The journal of Elizabeth Lady Holland (1791-1811) Volume 2 (of 2)Holland, Elizabeth Vassall Fox, Lady
History
The journal of Elizabeth Lady Holland (1791-1811) Volume 2 (of 2)
Holland, Elizabeth Vassall Fox, Lady
Holland, Elizabeth Vassall Fox, Lady, 1770-1845 -- Diaries
This was argued at his house on Wednesday, 11th, in the evening, at
a meeting consisting of Ld. Grenville, Mr. Grenville, Lds. Howick,
Holland, Henry Petty. Both the Grenvilles said they were ready to go
out if their colleagues thought they could not retreat with honour,
but they showed themselves very unwilling to that measure. Petty said
the same, with the same reluctant offer. The great argument for not
breaking with the King on this point was that this case would appear
a bad one to the public, as it might be plausibly argued that they
had deceived the King and committed his Governt. to more than he had
authorised them to grant. Lds. Howick and Holland, who were the most
averse to concession, were induced at length to give up, seeing that
their colleagues, though they offered to resign upon this point, did it
reluctantly and with a grudge; and being also satisfied that the whole
transaction with the King might be represented in the light that was
argued by the others.
[Sidenote: THE CATHOLIC QUESTION]
On Thursday, the 12th, Ld. Howick had an audience of the King, in which
the K. behaved to him in the most civil manner, paid him compliments to
himself and family, lamented that Ld. Howick had so far misunderstood
him in their last conversation, as to imagine that he had his consent
to propose the Bill to Parlt., but declared himself satisfied that
this was a mere misapprehension on his own side, in consequence of his
understanding the reverse to be Ld. Howick’s idea of the conversation
from Ld. Sidmouth soon after he parted from Ld. Howick. He assured
Ld. Howick that he had spoken of the affair to no persons out of the
Cabinet, except to persons of his own family; that he had taken no
measures to form an Administration, and that if he must separate from
his present advisers, he trusted that, as he had behaved and should
behave honourably to them, they would not retire from his service till
he had made arrangements to supply their place. He expressed himself in
the most flattering manner to Ld. Howick personally, and remarked that
he had not been aware till lately of his sentiments on the Catholic
question. It seems, when Ld. Sidmouth told him the week before what
were Ld. Howick’s opinions on that subject, he started with evident
surprise, from which it was argued some days ago that in the end he
would yield. Ld. Howick endeavoured to extract from him what was the
most he would concede in the present question to the Catholics, but
found him resolved not to go beyond the Irish Act of 1793. When Ld.
Howick mentioned the extending the same to the Navy, he started and
expressed disapprobation. When Ld. Howick said, if the clauses were
extended to the Catholics in England, they must also be extended to the
Protestant Dissenters (who were not included in the Irish Act, because
the Test Act was abolished in Ireland in 1774 or 1775), he started
again, and exclaimed, ‘But this is attacking the Establishment.’ In a
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