Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Stuart, John (1713-1792)
STUART, JOHN, third Earl of Bute (1713–1792), born in Parliament Square, Edinburgh, on 25 May 1713, was the elder son of James, second earl of Bute, by his wife Lady Anne Campbell, only daughter of Archibald, first duke of Argyll. His paternal grandfather, Sir James, afterwards first earl, represented Buteshire for several years in the Scottish parliament. On 25 April 1693 his place was declared vacant because he had not taken the oath of allegiance and signed the assurance. He was, however, re-elected for Buteshire in 1702, was made a member of Anne's privy council, and on 14 April 1703 was created Earl of Bute, Viscount of Kingarth, Lord Mount Stuart, Cumra, and Inchmarnock. Though named one of the commissioners appointed in 1702 to treat of a union with England (which did not then take effect), he afterwards opposed that measure, and absented himself from parliament when it was carried. He died at Bath on 4 June 1710.
The grandson succeeded as third earl on the death of his father on 28 Jan. 1723, and was educated at Eton, where Horace Walpole was one of his contemporaries. On 13 Aug. 1736 he married Mary, only daughter of Edward Wortley Montagu of Wortley, Yorkshire, and Lady Mary, his wife, the eldest daughter of Evelyn Pierrepont, first duke of Kingston [see Montagu, Lady Mary Wortley], an alliance which ultimately brought the large Wortley estates into his family. He was elected a Scottish representative peer in April 1737, and took his seat in the House of Lords for the first time on 24 Jan. 1738 (Journals of the House of Lords, xxv. 97, 159). He occasionally attended the sittings of the house, but took no part in the debates, and was not re-elected to the parliaments of 1741, 1747, and 1754. In 1737 he was appointed one of the commissioners of police for Scotland in the place of the Earl of Hyndford, and on 10 July 1738 he was elected a knight of the Thistle, being invested at Holyrood House on 15 Aug. following. He appears to have spent the greater part of the first nine years of his married life in the island of Bute, amusing himself with the study of agriculture, botany, and architecture (Chesterfield, Letters and Works, 1845–53, ii. 471), and to have removed to London soon after the outbreak of the rebellion in 1745. Here he seems to have acquired a passion for performing ‘at masquerades in becoming dresses, and in plays which he acted in private companies with a set of his own relations’ (Horace Walpole, Memoirs of the Reign of George II, 1847, i. 47). For his introduction to Frederick, prince of Wales, an event which laid the foundation of his future political career, Bute was indebted to a mere accident. A shower of rain after the Egham races in 1747 delayed the prince's return to Cliefden, and Bute, who happened to be on the race-ground, was summoned to the royal tent to join in a game of whist while the weather cleared (Wraxall, Historical and Posthumous Works, 1884, i. 319–20). Becoming a favourite of the prince and princess, he was soon constituted the leader of ‘the pleasures of that little, idle, frivolous, and dissipated court,’ and on 16 Oct. 1750 was appointed by Frederick one of the lords of his bedchamber (Chesterfield, Letters and Works, ii. 471). The prince's death in the following year rather increased than diminished Bute's influence in the household, and on 15 Nov. 1756, at the desire of the princess and her son, he was appointed groom of the stole in the new establishment (see Addit. MSS. Brit. Mus. 32684 ff. 92–3, 95, 96–7; Letters and Works of Lady M. W. Montagu, 1837, iii. 131). The king, who always spoke of Bute with the greatest contempt, refused to ‘admit him into the closet to receive the badge of his office, but gave it to the Duke of Grafton, who slipt the gold key into Bute's pocket’ (Waldegrave, Memoirs, 1821, pp. 64–8, 76–80). Bute became the constant companion and confidant of the young prince, and aided the princess in her daily task of imbuing his mind with Bolingbroke's theory that a king should not only reign but govern. For the purpose of instructing him in the principles of the constitution, Bute is said to have obtained from Blackstone a considerable portion of the manuscript of the ‘Commentaries,’ the first volume of which was not published until 1765 (Adolphus, History of England, 1840, i. 12). As the political adviser of the princess, Bute negotiated a treaty between Leicester House and Pitt against the Duke of Newcastle in 1755, and he took part in the conferences between those statesmen in 1757 (Waldegrave, Memoirs, pp. 37–9, 112–13; Hist. MSS. Comm. 11th Rep. pt. iv. p. 393). The intimate relations of Bute with the princess gave rise to much scandal, which, though founded on mere conjecture, was widely spread and commonly believed (ib. pp. 38–9; Walpole, Memoirs of the Reign of George II, ii. 204–5; Chesterfield, Letters and Works, ii. 471).
