This would seem to be an exhortation not very necessary. And if you are to go beyond that, is the union to be with those with whom, disagreeing formerly, you now agree, or are you to take for your associates those with whom you agreed formerly, but now disagree? The nature of the thing seems to admit no other choice."

In a few days after the date of this letter, the author of this narrative received another from him, containing more detailed observations on the same subject

"Pall Mall, January 5, 1804.

"WITH respect to coalitions, I am sorry that opinions take the turn which you describe; for though nothing has been either said or done on that subject, that I know of, between any of the parties, such is evidently the point to which they seem in a certain degree to tend, and to which it is most devoutly to be wished that they should tend. What What upon earth is it that people would have, or are wishing for? Is it desirable that such a man as Mr. Fox, powerful as he will be, in spite of all that can be done to prevent it, should for ever adhere to a system of politicks in which those who are supposed to mean the good of the country cannot join him? If he does not adhere to such a system, that is, if he has either been taught by experience that his system is wrong, or rather, putting all change on his part out of the question (which is the truer way), if on the questions of the present moment, he thinks as one would wish him,

is one not to co-operate with him, is one not to concert, to communicate with him, for giving effect to the opinions thus held in common? Upon what principle of common sense, or of common honesty, is this to be refused? Or how is the state ever to be served, or publick business ever to be carried on, if this is not the case? Men who have once differed upon any great question, must continue to differ for ever; till, in the course of not many years, no two men of any consideration will be found whom it will be possible to put together; and then that will happen which does happen, that a party will be formed out of all the underlings of all parties, whose oppositions have been just as great, and whose coalitions therefore must be just as monstrous, according to the phrase used, but of whom nobody complains, because neither their junctions nor oppositions have been matters that people have much troubled themselves about. But the way in which I wish people to satisfy themselves upon this subject is, by endeavouring to state their objections. They will find, I think, a confirmation of the opinion which they wish to confute, in the impossibility which they will be under of shewing it to be wrong. At least, it is fair to ask that the accusation should be distinctly stated, before an attempt is made at defence. If Mr. Pitt, Mr. Fox, Lord Grenville, myself, &c. should agree upon any question or measure, what is there immoral or wrong in our communicating, and concerting together, upon the best means of carrying it into effect? I might add, though it is not necessary, what is there that should make such an

agreement, upon many points, either impossible or very unlikely? The agreement I am speaking of; — the concert in consequence may from a thousand causes be sufficiently unlikely, and those causes, perhaps, far less creditable to the parties than their union would be."

As the session proceeded, the three parties which had thus accidentally fallen into the same ranks, found opportunities of cementing their strength, and of carrying on conjoint operations, very formidable in their nature to those whom they assailed. A motion made by Mr. Pitt, on the 15th of March 1804, for an enquiry into the state of the navy, had the effect of uniting in its support his own friends with those of the Grenvilles, Mr. Windham, and Mr. Fox;- and though it was negatived by a majority of 71, an opinion began rather generally to prevail that Mr. Addington's administration was not long-lived. In its stead, the country seemed to expect that a ministry would be formed on a broad basis, uniting all the parties then in opposition, and having in its cabinet the two great rival leaders who had for twenty years divided the suffrages of the nation. From such an union, strengthened by such powerful auxiliaries as Lord Grenville, Lord Spencer, and Mr. Windham, the highest advantages were confidently looked for. In a letter which I received from Mr. Windham, dated the 29th of March, after adverting to recent divisions in the house, and to the opinions which were entertained of a change of ministers, he added the following passage: "What the ministry may be that will

come in the place of the present one, it is difficult to say, I shall clearly not be a friend to any that does not fairly try to be a comprehensive one.” It appears, therefore, that the decision upon which he afterwards acted, had thus early been resolved upon.

On the 11th of April, upon the third reading of the Irish Militia Bill, another trial of strength took place, in which the numbers of the allied oppositionists approached very near to those of the ministers; being 107 against 128. An allusion to this division, and to its probable consequences, is contained in a letter addressed to this writer by Mr. Windham, from which is taken the following short extract:

a

"Pall Mall, April 19, 1804.

"THE late division has, I suppose, set the politicians of Norfolk speculating, as well as the politicians here. The opinions of the learned seems to be (I am not one of the learned) that the fate of the ministry is pretty much decided; not of course by the mere effect of that division, but by the causes that led to it. I suppose the fact may be, that, bating the respite which they get by the present state of the King's health, they can hardly hope to stand long. Then will come the question of what is to succeed them; and to this, I am far from professing to be able to give an answer. think I have a guess, and that guess is not favourable to any arrangement of which I am likely to make

part."

I

The ministers, however, fell only by repeated attacks. On the 23d of April, Mr. Fox moved for a committee to consider of measures for the defence of the country. This motion received the support of Mr. Pitt and Mr. Windham, and of their respective friends, amounting in all to 204 against 256. A division, two days afterwards, on the Irish Militia Bill, proved still less favourable to the ministers, who could count only 240 votes against 203.

By these latter divisions, the fate of Mr. Addington's administration was decided. Mr. Pitt, in submitting a list of names to the royal consideration, not only included that of Mr. Fox, but is said to have earnestly i and warmly recommended his admission into the new cabinet. But the attempt proved unsuccessful, and Lord Grenville, Lord Spencer, and Mr. Windham declined in consequence, to take their seats in a cabinet which was not to be formed on the extensive plan of including the heads of all the parties who had been acting together in opposition. Mr. Pitt, however, accepted the premiership, taking with him Lord Melville, and others of his immediate political friends, to whom were joined Lord Hawkesbury, Lord Castle reagh, the Duke of Portland, Lord Eldon, and some. other members of the preceding cabinet.

Mr. Windham was now once more the ally of Mr. Fox, and the adversary of Mr. Pitt; - a situation which unjustly exposed him to a charge of inconsistency. Though little inclined to admit that any deliberate act of Mr..Windham's life could require apology, the writer of this narrative may, perhaps, be