He resisted bribery, and generally succeeded in his views, or, if baffled, resigned his office. The son of this nobleman, however, pursued far different maxims, and pertinaciously clung to the douceurs and infamy of office; for _infamous_ it most certainly was, to practice measures his own sentiments condemned. Never did man accede to power on more just or noble principles, and never did man forsake those principles with less reserve. He forgot all obligations, and at a happy crisis, when he might have availed himself of the occasion of honorably fulfilling them, in advancing the liberty and happiness of the country, he was eternally launching out into vapid and unmeaning encomiums on the boasted excellencies of the British constitution, instead of adhering to his solemn contract, of exerting all his influence and abilities to reform its blemishes. With all the failings of this minister, his caution and plausibility were admirably calculated to entrap the confidence of the landed and monied interest, and he turned it to the best account, labouring with all his zeal to inculcate a belief of the flourishing state of the national finances, enforcing every circumstance tending to confirm this belief, and concealing every truth that would serve to diminish or destroy it. Will not such a man, then, be regarded by posterity as a time-server and an apostate? After the death of Mr. Pitt, Mr. Fox joined the ministry; and, at the same time, Lord Sidmouth continued a member of the cabinet! But Mr. Fox did not retain his situation long. His health soon after declined, and he died on the 13th of September following. Of this great statesman, we may say, "take him for all in all, we ne'er shall look upon his like again." He was an unbending patriot; possessed of great political ability, and loved, as well as advocated, the cause of LIBERTY. Light and shade, however, were mixed in Mr. Fox's picture. He permitted private friendship, in one instance, to over-balance his public duty. We refer to the language used by him in the House of Commons, in April, 1787, which must have been against his conscience. He there _denied_ the marriage between the Prince of Wales and Mrs. Fitzherbert, when, in fact, _he assisted at that very marriage_; but, because he had engaged secrecy to the prince, he thought proper to utter a direct falsehood rather than break his promise upon the subject! Mr. Pitt's death was an unpleasant consequence to the usurping queen, and perhaps impelled the ardour of her determination to get her favourite son's divorce from his injured wife settled as soon as possible. The scheme for this purpose, which seemed most practicable, was the obtaining some document as evidence _against the moral character of the princess_. By the queen's express desire, therefore, Lady Douglas had removed her abode, nearly six years previously, close to Blackheath, and was purposely employed to invent some dishonourable report against the princess.