though without office had great power. On the elevation of the attorney-general, Sir Robert Henley, to the woolsack, his Lordship had the praise of the public for disinterestedness in allowing Sir Charles Pratt to take the place over the head of his son, who nevertheless experienced some disappointment at being passed over. But on Sir Charles's promotion to the presidency of the Common Pleas in January 1762, Lord Hardwicke saw his son invested with the attorneygeneralship.

On the secession of Mr. Pitt and the Duke of Newcastle, and the formation of the Bute ministry in the following May, the new attorney-general began to feel his position uncomfortable, and, though tempted with the prospect of the Seal in case of a vacancy (which however did not take place), he wrote seriously to his father of his intention, if he resigned his office, of retiring altogether from the bar. Although his father was at least in latent opposition to Lord Bute's administration, he remained attorney-general during its continuance, and at its termination he advised the prosecution of the famous No. 45 of the "North Briton" published on April 23, 1763; but he had nothing to do with the general warrant on which its fire-brand author John Wilkes was arrested. In the subsequent ministry of George Grenville he defended the king's messengers in the actions brought against them for acting under it; but in subsequent debates he acknowledged the illegality of such warrants. In August 1763 an attempt was made to form a new administration on a Whig basis, and the king had apparently a satisfactory interview with Mr. Pitt; but a sudden and unaccountable stop was put to the negotiation. On the 3rd of November following this failure, Mr. Yorke thought proper to resign his office; and in the debate that soon after took place in the House of Commons he maintained his opinion against that of Chief Justice Pratt. On his quitting office he attended the court

on the outside bar in his stuff gown, although when appointed solicitor-general to the Prince of Wales in 1754, he had received a patent of precedence; deeming probably that that patent was rendered void by his resignation. His brethren of the bar however paid him the compliment of giving him the privilege of precedence and pre-audience over them. He was chosen recorder of Gloucester in 1764 in the room of his father, who had died in March.

On the subsequent death of Sir Thomas Clarke the post of master of the Rolls was offered to him and refused; but he accepted a patent of precedence next after the attorneygeneral. In the miserable ministerial differences that followed, which resulted in the Marquis of Rockingham becoming prime minister, Mr. Yorke was induced again to accept the office of attorney-general in July 1765, upon the king's promise that he should have the Great Seal in less than a twelvemonth. When however in the following year by another intrigue the ministry was again changed, and Mr. Pitt (now created Earl of Chatham) obliged the king to make Lord Camden chancellor, Mr. Yorke again threw up his office; but kept his lead at the bar with the same success that had ever attended him. The Earl of Chatham soon retiring, the Duke of Grafton became the head of the ministry, against whose measures a strong opposition was formed, in which the Earl of Hardwicke was one of the most zealous; and Mr. Yorke, though taking no very active share, was of course united in the same ranks with his brother. Lord Camden, though chancellor, at length felt obliged to give utterance to his condemnation of the policy of his colleagues, and was accordingly deprived of his office in January 1770. The Duke of Grafton knew not where to look for a successor; the tenure of his power being so frail, that none of his own party, if any were competent, would accept the precarious honour; and among his political antagonists he could

not expect to find one who would not spurn the temptation. The attempt was made on Mr. Yorke, then the most popular lawyer among them; and he had given the duke an absolute refusal. This he had reiterated to the king; but in an evil hour he was induced to have a second interview with his majesty, when by flattery, by pressing entreaties, and even by threats, he was so overborne as at last unwillingly to consent, without making any stipulations for his personal benefit. This occurred on January 17, 1770.

His brother was, as he says, "astounded;" and the opposition were loud in their disapproval; but all observation was soon silenced by the public being overwhelmed by the announcement three days after of his sudden death. It is not to be wondered at that under such circumstances a report should have arisen that he died by his own hand; that it should be circulated with minute details in various publications; and even that it should still be believed by many; though no proof was ever produced that it had any substantial foundation. The evidence on the contrary seems to be,-that no inquest was holden by the coroner; that persons were immediately after the death admitted to view the body; that Horace Walpole (no friend to the family), in a private letter written at the time, states that the death was caused by a high fever and the bursting of a blood vessel; and that on a recent revival of the report the surviving members of the family gave it a distinct and positive contradiction.' The subject is too delicate for discussion, which would lead to no useful result. It is enough to say that the melancholy event was to be attributed to his vexation caused by his friends' disapprobation, and to his anxiety how to meet the confusion of the times. The patent conferring upon him the title of Lord Morden, which had been prepared, but had not

1 Morning Chronicle, May 12, June 6, 1828.

passed the Great Seal, was after his death pressed upon but declined by his widow.

Such was the termination of the aspirations of Charles Yorke. To be the second chancellor of his family was a natural ambition. It was an office to which his undoubted talents, his extensive practice, and the high positions he had held in the profession, entitled him to aim: moreover, in which he would have had the universal suffrage of the bar: and which the favour and even the absolute promise of his sovereign warranted him in expecting. But of a reserved habit, fickle and irresolute, jealous of honour, yet sensitive of the slightest blame, he fell upon times when it was difficult to define the shades of party, and almost impossible to pursue an entirely independent and unexceptionable course. Twice had he accepted, and twice resigned the office of attorney-general, and each acceptance and resignation seemed to be dictated more by personal than political impulses: and at last, partly by flattery, and partly by fear, he was induced to permit the great object of his hopes to be thrust into his unwilling hands, not only against his settled and expressed convictions, but at a time when he was sure to be assailed with the deepest rage of his recent associates, and to risk the more dreaded coldness of his family and friends.

His first wife was Catherine, daughter and heir of the Rev. Dr. William Freeman, of Hammels in Herts. His second wife was Agneta, one of the daughters and coheirs of Henry Johnson of Great Berkhamstead. By each he had issue. Philip, his son by his first wife, became third Earl of Hardwicke by the death of his uncle without issue in 1790, and was himself succeeded in the title in 1834 by his nephew the present peer.

INDEX

TO THE EIGHTH VOLUME.

The names of the Judges whose Lives are given in this Volume are printed in
SMALL CAPITALS.