On the accession of George III to the throne, Bute produced the declaration to the council, which he had kept ‘lying by him for several years before George II died’ (Lord E. Fitzmaurice, Life of William, Earl of Shelburne, 1875, i. 43; see Walpole, Memoirs of the Reign of George III, 1894, i. 7–8). He was sworn a member of the privy council on 27 Oct. 1760, and on 15 Nov. following was appointed groom of the stole and first gentleman of the bedchamber. Though he only held office in the household, and had neither a seat in parliament nor in the cabinet, Bute was practically prime minister, and through him alone the king's intentions were made known (Harris, Life of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke, 1847, iii. 215). Lord George Sackville, who was an intimate friend of Bute, much to Pitt's disgust, was received at court as if he had never been disgraced, while Legge, who had quarrelled with Bute over a Hampshire election, was dismissed from his post of chancellor of the exchequer. It was obvious that Bute could not long remain in this anomalous position. Lord Holdernesse was therefore dismissed, and he was succeeded as secretary of state for the northern department by Bute, who received the seals on 25 March 1761. On 3 April his wife was created Baroness Mount Stuart of Wortley, Yorkshire, in the peerage of the United Kingdom, and in the following month he was elected a Scottish representative peer (Journals of the House of Lords, xxx. 102–3). The chief objects of Bute's policy were to conclude a peace with France, to sever England from a connection with German politics, to break up the whig oligarchy, and to make the king supreme over parliament. Bute skilfully took advantage of the jealousies among the ministers in order to get rid of Pitt, who had no desire for any peace which did not completely humiliate France. After several lengthy discussions in the cabinet, Bute succeeded in defeating Pitt's proposal to commence hostilities against Spain, and on 5 Oct. Pitt resigned office, refusing to ‘remain in a situation which made him responsible for measures he was no longer allowed to guide’ (Adolphus, History of England, i. 43). After an absence of more than twenty years Bute reappeared in the House of Lords at the opening of the new parliament on 3 Nov. From the very commencement of the new reign he had been hated by the populace for being a favourite and a Scotsman. Pitt's downfall still further increased Bute's unpopularity, and he was mobbed on his way to the Guildhall banquet on 9 Nov. (Chatham Correspondence, 1838–40, ii. 166–8). Before the year was over Pitt's policy was completely vindicated, and on 4 Jan. 1762 Bute was obliged to declare war with Spain. On 19 Jan. 1762 Bute ‘harangued the parliament for the first time,’ and ‘the few that dared to sneer at his theatric fustian did not find it quite so ridiculous as they wished’ (Walpole, Memoirs of the Reign of George III, i. 103). While laying the Spanish papers before the house on 29 Jan., Bute pompously informed his audience that ‘it was the glory and happiness of his life to reflect that the advice he had given his majesty since he had had the honour to be consulted was just what he thought it ought to be’ (Cavendish, Parl. Debates, 1841, i. 563, 565). On 5 Feb. he opposed the Duke of Bedford's motion for the withdrawal of the British troops from Germany, and declared that ‘a steady adherence to our German allies is now necessary for bringing about a speedy, honourable, and permanent peace.’ His speech on this occasion is said to have been ‘so manly, spirited, and firm’ that ‘the stocks actually rose upon it half per cent.’ (ib. i. 570–2; see also Parl. Hist. xv. 1218 n.) Bute had for some time been desirous of getting rid of Newcastle, who still clung tenaciously to office, though he had again changed his views and no longer supported Bute's foreign policy. When Bute proposed in the cabinet the withdrawal of the Prussian subsidy as the readiest means of forcing Frederick into a peace, Newcastle threatened to resign unless 200,000l. was raised for the prosecution of the war and the subsidy was continued. On which Bute dryly remarked that if ‘he resigned, the peace might be retarded;’ but he took care not to request him to continue in office (Harris, Life of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke, i. 278–9).
