Irvine, 13 Nov. 1768, Molyneux Letter Book, fo. 48.

¹¹⁴ Butler, John, Letter to the Cocoa Tree from a Whig (London, 1762), pp. 5, 9.Google Scholar Again Bute appears to have recognized his position for he commented that ‘he had nothing but his credit with the King, he had nothing else to support him’. (Newcastle to Hardwicke, 13 Oct. 1761, Yorke, , Hardwicke, III, 331.Google Scholar Cf. Newcastle to Devonshire, 14 Oct. 1761, B.M. Add. MSS 32,929, to. 253.)

¹¹⁵ “A.Z. Some Considerations upon the present situation of affairs’, Gazetteer, 30 May 1763; George Armytage to Rockingham, 2 Jan. 1763, Rockingham 1–348.

¹¹⁶ Dodington to Bute, 22 Dec. 1760, Bute MSS 1760/206; Bute to Denbigh, 13 Oct. 1762, B.M. Add. MSS 36,797, fo. 14; Bute to Worsley, 28 Nov. 1762, ibid. fo. 24; Fox to Devonshire, 12 Oct. 1762, Ilchester, , Henry Fox, II, 189–90;Google ScholarSedgwick, , George III to Bute, pp. 203, 227.Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ Bute to George Grenville, 10 Oct. 1762, B.M. Add. MSS 38,191, fo. 9 (draft); 36,797, fo. 13 (copy); Bute to Sir James Lowther, 17 Nov. 1762, ibid. fos. 22–3 printed in HMC Lonsdale, 13th Report. Part VII, p. 131, and Jucker, , Jenkinson Papers, pp. 86–7;Google ScholarThe True Whig Displayed. Comprehending Cursory REMARKS on the Address to the Cocoa-Tree. By a Tory (London, 1762), pp. 18–19.Google Scholar Fox. as Pares remarks (George III and the Politicians, p. 100 n.)Google Scholar, also employed the servant analogy in 1767, and it must have been used frequently. By the end of the decade it seems to have been generally known and was not only parodied by Burke (The Worlds of Edmund Burke (8 vols., Bohn's British Classics, London, 1854–1889), I, 316)Google Scholar but was also the object of comment in the periodical press (see note 121 below).

¹¹⁸ Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, I, 200.Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ [Francis, Philip], A Letter from the Cocoa Tree to the Country-Gentlemen (London, 1762), p. 4.Google Scholar

¹²⁰ [Butler, ], Letter to the Cocoa Tree from a whig, p. 3;Google ScholarA Letter to a Member of the Club in Albemarle-Street (London, 1764), pp. 11–12;Google Scholar[Walpole, Horace], The Counter-Address to the Public, on the late Dismission of a General Officer (London, 1764), p. 30;Google Scholar ‘CONSTITUTIONAL LIBERTY’, Gazetteer, 20 May 1763; [Almon, John], Biographical, Literary and Political Anecdotes, of Several of the Most Eminent Persons of the Present Age … By the Author of Anecdotes of the late Earl of Chatham (3 vols., London, 1797), III, 32.Google Scholar

¹²¹ [Butler, ], Letter to the Cocoa Tree from a Whig, pp. 7, 10, 15;Google ScholarPolitical Register, I (1767), pp. 6–8;Google Scholar’Bull, John’ in New and Impartial Collection of Letters, I, 23;Google Scholar [Lloyd], Critical Review of a New Administration, p. 7.Google Scholar

¹²² Devonshire to Fox, 14 Oct. 1762, Ilchester, (ed.), Letters to Henry Fox Lord Holland, with a few addressed to his brother Stephen, Earl of Ilchester (London, 1915), p. 163.Google Scholar Hardwicke held a position which was similar to that of Devonshire. As he pointed out to Egremont, ‘a King of England, at the head of a popular government, especially as of late the popular scale has grown heavier, would sometimes find it necessary to bend and ply a little; that it was not to be understood as being forced; but only submitting to the stronger reason, for the sake of himself and his government’ (Yorke, , Hardwicke, III, 515)Google Scholar. For an interesting discussion of these ideas, see Butterfield, , ‘Some Reflections on the Early Years of George III's Reign’, Journal of British Studies, IV, 2 (1965), 78–101.Google Scholar As should be clear from the argument of the following pages I do not think that Hardwicke's notions of the constitution were quite as strange to contemporaries as Butterfield assumes. For an excellent general summary of the positions adopted by both sides in the quarrel, see the Annual Register (1763), pp. 40–2.Google Scholar

