[219] The Author could judge a little of this, by what he had seen himself at the conclusion of his father’s Ministry. 1753, AND PART OF 1754. _Vernon._ Then for the truth and plainness of the case, I pluck this pale and maiden blossom here, Giving _my_ verdict on the _white rose’ side_. _Lawyer._ Unless my study and my books be false, The argument you held, was wrong in you;--(_To Somerset_) In sign whereof _I_ pluck a white rose too. _Shakesp. first Part of Henry VI._ CHAPTER X. Debates in Parliament at the commencement of the year 1753--The King of Prussia stops the payment of the Silesian Loan--The fictitious Memorial of several Noblemen and Gentlemen on the Education of the Prince of Wales--History of Lord Ravensworth and Fawcett--The latter’s charge of Jacobitism against persons holding situations under the Crown--Debate in the House of Lords on Fawcett’s testimony--Speeches of the Duke of Bedford, the Lord Chancellor, Lord Harcourt, Lord Talbot, the Bishops of Norwich and Gloucester, and the Duke of Newcastle. This year, soon made remarkable by some extraordinary occurrences, opened quietly; at least with events scarcely worth recording. A few independents of Westminster attempted, on the death of their representative, Sir Peter Warren, to revive an opposition to the Court, by again presenting Sir George Vandeput to the mob; but the idol’s holiday was past; and he himself soon declined the contest. The Earl of Marchmont, adopted into the Court, moved the Address in the House of Lords, but coldly and unanimated; the fire and acrimony which made him shine in Opposition were gone, and no grace had succeeded. In the other House, Lord Egmont reflected on the Address, which he said, he expected would have been prudent and discreet, but found some parts of it improper and vain-glorious: that he believed the measures were well intended, but would prove unsuccessful; that the College of Princes had objected to an election of a King of the Romans; that the new memorial of the King of Prussia, outwardly relative to the Silesian loan, was founded, he believed, on that Prince’s dissatisfaction with our conduct in the affair of the election; that he desired to avoid petulance, but thought it improper to give approbation to measures as wise, in which no wisdom had appeared, and that therefore, in wording the Address, he would omit the words _wisdom as well as_ goodness; that he acknowledged the goodness, not the wisdom. Mr. Pelham replied, that he thought the noble Lord (_who was as accurate as anybody in writing_)[220] had made a false emendation; that the purpose of maintaining peace was all that was aimed at in the speech; who would not own the wisdom as well as the goodness of his Majesty in this? This is all the speech says: is it good in the King or in Ministers to pursue bad measures? there cannot be great goodness and little wisdom.