Memoirs of the Reign of King George the Second, Volume 3 (of 3)Walpole, Horace
History
Memoirs of the Reign of King George the Second, Volume 3 (of 3)
Walpole, Horace
Great Britain -- History -- George II, 1727-1760
Through the course of the trial, which being in print it is not
necessary to recapitulate, the chief examinents were General
Cholmondeley[105] and Lord Albemarle; both appearing unfavourable to
Lord George, and the latter as little sparing Prince Ferdinand, when,
by any indirect question, he could draw forth evidence of the Prince
having been surprised into the battle. The rest of the Court took
so little share in the examination, that Cholmondeley complained of
the invidious part that was forced on him. Sloper was particularly
acrimonious in his evidence against Lord George, and was believed
actuated by General Mordaunt, so warmly did the latter resent Lord
George’s practices on the miscarriage at Rochfort; though, if Lord
George stirred up the prosecution of that affair, Mordaunt had only
suffered by implication: Conway was Lord George’s object; but Conway
was far from retorting that injury in the same manner.
Lord Granby, who was actually involved in the trial as evidence,
showed the same honourable and compassionate tenderness. So far from
exaggerating the minutest circumstance, he palliated or suppressed
whatever might load the prisoner, and seemed to study nothing but
how to avoid appearing a party against him--so inseparable in his
bosom were valour and good-nature. That the constitution of the Court
itself was not unfavourable to Lord George, appeared, when a question
that bore hard against him being put by General Cholmondeley, and
Lord Robert Bertie objecting to it, it was put to the vote, and by
the majority not admitted to be asked.
Lord George’s own behaviour was most extraordinary. He had
undoubtedly trusted to the superiority of his parts for extricating
him. Most men in his situation would have adapted such parts to the
conciliating the favour of his judges, to drawing the witnesses
into contradictions, to misleading and bewildering the Court, and
to throwing the most specious colours on his own conduct, without
offending the parties declared against him. Very different was
the conduct of Lord George. From the outset, and during the whole
process, he assumed a dictatorial style to the Court, and treated
the inferiority of their capacities as he would have done if sitting
amongst them. He browbeat the witnesses, gave the lie to Sloper, and
used the Judge Advocate, though a very clever man, with contempt.
Nothing was timid--nothing humble in his behaviour. His replies were
quick and spirited. He prescribed to the Court, and they acquiesced.
An instant of such resolution at Minden had established his character
for ever.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account