¹²³ A term used in a letter by Bonell to Wilkes, 29 Dec. 1764, B.M. Add. MSS 30,868, fo. 170.

¹²⁴ Hardwicke to Robert Dundas, 12 June 1763, Yorke, , Hardwicke, III, 504;Google Scholar Newcastle to John White, 15 May 1763, B.M. Add. MSS 32,948, fo. 291; Walpole, , Letters, v, 312;Google ScholarNorth Briton, 45 (23 Apr. 1763); ‘INDEPENDENT WHIGG’, Gazetteer, 28 Apr. 1763.

¹²⁵ The purpose of both Bute's and Grenville's administrations being to ensure that the king preserved his independency. (George Townshend to Bute, 9 Apr. 1763, Bute MSS 1763/247; Grenville, , Correspondence, II, 86, 106, 122–3;Google ScholarBedford, , Correspondence, III, 224–5;Google ScholarSedgwick, , George III to Bute, pp. 203, 220–1.)Google Scholar

¹²⁶ Newcastle to Hardwicke, 16 June 1763, Yorke, , Hardwicke, III, 504;Google Scholar Hardwicke to Newcastle, 18 June 1763, B.M. Add. MSS 32,949, fo. 163; Devonshire to Newcastle, 2 Aug. 1763, Add. MSS 32,950, fo. 8. Jenkinson admitted to Grenville after the latter's resignation that the king had corresponded with Bute, ‘telling him [Grenville] that he knew that the King wrote him [Bute] a journal every day of what passed, and as minute as if, said he, ‘your boy at school was directed by you to write his journal to you’.’ (Grenville, , Correspondence, III, 220.)Google Scholar

¹²⁷ Newcastle to Hardwicke, 9 June 1763, B.M. Add. MSS 32,949, fos. 70–1; Hardwicke to Royston, 4 Sept. 1763, Yorke, , Hardwicke, III, 525–9;Google Scholar Hume to Mure, 1 Sept. 1763, Mure, , Caldwell tapers, Part 2, I, 190–1;Google ScholarFitzmaurice, , Life of Shelburne, I, 207.Google Scholar It is clear that Bute, either in a personal capacity, or as the broker of the king had approached Pitt before the death of Egremont on 21 Aug. A negotiation was also opened with Bedford. (Fitzmaurice, , Shelburne, I, 200–2.)Google Scholar

¹²⁸ Fox to Bute, Sunday night [end Mar. 1763], Bute MSS (Cardiff) 10/31.

¹²⁹ For rumours of negotiation, and the king's dealing behind the back of Grenville, see Grenville, , Correspondence, II, 214–15, 217, 494;Google ScholarJarrett, Derek, ‘The Regency Crisis of 1765’, E.H.R., LXXXV (1970), 291, 296–9, 301, 314–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar For patronage quarrels, see Jucker, Jenkinson Papers, pp. 318, 326, 393–400; Bute MSS 1764/49, 64, 68, 74. And for the insults offered the Grenvilles after the Regency Crisis that meant that everyone knew that the king was going to tolerate them no longer than he had to, see Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, II, 154;Google ScholarChesterfield's Letters, VI, 2657;Google Scholar’ Account of the Crisis May-June, 1765 ‘, Minto Papers 6, no. 3, National Library of Scotland.