Bute succeeded Newcastle as first lord of the treasury on 26 May 1762, and on the following day was elected a knight of the Garter, having previously resigned the order of the Thistle. The changes made in the administration were few. Sir Francis Dashwood was appointed chancellor of the exchequer, and George Grenville succeeded Bute as secretary of state for the northern department. Lord Henley remained lord chancellor, Lord Granville lord president of the council, the Duke of Bedford lord privy seal, and the Earl of Egremont secretary of state for the southern department. The expeditions to the West Indies which had been planned by Pitt were carried out, but Bute, in his eagerness for peace, could not wait for the result. Without the knowledge of the cabinet he had for several months been secretly making overtures of peace to the court of Versailles through the mediation of Count de Viri, the Sardinian ambassador (Lord E. Fitzmaurice, Life of William, Earl of Shelburne, i. 137). When these negotiations had arrived at sufficient maturity, Bute entrusted them to the Duke of Bedford, who signed the preliminary 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’ (Walpole, 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 directly or indirectly, publicly or privately, have anything to do with his business, nor give advice upon anything whatever,’ and that Bute's brother, James Stuart Mackenzie, should be dismissed from his office of lord privy seal in Scotland (Grenville Papers, iii. 185, 187). Though the whigs for years continued to denounce Bute's secret influence behind the throne, it seems tolerably certain that all communications whatever on political matters between Bute and the king ceased from this time (Correspondence of King George III with Lord North, 1867, vol. i. pp. xx–xxi n.). It is true that he continued to visit the princess until her death, but ‘when the king came to see his mother, Lord Bute always retired by a back staircase’ (Dutens, Memoirs of a Traveller now in Retirement, 1806, iv. 183).
Bute twice voted against the government on the American question in February 1766 (see Hist. MSS. Comm. 9th Rep. App. iii. p. 22). On 17 March following he both spoke and voted against the third reading of the bill for the repeal of the Stamp Act, ‘entirely from the private conviction he had of its very bad and dangerous consequences both to this country and our colonys’ (Caldwell Papers, Maitland Club, 1854, vol. ii. pt. ii. p. 82). He was re-elected a Scottish representative peer in May 1768, and in the same year visited Barèges for the sake of his health. He subsequently went to Italy, where he remained for more than a year travelling incognito under the name of Sir John Stuart. He frequently complained of the malevolent attacks made on his character by his political opponents, and of the neglect and ingratitude of the king. ‘Few men,’ he writes to Home, ‘have ever suffered more in the short space I have gone through of political warfare’ (Works of John Home, ed. Henry Mackenzie, 1822, i. 151). The death of the princess dowager in February 1772 left him ‘without a single friend near the royal person,’ and ‘I have taken,’ he tells Lord Holland, ‘the only part suited to my way of thinking—that of retiring from the world before it retires from me’ (Trevelyan, Early Life of C. J. Fox, 1881, p. 277). Early in 1778 his friend, Sir James Wright, and Dr. Addington, Chatham's physician, engaged in a futile attempt to bring about a political alliance between Bute and Chatham. Bute took the opportunity of unequivocally denying his secret influence with the king, and declared that he had no wish or inclination to take any part in public affairs (Quarterly Review, lxvi. 265–6). Though his attendance had ‘not been very constant’ in the house, Bute was again re-elected a Scottish representative peer in November 1774. Lord North considered that ‘a dowager first lord of the treasury has a claim to this distinction, and we do not now want a coup d'état to persuade the most ordinary newspaper politician that Lord Bute is nothing more’ (Hist. MSS. Comm. 5th Rep. App. p. 209). Bute retired from parliament at the dissolution in September 1780 on the ground of his advanced age (ib. 10th Rep. App. vi. p. 38). He spent most of his time during the last six or seven years of his life at his marine villa at Christ Church in Hampshire. He died at his house in South Audley Street, Grosvenor Square, London, on 10 March 1792, aged 78, and was buried at Rothesay in the island of Bute.
