George's popularity was impaired by the influence exercised over him by his mother and Bute, which excited the ridicule of the higher class of society and the bitter feelings of the London populace. Bystanders sneered when they saw him on his way to visit his mother, and it is said that on one occasion he was insulted with a coarse jest. In Bute's case the idea that he was the royal favourite would alone have sufficed to make him hated. The term was generally applied to him. Yet he was not a favourite in the more odious sense of the word, for though the king showed him signal favour, their relations were rather political than personal. His nationality strengthened the dislike with which he was regarded. The jacobite troubles had increased the prejudices of the English against the Scots; they looked down upon them as a half-barbarous people, poor, and greedy to enrich themselves with the wealth of England. Scorn and indignation were aroused by the grants of honours and employments made to Bute's Scottish followers who came in great numbers to the court under his patronage. Bills were posted in London with the words: "No petticoat government! No Scotch minister! No Lord George Sackville!" Any unpopular measure was set down to Bute's advice. The beer-tax was believed to have been suggested by him, and provoked a disturbance in the theatre in the king's presence, which caused Bute much annoyance. He was yet to rise higher in the state, and to arouse more violent feelings of hatred and contempt. FOOTNOTES: [1] Mahan, _The Influence of Sea Power upon History_, pp. 318-19. [2] Earl Waldegrave's _Memoirs_, p. 36. [3] See, for example, "Memorandum of what past at Sir R. Walpole's house," Sept. 9, 1725, Add. MS. 32,687 (Duke of Newcastle's Papers), f. 155. [4] _Engl. Historical Rev._, xvii. (1902), 678 _sqq._, an interesting article by Mr. Winstanley to which I am indebted. [5] Add. MS. 32,914, ff. 171, 189; the order in the text is that of the manuscript, the names and offices within parentheses are supplied. [6] His appointment about Nov. 16, Add. MS., _u.s._, f. 369; he appears as a "lord of the cabinet," Jan. 8, 1761, Add. MS. 32,917, f. 180. [7] Add. MS. 32,929, f. 143; see also _Engl. Hist. Rev._, _u.s._ [8] _Dropmore Papers_, iii., 337-38, 341-43 (Hist. MSS. Comm.); Earl of Malmesbury, _Diaries_, etc., iii., 465. [9] J. Morley, _Walpole_, p. 157. [10] From the Revolution the two principal secretaries of state took one the southern, the other the northern department. Both were responsible for home affairs. Foreign affairs were divided between them, the southern department including France, Spain, etc., the northern, Germany, the Low Countries, Denmark, Sweden, and Russia. A third secretaryship was established for the colonies in 1768, and abolished in 1782, when the distinction between northern and southern was discontinued and the secretaryships were divided into home and foreign.