¹³⁰ Bedford to Grenville, 8 July 1765, Grenville, , Correspondence, III, 69–70;Google Scholar Augustus Hervey to Grenville, 3 Oct. 1765, ibid, III, 87–8; Grenville, Diary, ibid, III, 179–80. For Grenvillite pamphlets, see note 76 above. The belief that the Rockinghams were hand in glove with the favourite was not, of course, confined to the Grenvilles. Wilkes believed that ‘the Scot is the breath of their nostrils’ (Wilkes to Cotes, 27 Oct. 1765, B.M. Add. MSS 30,868, fo. 202), and the party had difficulty dispelling rumours in the north that they were the favourite's allies (see p. 10 above).

¹³¹ Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, II, 290;Google Scholar F[rederick] Cavendish to [Lord George Lennox], 23 Feb. 1766, HMC Bathurst, pp. 692–3;Google Scholar Newcastle to Rockingham, Friday night [21 Feb. 1766], Rockingham 1–579; Anon to Rockingham, Sunday [16 Feb. 1766], ibid. 1–570; ‘Memorandum ‘, Bute MSS 1766/4; ‘Transaction with Eglinton, Feb: 1766’, ibid. 1766/8–8a.

¹³² Pares, , George III and the Politicians, pp. 108–9 and n.;Google Scholar George III to Egmont, 36 mins past 10 pm [end Jan. 1766], B.M. Add. MSS 47,012, fo. 16; ‘To the King from Ld. Egmont relating what passed with Mr Morton upon his Commission II February 1766’, ibid. fo. 22; George III to Egmont, 2 May 1766, Fortescue, (ed.), The Correspondence of George III from 1760 to 1783 (6 vols., London, 1927–1828), I, 301;Google Scholar Rockingham to George III, 5 June 1766, ibid. pp. 354–5; George III to Rockingham [5 June 1766], ibid. p. 355; Bateson, Mary (ed.), A Narrative of the Changes in the Ministry 1765–67 told by the Duke of Newcastle in a series of letters to John White, M.P. (Camden Society, London, 1898), pp. 70–1.Google Scholar

¹³³ Newcastle to Rockingham, 12 July 1766, Rockingham 1–646; Rockingham to Portland, 28 Aug. 1766, Portland MSS, PwF 8984; Hardwicke to Rockingham, 11 July 1766, Albemarle, , Memoirs of the Marquess of Rockingham (2 vols., London, 1852), I, 363–4.Google Scholar It is interesting to notice that in 1766, as in the summer of 1763, Holland made a remarkably accurate prediction to Bute of forthcoming changes. ‘In this Situation of Things I earnestly recommend Pitt. He has lost a good deal of his Popularity; He has seen how suddenly it may all vanish; he will not be that commanding that Termigant Pitt He was a Month ago nor come link'd with your inveterate and malicious Enemy Ld Temple. He will gladly go into the H. of Lords, which will supply what is wanting for the Ministry there. The first thing He will do will be to restore Mr Mackenzie, that is the K's Honour, & the whole World will applaud it without a dissentient voice. He declares that the Earl of Bute ought to have that Situation at Court, that his Rank and Favour entitles Him to. He will restore Ld Despenser, shew regard & if I mistake not take a Pride in shewing regard to your friends, which he declares it is mean cowardice, & absurd fear in the Present Ministers to be so averse to.“ (Holland to Bute, 11 Feb. [1766], Bute MSS.)

¹³⁴ Cotes to Wilkes, 25 July 1766, B.M. Add. MSS 30869, fo. 64; ‘The Statesman Embarrassed’, 16 July 1766, Hervey MSS 50/5/505; Brooke, John, The Chatham Administration 1766–1768 (London, 1956), pp. 47–8;Google Scholar George Sackville to General Unwin, 9 Dec. 1766, HMC Stopford-Sackyille MSS, 9th Report, App. Part III, p. 25; John Pringle to Walter Scott, II Dec. 1766, HMC Polwarth, v, 365; Macclesfield to Jenkinson, 7 Dec. 1766, Jucker, , Jenkinson Papers, p. 438;Google Scholar Rigby to Bedford, 3 Dec. 1766, Bedford, , Correspondence, III, 360–1;Google ScholarWalpole, , Letters, VII, 76;Google ScholarGrenville, , Correspondence, III, 393–4;Google Scholar Rockingham to Portland, 4 Dec. 1766, Portland MSS, PwF 8987; Bamber Gascoigne to Strutt, 5 Dec. 1766, Strutt MSS.