Bute's widow, who was born at Pera in February 1718, and succeeded on her father's death, in February 1761, to his extensive estates in Yorkshire and Cornwall, died at Isleworth in Middlesex on 6 Nov. 1794, aged 76. Bute had a family of five sons and six daughters: (1) John, viscount Mount Stuart, born on 30 June 1744, who was created Baron Cardiff in the peerage of Great Britain on 20 May 1766. He succeeded to the earldom of Bute on the death of his father, and on the death of his mother to the barony of Mount Stuart. He was further advanced to the viscounty of Mountjoy, the earldom of Windsor, and the marquisate of the county of Bute on 21 March 1796. He held the post of envoy to Turin from 1779 to 1783, was ambassador to Spain in 1783, and died at Geneva on 16 Nov. 1814, leaving a large family, of whom Lord Dudley Coutts Stuart is separately noticed. (2) James Archibald (1747–1818), father of James Archibald Stuart-Wortley-Mackenzie, first baron Wharncliffe [q. v.] (3) Frederick, born in September 1751, M.P. for Buteshire, who died on 17 May 1802. (4) Sir Charles Stuart (1753–1801) [q. v.] (5) William Stuart (1755–1822) [q. v.], archbishop of Armagh. (6) Mary, who became the wife of James Lowther, earl of Lonsdale [q. v.] (7) Jane, who became the wife of George Macartney, earl Macartney [q. v.] (8) Anne, who became the wife of Hugh Percy, second duke of Northumberland [q. v.] (9) Augusta, who married Captain Andrew Corbett of the horse guards, and died on 5 Feb. 1778. (10) Caroline, who married, on 1 Jan. 1778, the Hon. John Dawson, afterwards first earl of Portarlington. (11) Louisa, the authoress of the introductory anecdotes prefixed to Lord Wharncliffe's edition of the ‘Letters and Works of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu’ (1837), who died unmarried in August 1851, aged 94. Bute was a proud but well-intentioned nobleman, with a handsome person and pompous manners. He possessed some talent for intrigue, but his abilities were meagre, and his disposition irresolute. Though admirably qualified to manage the petty details of a little court, he was utterly unfit to direct the destinies of a great nation. He had no knowledge of public business, no experience of parliamentary debate, no skill either in the management of men or in the administration of affairs. He was both ‘rash and timid, accustomed to ask advice of different persons, but had not sense and sagacity to distinguish and digest, with a perpetual apprehension of being governed, which made him, when he followed any advice, always add something of his own in point of matter or manner, which sometimes took away the little good which was in it, or changed the whole nature of it’ (Fitzmaurice, Life of William, Earl of Shelburne, i. 140). It is true that he succeeded in obtaining peace, and in partially breaking up the whig oligarchy, two objects upon which the king had set his heart, but he wanted the courage and obstinacy which George possessed and demanded in others. Few ministers have ever been more unpopular in this country. He was incessantly mobbed, lampooned, and caricatured. He could not appear unattended or undisguised in the streets without running considerable risks. The ‘North Briton,’ which was set up by Wilkes in opposition to the ministerial organ, the ‘Briton,’ occupied itself with abusing him and everything connected with him. A jackboot and a petticoat, the popular emblems of Bute and the princess, were frequently burnt by excited mobs, and his house was always the object of attack whenever there was a riot. The details of his administration are peculiarly disgraceful, and for corruption and financial incapacity it is not likely to be surpassed. Two charges of bad faith were brought against Bute during the negotiations for peace. In January 1762 secret overtures were made by him to Maria Theresa without the knowledge of Frederick. It was alleged that in order to induce Austria to consent to an early peace, Bute held out hopes that England would endeavour to obtain for Austria territorial compensation from Prussia, and that with a like view after the czarina's death he had urged upon Prince Galitzin the necessity of Russia remaining firm to the Austrian alliance. Both these charges were fully believed by Frederick, but were positively asserted by Bute to be untrue (Lecky, History of England, 1882, iii. 45–6).
Bute was by no means without polite accomplishments. He had a taste for literature and the fine arts, was passionately fond of botany, and possessed a superficial knowledge of various kinds of learning. Though haughty and silent in society, he was amiable and courteous when among his friends. ‘His knowledge,’ says M. Dutens, ‘was so extensive, and consequently his conversation so varied, that one thought one's self in the company of several persons, with the advantage of being sure of an even temper, in a man whose goodness, politeness, and attention were never wanting towards those who lived with him’ (Memoirs of a Traveller now in Retirement, iv. 178). As a patron of literature he rarely extended his aid to writers outside of his party, and was somewhat inclined to show an undue partiality to Scotsmen. To him, however, Johnson owed his pension of 300l. a year. Through his instrumentality Sir James Steuart-Denham [q. v.], the jacobite political economist, obtained his pardon. By him John Shebbeare was pensioned to defend the peace, while Dr. Francis, Murphy, Mallet, and others were employed in the same cause.
Bute was appointed ranger of Richmond Park in June 1761; a governor of the Charterhouse and chancellor of Marischal College, Aberdeen, in August 1761; a trustee of the British Museum in June 1765, and president of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland in December 1780. He was also a commissioner of Chelsea Hospital and an honorary fellow of the Royal College of Physicians at Edinburgh. When Bute was appointed prime minister he was obliged to hold his public levees at the Cockpit, as his town-house was too small for official receptions. In 1763 he purchased an estate at Luton Hoo in Bedfordshire, where Robert Adam [q. v.] built him a palatial residence. There he formed a magnificent library, a superb collection of astronomical, philosophical, and mathematical instruments, and a gallery of Dutch and Flemish paintings (see Autobiography and Correspondence of Mrs. Delany, 2nd ser. i. 542, ii. 33–6, 317). Since then two fires have unfortunately occurred at Luton Hoo: one in 1771, when the library, including that purchased from the Duke of Argyll, perished; the other in 1843, when the house was destroyed, but the greater part of the pictures and books were saved. Bute also formed a botanic garden at Luton Hoo, but he subsequently removed his valuable collection of plants to Christchurch (Lysons, Mag. Brit. i. 109). Lansdowne House, on the south side of Berkeley Square, London, was built by the brothers Adam between 1765 and 1767 for Bute, who, however, sold it before completion to Shelburne for 22,000l.
