Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 55.djvu/101

 liminary treaty at Fontainebleau on 3 Nov. During the progress of the negotiations Bute had frequent differences with George Grenville [q. v.], and he now began to doubt Grenville's ability to defend the terms of the treaty successfully in the face of the powerful opposition in the House of Commons. Unable to find any one else to help him in the coming crisis, Bute induced Henry Fox [q. v.] to desert his party, and to accept the leadership of the House of Commons. With the aid of this new ally and by the employment of the grossest bribery and intimidation, Bute was able on 9 Dec. to carry addresses approving of the terms of the preliminary treaty through both houses of parliament. According to the Duke of Cumberland, Bute's speech in the House of Lords on this occasion was ‘one of the finest he ever heard in his life’ (Bedford Correspondence, 1842–6, iii. 170). He appears to have been somewhat less pompous than usual, and to have theatrically declared that he desired no more glorious epitaph on his tombstone than the words ‘Here lies the Earl of Bute, who in concert with the king's ministers made the peace’ (, Memoirs of the Reign of George III, i. 175–6). Emboldened by success, Bute and Fox commenced a general proscription of the whigs. Newcastle, Grafton, and Rockingham were dismissed from their lord-lieutenancies, and even the humblest of officials who owed their appointments to whig patronage were deprived of their posts. The definitive treaty of peace with France and Spain was signed at Paris on 10 Feb. 1763. The terms obtained by Bute were less advantageous to this country than they should have been, and the peace was exceedingly unpopular. Instead of the popularity which Bute had fondly hoped to obtain as a reward for bringing the war to a conclusion, he found himself the object of still stronger animosity. He was even accused of having been bribed by France; and though the House of Commons, after a careful investigation of this charge in January 1770, pronounced it to be ‘in the highest degree frivolous and unworthy of credit’ (Parl. Hist. xvii. 763–85), it was long before the accusation was forgotten. Lord Camden told Wilberforce more than five-and-twenty years after the date of the treaty that he was sure Bute ‘got money by the peace of Paris’ (Life of William Wilberforce, 1838, i. 233). The introduction of Dashwood's proposal for a tax on cider still further increased the unpopularity of Bute's ministry. In spite, however, of the vehement opposition which it raised, Bute clung pertinaciously to the measure, and spoke in favour of it in the House of Lords on 28 March 1763 (Parl. Hist. xv. 1311 n.) On 8 April, only eight days after the bill imposing the cider tax had received the royal assent, Bute resigned office. The resolution to retire had not been so suddenly taken as the public supposed. He had received a promise from the king that he should be allowed to resign as soon as peace had been obtained (Bedford Correspondence, iii. 223–5), and it is evident that he meant to keep the king to his promise. Writing to Sir James Lowther on 3 Feb. 1763, he says ‘such inveteracy in the enemy, such lukewarmness (to give it no harsher name), such impracticability, such insatiable dispositions appear in those soi-disant friends, that if I had but 50l. per annum I would retire on bread and water, and think it luxury compar'd with what I suffer’ (Hist. MSS. Comm. 13th Rep. App. vii. p. 132). To his friends Bute declared that ill-health and the unpopularity which he had entailed on the king were the causes of his retirement, but the real reason probably was that, owing to want of support in the cabinet, he felt unable to bear any longer the labour and responsibility inseparable from the post of prime minister.

Though no longer in office, Bute still retained the king's confidence. He recommended George Grenville as his successor, and employed Shelburne as an intermediary in his negotiations with the Duke of Bedford and others for the formation of a new ministry. Bute hoped to make use of Grenville as a political puppet, but in this he was destined to be disappointed, for Grenville quickly resented his interference, and complained that he had not the full confidence of the king. In August 1763 Bute advised the king to dismiss Grenville, and employed Shelburne in making overtures to Pitt and the Bedford connection. On the failure of the negotiation with Pitt, Grenville insisted on Bute's retirement from court. Bute thereupon resigned the office of privy purse, and took leave of the king on 28 Sept. following (Grenville Papers, 1852–3, ii. 208, 210). While in the country he appears to have kept up a correspondence with the king (ib. iii. 220). He returned to town at the close of the session of 1763–4. His presence in London, however, gave rise to perpetual jealousies between him and the ministers, which were greatly increased by the introduction of the Regency Bill in April 1765 (see Hist. MSS. Comm. 12th Rep. App. ix. pp. 254–6). After the failure of the Duke of Cumberland's attempt to form a new administration in May 1765, Grenville obtained the king's promise that Bute ‘should never