¹³⁵ Diary, Grenville, Grenville, Correspondence, IV, 407;Google Scholar Whately to Grenville, 3 Aug. 1769, ibid, IV, 433–5; Fitzwilliam to Rockingham, Friday [1 Dec. 1769?], Rockingham 1/1248. Burke came to the same conclusion a little later. (Burke to Rockingham, 29 Dec. 1770, Burke, , Correspondence, II, 176.)Google Scholar

¹³⁶ The Letters of Junius, p. 246;Google Scholar Chatham to Calcraft, 10 Apr. 1770, Chatham, , Correspondence, III, 443;Google ScholarWalpole, , Memoirs of George III, IV, 92–3;Google Scholar[Almon, ], A Letter to the Earl of Bute (London, 1771), pp. 38–9.Google Scholar For Wedderburn and Chatham's statements on secret influence, see notes 44 and 45 above.

¹³⁷ For the language and notions of conspiracy on both sides of the Atlantic, see Bailyn, Bernard, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (Cambridge, Mass., 1967), esp.Google Scholar ‘A note on conspiracy’, pp. 144–59.

¹³⁸ Newman, A. N. (ed.), ‘Leicester House Politics’, Camden Miscellany, XXIII, 227;Google ScholarWalpole, , Memoirs of George III, III, 92;Google Scholar ‘A Letter to Lord Bute relative to the late changes in A-----n’, in Hervey MSS 50/5/328, part printed in Gentleman's Magazine (1765), pp. 305–8Google Scholar; Bedford to Rockingham, 16 July 1767, Rockingham 1–823; Rockingham to Conway (draft), 19 July 1767, ibid. 1–834; Portland to William Bentinck, 3 Mar. 1767, Portland MSS 1240a; Diary, Grenville, Grenville, Correspondence, IV, 239Google Scholar; Political Register, 2 (1768), p. 264;Google Scholar Richmond to Rockingham, 12 Feb. 1771, in Olson, Alison, The Radical Duke, the Career and Correspondence of Charles Lennox, third Duke of Richmond (Oxford, 1961), p. 141.Google Scholar

¹³⁹ ’Anti-Sejanus, ’ in New and Impartial Collection of Letters, II, 4;Google Scholar Richard Kaye to Portland, 18 July 1766, Portland MSS, PwF 5927; Political Disquisitions proper for public Consideration, p. 19; The Principles of the Changes in IJ6$ Impartially Examined, p. 18; Newcastle to Kinnoull, 3 June 1763, B.M. Add. MSS 32,949, fo. 18; Walpole, , Letters, VI, 222;Google Scholar Hardwicke to Rockingham, 11 July 1766, Albemarle, , Rockingham, I, 363;Google Scholar Newcasde to Rockingham, 17 Nov. 1767, Rockingham 1–872; [Almon, ], Letter to Bute, pp. 28–9;Google ScholarThe Favourite, p. 14.Google Scholar It is this distinction made by all the opponents of Bute between the ‘real’ and ‘apparent’ ministers, between the ‘praetorians’ and ‘mercenaries’ which Burke elevated and institutionalized in his notion of the double cabinet in Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents (London, 1770).Google Scholar It is important to realize, however, that pace Christie (Myth and Reality, p. 30), Burke's pamphlet is not the natural starting point for an inquiry into the whig ‘myth’ of the 1760s. Outside his own party the idea of the double cabinet was rejected and his failure to pin the blame on Bute and his secret influence - the standard whig argument of the sixties - berated as an attempt to curry favour with the Thane. Though firmly located in the mainstream of opposition writing, the Thoughts drew conclusions and made inferences that few of the administration's opponents could accept. (Brewer, ‘Party and the double cabinet: two facets of Burke's Thoughts’, H.J., 1971.)

