of that country. Within less than three years she was elevated to the station which she had sighed for as a child, her husband succeeding, on the death of his father, to the throne.

Her husband, her; but, like

The married life of the Queen of Denmark was far from being a happy one. indeed, was devotedly attached to many weak persons, he lived in dread that the world might imagine he was governed by his wife, and, in order to give the lie to any rumours of his uxoriousness, supported a mistress as evidence of his independence. The circumstance, though a source of unceasing misery to his queen, is said on no occasion to have been alluded to by her even in her most confidential letters to her own family. On her quitting England she had observed to her brother, the Duke of Cumberland, "If I am unhappy, my relations shall never know of it."

As the character of the Queen of Denmark resembled that of her mother, so also was it a curious coincidence in their respective histories, that the husband of each should have maintained a mistress, in order, as we have seen, to preclude the suspicion of his being under matrimonial restraint. But a still more remarkable coincidence, was the similarity of the circumstances under which both mother and daughter quitted the world. Queen Caroline had owed her death to feelings of mistaken delicacy, which induced her to keep a disorder, not otherwise fatal, a secret from her physicians. On her death-bed

she observed to her daughter, as if prophesying what would be the fate of the survivor, "Louisa, remember, I die by being giddy and obstinate, and keeping my disorder a secret." It was certainly a striking circumstance, that the daughter should not only have died of exactly the same disease, but that her death should also have been caused by keeping that disease a secret. "Her death," says Walpole, "(which was terrible, and after an operation, that lasted an hour,) resembled her mother's, a slight rupture which she concealed, and had been occasioned by stooping when she was seven months gone with her first child." In her last moments she addressed a moving letter to her relations in England, by whom she seems to have been deeply beloved and deservedly lamented. Her death took place on the 8th of December, 1751, the day after she had completed her twenty-seventh year.

228

THOMAS PELHAM,

DUKE OF NEWCASTLE.

Born in 1693.-Educated at Westminster School and Clare Hall, Cambridge.-Succeeds to the barony in 1712, and inherits the princely wealth of his maternal uncle, the Duke of Newcastle. His early zeal in support of the Electoral family. Created Duke of Newcastle in 1715.-Appointed Lord Chamberlain in 1717, and created a Knight of the Garter. Raised to the Secretaryship of State in 1724.- His vanity and pompousness.-Sketches of his character by his contemporaries.-Amusing anecdote of his ignorance.-His fear of sleeping in a room alone.-His dislike and apprehension of the sea. His nervous solicitude respecting his health, -The Duke's treachery to Sir Robert Walpole.-Appointed Prime Minister, on the death of his brother, Henry Pelham. -His utter incompetency.-Lord Waldegrave's character of him.-George the Second's antipathy to the Duke.-The latter's mean subserviency.-Quits office in 1756.-Reinstated the following year.-The Duke declines a pension on his dismissal from office in 1762.-Extracts from Ellis's Original Letters.-Death of the Duke in 1776.

THE life of this pompous and offensive personage presents a striking instance of a man, (without natural abilities or acquired knowledge, and indeed without even personal courage,) not only rising to the post of prime minister, but, during a period of sixteen years, tyrannizing over a

master by whom he was alike detested and despised. As the events of his inglorious administration have fortunately little to do with the character of this work, we shall content ourselves with relating a few anecdotes respecting this most insignificant of statesmen and ridiculous of men.

Thomas Pelham, eldest son of Thomas Lord Pelham, by Grace, sister of John Holles, Duke of Newcastle, was born on the 21st of July, 1693. He received his education at Westminster School, and afterwards at Clare Hall, in the University of Cambridge. On the death of his father, in February 1712, he succeeded to the Barony of Pelham, having previously inherited the princely estates of his maternal uncle, John Holles Cavendish, Duke of Newcastle, who died on the 5th of July, 1711, without leaving male issue. His great wealth; the political influence which he possessed in several counties; and more especially the zeal which he loudly expressed for the interests of the House of Hanover, previous to the accession of that family to the throne, were the means of raising him into notice and power. During the last two years of the reign of Queen Anne, though only in his nonage, he is said to have distinguished himself, in rather a peculiar manner, in support of the cause of the Electoral family, by retaining a large mob of people, who, when opportunities offered, shouted vociferously in their behalf.

On the accession of George the First to the throne, the zeal and partizanship of the Duke

His

of Newcastle were amply rewarded. In October, 1714, within a month after the King's arrival, he was created Earl of Clare, and in August the following year, Duke of Newcastle. On the breaking out of the rebellion, in 1715, he raised a troop of horse to act against the Jacobites, and two years afterwards was appointed to the post of Lord Chamberlain, and honoured with the Garter. In April, 1724, his ambition was still further gratified by being appointed Secretary of State on the removal of Lord Carteret. incompetency to discharge the important duties thus confided to him must have been sufficiently notorious. His great colleague, Sir Robert Walpole, however, seems to have regarded the Duke's intellectual deficiency as of little consequence, compared with the importance of securing a powerful nobleman, whose insidious and intriguing disposition, and great political influence, might otherwise have rendered him a formidable adversary.

The Duke of Newcastle was at this period in his thirtieth year. He was inexperienced in state affairs and ignorant in common ones, and as he succeeded a man of great and acknowledged talent in the office of Secretary of State, the appointment was naturally looked upon by the public with distrust. With his accession to office he assumed the most pompous airs. He affected a peculiar solemnity of manner; was always apparently immersed in business, which, however,