Sir Joshua Reynolds painted portraits of Bute in 1763 and 1773, and of Lady Bute in 1777 and 1779 (Leslie and Taylor, Life and Times of Sir Joshua Reynolds, 1865, i. 221, ii. 203, 279, 281). The later portrait of Bute, which has been reproduced as a frontispiece to the second volume of Walpole's ‘History of the Reign of George III’ (ed. Barker, 1894), is in the possession of the Earl of Wharncliffe at Wortley. There are engravings of Bute by Watson, Graham, and Ryland, after Ramsay (see Hist. MSS. Comm. 10th Rep. pt. i. p. 360).
Bute purchased for his own library ‘the Thomason collection’ of pamphlets published during the Commonwealth [see Thomason, George], but he subsequently sold it to the king, who presented this valuable collection, now better known as the ‘King's Tracts,’ to the British Museum in 1763 (Annual Register, 1763, p. 11; Edwards, Lives of the Founders of the British Museum, 1870, pt. i. pp. 330–3). Bute's collection of prints, a part of his library, and duplicates of his natural history collection were sold after his death (see catalogues of sales preserved in the British Museum, press mark 1255, c. 15. 1–3). The Public Record Office and the British Museum possess a number of Bute's despatches and letters, and many of the latter are contained in the Lansdowne and other manuscript collections, calendared in the reports of the historical manuscripts commission (cf. 3rd, 9th, 10th, 12th, and 13th Reps. App.). A few manuscripts chiefly relating to botanical subjects, apparently in Bute's handwriting, are in the possession of the present Marquis of Bute (Hist. MSS. Comm. 3rd Rep. p. 208, see also p. 202). In or about 1785 Bute, at the cost of some 12,000l., privately engraved twelve copies of ‘Botanical Tables, containing the different Familys of British Plants, distinguish'd by a few obvious Parts of Fructification rang'd in a Synoptical Method.’ &c. (London, 4to, 9 vols.). A collection of the contents of this rare work is given in Dryander's ‘Catalogue’ (iii. 132–3), while the original disposition of the twelve copies is duly noted in the copy in the Banksian Library at the British Museum. Another privately printed work, called ‘The Tabular Distribution of British Plants’ (1787), in two parts—the first containing the genera, the second the species—is sometimes attributed to Bute.[Authorities quoted in the text; Lord Albemarle's Memoirs of the Marquis of Rockingham, 1851, vol. i.; Dodington's Diary, 1784; Walpole's Letters, 1857–9; The History of the Late Minority, 1766; Burke's Works (1815), vol. ii.; Boswell's Life of Samuel Johnson, 1887; Diaries and Correspondence of the Rt. Hon. George Rose, 1860, ii. 188–92; Memoirs of Richard Cumberland, 1807, i. 206, 211–14; Extracts from the Correspondence of Richard Richardson, 1835, pp. 406–7; Lord Mahon's Hist. of England, 1858, vols. iv–vi.; Massey's Hist. of England, 1855, vol. i.; Jesse's Memoirs of the Life and Reign of George III, 1867; Earle's English Premiers, 1871, i. 156–84; Georgian Era, 1832, i. 307–9; Cunningham and Wheatley's London Past and Present, 1891, i. 14, 80, 163, 438; Calendar of State Papers, Home Office, 1760–5, 1766–9, 1770–2; Collins's Peerage of England, 1812, ii. 575–9; Douglas's Peerage of Scotland, 1813, i. 284–90; G. E. C[okayne]'s Complete Peerage, ii. 91–2, v. 409–10; Foster's Peerage, 1883, p. 107; Foster's Members of Parliament, Scotland, 1882, pp. 322, 324, 326, 327, 328; Gent. Mag. 1736 p. 487, 1748 p. 147, 1750 p. 477, 1763 p. 487, 1792, i. 284–5, 1794 ii. 1061, 1099, 1851 ii. 324; Notes and Queries, 3rd ser. vii. 181, 6th ser. x. 89, 175, 7th ser. ix. 230; Martin's Bibliogr. Cat. of Privately Printed Books, 1854, pp. 96–8; Haydn's Book of Dignities, 1890.]