¹⁴⁰ The Secret Springs of the late Changes in the Ministry Fairly Explained, By an Honest Man. In Answer to the Abuse and Misrepresentations of a pretended Son of Candor (London, 1766), pp. 27–8.Google Scholar

¹⁴¹ Namier, , England, pp. 83–4;Google Scholar Bute MSS (Cardiff) 8/428; Namier, Lewis, Personalities and Powers (London, 1955), pp. 40–1.Google Scholar

¹⁴² Sedgwick, , George III to Bute, pp. xxiii–vii, lvi.Google Scholar

¹⁴³ Namier, , Personalities and Powers, p. 57.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁴ Namier, , Crossroads of Power (London, 1962), pp. 83–6.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁵ Namier, , England, pp. 47–51.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁶ Namier, , Crossroads, pp. 78, 87;Google ScholarNamier, , England, p. 45.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁷ Sedgwick, , George III to Bute, pp. xvi–ix.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁸ Foord, , His Majesty's Opposition, pp. 148–9;Google Scholar [Egmont], An Examination of the Principles and an Enquiry into the Conduct of the Two B[rothe]rs (London, 1749), p. 3;Google ScholarThe Test, I (6 Nov. 1756); ibid. 21 (2 Apr. 1757); [Ralph, James], The Remembrancer by George Cadwallader, Gent. Consisting of the Twelve First Essays from the Weekly Paper, Published under the above mentioned title (London, 1748), p. 17.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁹ [Pulteney, ], An Answer to One Part of a Late Infamous Libel, Remarks on the Craftsman's Vindication of his two honourable Patrons (London, 1731), p. 28;Google ScholarCraftsman, 22 (20 Feb.), 23 (24 Feb.), 44 (8 May), 72 (18 Nov.), 78 (30 Dec. 1727); B.M. Catalogue of Prints and Satires, 11, nos. 1925, 1939; ibid, in, pt. 1, nos. 2270, 2459; ibid, in, pt. 11, no. 3264; The Test, 1 (6 Nov.), 3 (27 Nov. 1756), 8 (1 Jan.), 11 (22 Jan.), 17 (5 Mar. 1757); The Constitution, with a Letter to the Author, Number Two (London, 1757), pp. 14–15;Google ScholarHaberdasher, O. M., Plain Reasons for removing a certain great Man from his M(-----)y's presence and councils for ever (London, 1759). P. 8.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁰ Namier, , England, pp. 51–7;Google ScholarSedgwick, , George III to Bute, p. xvi.Google Scholar The suggestion made by Brooke (Chatham Administration, p. 227) that opposition's attachment to the reversionary interest in some way imbued it with legitimacy, and that because there was no such interest in the early years of George III's reign Burke had perforce to find new ways to justify opposition (ibid. pp. 232–3) is nonsense. Oppositions before 1760 were frequently composed of those who had either the most oblique connexions with the Prince of Wales, or no connexion at all, and no member of any opposition whether a supporter of the heir to the throne or not, attempted to justify or legitimate opposition by reference to the reversionary court. Burke's argument may have been a new permutation of an old idea, but that idea was never the exclusive provenance of Leicester House. Besides, Burke's ideological antecedents lie as much with the Pelhamite Whigs as with any of those that opposed them. (Foord, , His Majesty's Opposition, p. 311.)Google Scholar

¹⁵¹ Christie, , Myth and Reality, pp. 36, 44, 49;Google ScholarPares, , George III and the Politicians, pp. 104–9;Google ScholarBrooke, , Chatham Administration, pp. 47–8.Google Scholar

¹⁵² For Pitt's resignation, see note 28 above. For the incident in 1766 see Bute MSS 1766/4, 8, 8a. The confusion at this meeting seems to have been the fault of Lord Eglinton who acted as intermediary between Bute and Grenville. It became clear at the meeting that Bute and Grenville were at almost complete cross purposes. Bute was very angry with Eglinton and made him sign a statement affirming that his (Bute's) purpose in calling the meeting had not been to subvert the government through intrigues with the ‘Interior’.

