The following excerpt (pages 294-501) has been copied from

“Towards him, even political rivalry seems scarcely to have engendered either prejudice or animosity; and in the estimate of the principles, by which he was guided, the ends which he pursued, and the means which he employed, both his opponents and friends, with little exception, cordially agree.

His knowledge was rather useful than extensive; his understanding more solid than brilliant. His abilities did not burst forth with that splendor which has distinguished the opening career of many statesmen, but were gradually developed by experience and practice, and seemed to grow equal to the occasions, by which they were called into action. He was slow and cautious in deciding, yet firm and persevering, when his resolution was once formed; though he knew the proper time and occasion, to bend to popular prejudice, or public opinion. Instead of declining under the weight of years, his energies continued to increase; and, at no period did he better assume the spirit and authority of a great minister, than in that which immediately preceded his dissolution.

His temper was naturally equable and conciliatory; and his disposition candid and unassuming. He was cautious in raising expectations, but faithful in the performance of his promises. These qualities, instead of being deteriorated by the exercise of power, distinguished to the latest period, the minister as well as the man; and to them he owed more friends, and a stronger attachment, than the most profound and refined art could have acquired. Even his opponenets felt the value of such merits; and however disposed to question the propriety of his measures, they seldom failed to render justice to his sincerity, disinterestedness, and integrity. Indeed, a better proof cannot be given, of the suavity of his manners, and the impression produced by his manliness and candor, than the treatment he experienced in his intercourse with the sovereign. Notwithstanding the irritability of temper, and the pertinacity of opinion, which marked the character of George II, his Majesty invariably behaved towards Mr. Pelham with kindness and attention; always listened to his advice with complacency; and, in numerous cases, yielded to his representations, though frequently exposed to his favorite plans of continental policy. When he was informed of his death, he testified his regret by the exclamation, ‘Now I shall have no more peace!’

In manner, Mr. Pelham united dignity with ease. Though naturally grave, yet no one was more free from affected reserve or repulsive austerity; and, in his social hours, no one could more gracefully unbend, and mingle in the playfulness of conversation.

In his public character, he was uniformly moderate and disinterested; and, it is mentioned to his honor, by almost the only author who has treated him with obloquy, that he lived without abusing his power, and died poor. In a word, Mr. Pelham may be ranked among the few ministers who enjoyed at once the esteem of the sovereign, the confidence of the parliament, the respect of opposition, and the love of the people.

Without the natural gifts of a great orator, he always spoke with good sense and effect; and his speeches, though rarely marked with bursts of eloquence, or decorated with rhetorical graces, were remarkable for judgment and perspicuity. Though occasionally too colloquial and redundant, they were delivered with such candor and simplicity, as to convince his hearers that they directly conveyed the real sentiments of his heart; and were rendered still more effective, by the general conviction which prevailed of his honesty, economy, and patriotism.

By his well known attachment to true liberty, and the respect he ever preserved for the principles of the constitution, he dispelled all suspicions of the slightest intention to extend the royal prerogative beyond its due bounds, or in the least degree to encroach upon the rights of the people. He may indeed be classified among those sound patriots, whom Mr. Burke distinguishes by the name of the Old Whigs, who were equally free from faction on the one hand, and servility on the other.

In the development of his financial arrangements, he is said to have ;proved himself a worthy pupil of Sir Robert Walpole; and, in many instances, is admitted to have been scarcely inferior to his able master. As a minister, however, he was certainly deficient in a knowledge of the general system of European policy. Indeed, he seems to have limited his cares and ambitions to his own peculiar province, the finances and domestic economy of the country; and when he did venture to interfere with the management of foreign affairs, it was rather from necessity than inclination. From this principle, he felt all the sensibility of a financier, with regard to the state of public credit; and gave cause for the complaints of his colleagues, that he sometimes manifested too much despondency and alarm in the House of Commons. Sometimes, also, like Sir Robert Walpole, he was carried by his love of peace to too great an extent of concession. As the head of the financial department, he was a frugal steward of the public money; and having experienced the difficulties and embarrassments attending protracted and unsuccessful hostilities, he was led to consider even a doubtful peace as preferable to the most successful war; and to think no sacrifice too great for the preservation of national tranquility.

To the agriculture, manufactures, and commerce, of the country, he was vigilantly attentive; and not only rose superior to the narrow principles of preceding times, but suggested or promoted a greater number of useful and practical regulations, than any other individual, in a similar period of time, since the Revolution.

The great feature of his administration, is the reduction of the interest on the national debt, and the consolidation of the public funds. This important operation was not only accomplished with peculiar prudence, but with equal justice towards the public and the fundholder; and no better proof can be adduced of its merits and effects, than the ready acquiescence with which it was attended, and the general satisfaction since expressed in its favor.

In his private life, Mr. Pelham was equally moral and regular. He had, as Lord Chesterfield observes, many domestic virtues, and no vices. He was a tender husband an indulgent father, and a kind master; and though peculiarly liberal in his religious opinions, he was a zealous member of the church of England.