acquired much parliamentary distinction. His father, Henry Fox, was a conspicuous figure among that remarkable group of statesmen who were formed under the auspices of Walpole, and, during the reigns of the two first Georges, conducted the government of the empire. One marked characteristic of this school, common alike to Pelham, Carteret, and Dodington, was to maintain the supremacy of the house of commons over the crown and the nation, to disregard all other powers in the state, and, accordingly, to govern solely in the interest of the actually existing majority at St. Stephens. This system, possible only in the eighteenth century, led necessarily to parliamentary irresponsibility and corruption, to administering public affairs by a dominant oligarchy; and in Henry Fox it found one of the greatest exponents who ever carried it out in England. It seems necessary to say thus much of him even in this place, since he directed the early education of his celebrated son; and much of the youthful career of the latter, and even several of his more mature opinions, especially as regards the Middlesex election and the position of the house of commons under the coalition, may be traced to his father's character and precepts. Having imbibed his first notions of politics from his father, Mr. Fox was educated at Eton and Oxford. This training confirmed the frankness and manliness, the open-heartedness and simplicity, which formed the bright side of his character, and it gave him a thorough knowledge of the ancient languages, with the fine taste such knowledge usually instils; but it left him ignorant of mathematics, and of even the rudiments of moral or political science. He acquired, however, for himself a mastery over modern languages, and so thorough an insight into modern history, that it may be questioned if any public man of his time, with the one exception of Edmund Burke, was equally conversant with modern historical problems. In 1768 he was elected member for Midhurst, and, as might have been expected from his father's latest antecedents, he at once sided with the ministry of the "king's friends," which, beginning under the nominal rule of Chatham, fell ultimately into the hands of the duke of Grafton and Ludworth. From 1768 to 1774 he voted almost always with this administration; and true to his father's avowed principles as regards the omnipotence of the house of commons, he supported the exclusion of Wilkes from parliament, defended the return of Colonel Luttrel for Middlesex, and maintained with the regular champions of prerogative that the colonies were liable to imperial taxation. As might have been expected, he also vindicated the peace of Paris, which in those days was made a kind of test of party; and in this part of his career he appeared as steady a "king's friend" as even George III. could have wished for. During this period it should be added that he obtained a subordinate office from Lord North, and that although he showed from the first, great powers in debate, strong common sense and capacity for reasoning, with a command of vigorous though homely language—these were so impaired by awkwardness and hesitation in delivery, and also by want of sufficient study—that his full oratorical abilities were as yet undiscovered. He was also much addicted in these years to the dissipation which, unhappily, was a law of fashion; and Horace Walpole describes him as leading a life of racing, gambling, drinking, and debauchery, which must have kept his highest faculties comparatively in abeyance. Few in 1770 could have anticipated that the dissolute young tory, whom Junius darkly sneered at as the "black boy," and whose only promise was that of vigour in debate, would develop into a great whig statesman, and perhaps the first of parliamentary speakers. In 1774, however, a quarrel with Lord North regarding a breach of privilege of the house of commons, in which he took the prerogative side of the question against that mild though able statesman, drove him into the ranks of the opposition. Here he had the advantage of the acquaintance of Edmund Burke, and under the training of that profound thinker—Fox always called him his "political instructor"—he acquired a great deal of valuable information, imbibed liberal ideas of public Law and government, and gradually became a whig in his tendencies. He now rapidly rose to the head of the opposition, and displayed extraordinary powers in debate, a strength of reasoning on practical subjects that has not been surpassed; extreme readiness in seizing all the points of a case, and bringing them out in clear relief; and that plain and manly command and ease which never fails to succeed in the house of commons. The openness, too, and the simplicity of his character, made him a very engaging party leader; and while his friend and preceptor went on refining and philosophizing, and stood somewhat coldly aloof from his fellows. Fox was always useful in making allies, and in winning over recruits to the opposition. From this period till the fall of Lord North, he acted usually with the Rockingham whigs, and took an active part in the stormy debates which marked the progress of the American war, and the decline of the ministry which engaged in it. Thus he voted on Dunning's famous resolutions, supported Burke's scheme of economic reform, and discussed ably the different plans for conciliating America which were mooted during the course of the struggle. On two or three occasions, however, he opposed the whigs, and insisted, with strange and vehement pertinacity, upon the propriety of his earliest tory opinions, especially as regards the Middlesex election. By the year 1779 he was, upon the whole, the first debater in a house of commons which possessed the wit and skill of Lord North, the genius of Burke, the logic of Dunning, the pleasantry of Fitzpatrick, and the sarcasm of Barré, but as yet his rank and calibre as a statesman were not perhaps ascertained completely. "Fox," said Horace Walpole about this time, "seemed to leave pleasure with regret, and to bestow only spare moments on the government of a nation; . . . but in debate no man ever exceeded him in the clearness of argument which flowed from him in a torrent of vehemence, as declamation sometimes does from those who want argument." Lord North fell in March, 1782, and Fox became secretary of state in the Rockingham-Shelburne ministry which followed. This short-lived ministry is still celebrated for its grant of independence to Ireland, and for its plans of economic and parliamentary reform; and as Fox was one of its leading spirits, he is entitled to the credit due to this policy. But it fell to pieces on the death of Lord Rockingham within four months from its formation, and it was succeeded by the government of Lord Shelburne. Why Fox would not take a part in this ministry is a question not very easy to answer. Lord Shelburne and his party were whigs, and had acted in concert with the Rockingham connection for a period of nearly twelve years. It was natural that Fox should join a ministry which still numbered some of his friends, and in part at least sustained his opinions. But instead of doing this, he preferred to coalesce with Lord North and the much discredited tory party, and thus, as it was said, "to form an inauspicious union, the banns of which were forbidden by Pitt in the name of the country." It is certain that he disliked Lord Shelburne, who had an unlucky reputation for insincerity; that he conceived that in office he had been thwarted by that statesman, and that he objected to the Shelburne policy towards France of cordial peace and open tariffs; and these causes may have led to the coalition. But whatever the ruling motive may have been, in February, 1783, was seen the spectacle of Fox, with Burke and the Rockingham whigs, in strange alliance with Lord North and the tories, combining to overthrow Lord Shelburne's government, and forming a close political league out of elements completely antagonistic, and of statesmen who recently had been open enemies. The consequences were many and momentous. The nation was disgusted at the coalition, and jealous of its parliamentary majority; the king, who had been very unpopular, began to be looked up to as an instrument to get rid of what was termed a corrupt cabal; the Shelburne party became in favour with the country; and the train was laid of a series of events, which for many years excluded Fox and the whigs from office. It should be added that one of the more personal of these consequences was the severance from Fox of young William Pitt, who, having been made chancellor of the exchequer by Lord Shelburne, resented bitterly what he conceived an unfair coalition against his ministry. It has been well said "that no judicious and impartial biographer will seek to justify or even palliate Fox's coalition with Lord North;" and even Lord John Russell, the eulogist of that statesman, condemns it as a great error. The coalition ministry was formed in 1783, with Fox as its foreign secretary. Its first measure was to conclude a peace with France, and to recognize the independence of America, almost in the identical terms which had been proposed by Lord Shelburne. Mr. Pitt, now the leader of the opposition though only in his twenty-fourth year, reminded the house in indignant language, that this peace differed in no substantial respect from that which had been projected by his leader, and on which his government had been outvoted. The ministry, however, had a majority in parliament, and although it was already disliked by the king, who only sought an opportunity to