¹⁵³ For a characteristic example of incredulity, see Christie, , Myth and Reality, p. 49.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁴ Pares, , George III and the Politicians, p. 107.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁵ The opposition was especially adamant that the ‘king could do no wrong’ and that the concomitant distinction between an infallible king and a culpable minister should be observed as they believed that Bute and the king (at Bute's direction) did not act on this crucial convention (see note 120). It was very unusual in the 1760s for anyone publicly (or even privately) to admit that the king was personally responsible in any way for the events usually imputed to Bute, though as Christie points out (Myth and Reality, pp. 46–8) Junius did, and was berated by Rockingham for neglecting one of the keystones of whiggery.

¹⁵⁶ [Dowdeswell], The Sentiments of an English Freeholder, on the late Decision of the Middlesex Election (London, 1769), pp. 52–3.Google Scholar The author is identified in Burke, , Correspondence, II, 113 n.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁷ ‘CONSTITUTIONAL LIBERTY’, Gazetteer, 25 May 1763; [Jones, William], The Constitutional Criterion: By a Member of the University of Cambridge (London, 1768), pp. 18–19;Google Scholar[Priestley, ], The Present State of Liberty in Great Britain and her Colonies. By an Englishman (London, 1769), p. 17.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁸ ‘A Letter concerning libels, warrants, and the seizure of papers; with a view to some late proceedings, and the defence of them by the majority’, Gentleman's Magazine (1764), p. 618.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁹ ‘An answer to a series of queries’, Gazetteer, 28 May 1763; ‘NO MATTER WHOM’, ibid. 13 June 1763. It is important that such sophisticated distinctions could be made in letters in the daily press.

¹⁶⁰ Newcastle to Hardwicke, 3 Jan. 1761, B.M. Add. MSS 32,917, fo. 92; Newcastle to Rockingham, 26 Mar. 1765, Rockingham 1–447. When Hardwicke heard from Newcastle what the king was reported to have said he commented, ‘I am sorry to hear of the Language - Whoever speaks against My Lord Bute speaks against me. How can this come out of the School of Opposition? It is the very thing, wch. the grand opposition roared against Sir Robert Walpole's Ministry; and yet the late king never condescended to use such a language; nay would have been very angry had any body imputed it to Him’. (Hardwicke to Newcastle, 3 Jan. 1761, B.M. Add. MSS 32,917, fo. 96.)

¹⁶¹ [Almon, ], Biographical, Literary and Political Anecdotes, III, 32.Google Scholar

¹⁶² Richmond to Rockingham, 12 Feb. 1771; Olson, , The Radical Dulke, p. 141.Google Scholar

¹⁶³ Hill, B. W., ‘Executive Monarchy and the Challenge of Parties, 1689–1832’, H.J., XII (1970), 392–4;Google Scholar[Butler, ], Letter to the Cocoa Tree from a Whig, pp. 5–6;Google ScholarMinisterial Patriotism Detected; or the Present Opposition Proved to be founded on Truly, just and laudable Principles, By the Evidence of the Facts (London, 1763), p. 31;Google ScholarA Letter from Arthur's to the Cocoa Tree, in ANSWER to the LETTER from thence to the COUNTRY GENTLEMEN (2nd edn., London, 1762), passim.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁴ Blackstone, , Commentaries, I, 256–8;Google Scholar[Ruffhead, ], Considerations on the present dangerous Crisis, pp. 46–7.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁵ Pares, , George III and the Politicians, p. 100.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁶ Hence the emphasis of the opposition on their role as constitutional watch-dog, ensuring that constitutional abuses did not occur. ([Dowdeswell], Sentiments of an English Freeholder, p. 52.)Google Scholar

¹⁶⁷ Though Bute professed to be contemptuous of public criticism (Bute to Dashwood, n.d., B.M. Egerton MSS 2136, fo. 20) his sensitivity to abuse was well known (Whately to George Grenville, 13 June 1766, Grenville, , Correspondence, III, 246)Google Scholar, and such was his eagerness to prosecute his detractors that only the efforts of Campbell and Holland prevented more frequent prosecutions. (Campbell to Bute, 5 June 1762, Bute MSS; Jenkinson to [Philip Carteret Webb], 11 Oct. 1762, Guildhall, Wilkes MSS 214/3/101. See also note 79 above.)

¹⁶⁸ Walpole, Letters, v, 304.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁹ Sedgwick, , George III to Bute, pp. 195–6.Google Scholar Almost as soon as he came into office Bute began to talk of retirement, and he continued to do so until his resignation, even mentioning it in the House of Lords. (Sedgwick, ibid. pp. 166–7; B.M. Add. MSS 36,796, fos. 168, 184; Add. MSS 36,797, fos. 16–17, 24, 36–8; Walpole, , Memoirs of George III, I, 255;Google ScholarHMC Lonsdale 13th Rep. Pt. VII, p. 132.)Google Scholar There were rumours that Bute would resign as early as Aug. 1762, and Bute's talk of resignation after the mobbing of Nov. 1762 filtered through to the opposition. (Chase Price to Portland, 28 Aug. 1762, Portland MSS, PwF 7903; Kinnoull to Newcastle, 20 July 1763, B.M. Add. MSS 32,949, fo. 413.)

¹⁷⁰ Bute to Campbell, 30 Jan., 27 Nov. 1763, Bute MSS; Bute to Dillon, 8 Apr. 1763, HMC Appendix Second Report, p. 32;Google Scholar Bute to Fox [2 Mar. 1763], Ilchester (ed.), Letters to Fox, p. 172; Bute to Mure, 9 Apr. 1763, Caldwell Papers Part 2, 1, 176;Google Scholar Bute to George Townshend, 8 Apr. 1763, B.M. Add. MSS 36,797, fo. 42; Hardwicke to Newcastle, 8 Apr. 1763, Yorke, , Hardwicke, III, pp. 457–8;Google Scholar John Yorke to Royston, 3 May 1763, ibid, III, 493.

¹⁷¹ Which he certainly did not. Bute enjoyed retirement and determined never to return to office. (Bute to Campbell, 18 Nov. 1763, Bute MSS; Barrington to Buckingham, 9 May 1764, HMC Lothian, p. 250; Williams to George Selwyn, 14 June 1763, Jesse, J. H. (ed.), George Selwyn and his Contemporaries (4 vols., London, 1843–1844), I 226.)Google Scholar

¹⁷² Thus the Rockinghams were extremely reluctant to allow Lord Holland to attend their leader's levee in Oct. 1765 because, although ‘all the parliamentary lookers-out will immediately conceive that it is a great addition of strength and support to the present administration’, because of his connexions with Bute his presence would also ‘not tend to the general credit with the public, on which this administration founded their reliance of support’. (Albemarle, , Rockingham, I, 241–2.)Google Scholar

¹⁷³ Almost, because it was argued that Bute had procured a parliamentary majority through the insidious arts of corruption. ([Almon], Review of Lord Bute's Administration, 51 n.; [Almon], History of Late Minority, p. 65; [Butler, John], Serious Considerations as to the Measures of the present Administration (London, 1763), pp. 4–6, 8.)Google Scholar

¹⁷⁴ Clearly to provide an adequate explanation of how the quarrel between the Crown and the politicians came about, we must go beyond the views of the politicians and the king. But there is always a danger that in opposing the whig critique of George - or for that matter George's critique of his opponents (viz. that they were forming a conspiratorial cabal to undermine the just powers of the Crown) - to reality, we will exaggerate the folly and implausibility of either theory. Both are, after all, legends rather than myths; they may misconstrue the intentions of those they are criticising but they both certainly had a basis in fact.

¹⁷⁵ The trouble with asking this question is that it requires a definition of what is or is not unconstitutional behaviour, and as the only two definitions available are either the royal ‘tory’ or the ‘whig’ opposition definitions, historians have perforce adopted either the one or the other, thereby producing historiographically the same arguments deployed by contemporaries in the 1760s. Inevitably this provides a very partial account of the quarrel.