.ST. 34.] OF THE ORDERS IN COUNCIL. 33 



not the writing to Glasgow, which was only a want of 

 proper delicacy, but the not informing me, both that 

 I might have the option of receiving the gift voted, 

 paying the price, and especially suffering the Glasgow 

 men to remain under the imputation of not performing 

 their promise to me. 



There was much resemblance between this Liverpool 

 popular proceeding and the generous intentions of 

 Queen Caroline eight years after; and the parallel 

 shows how little courtly and popular levity and want 

 of consideration may occasionally differ. 



Upon the defeat of the bill for divorcing the Queen, 

 I waited upon her to communicate the event, and 

 tender my congratulations. She said, "There is a 

 sum of 7000 at Douglas Kinnaird's " (her banker's), 

 " which I desire you will accept for yourself, giving 

 4000 of it to the other counsel. " This I of course 

 refused, saying that we all received, or should receive, 

 the usual fees, and could not take anything further. 

 She insisted on my telling my colleagues, which I said 

 I should, as a matter of course, but that I w r as certain 

 they would refuse, as I had done. Next day, when I 

 again waited upon her, she recurred to the subject, 

 and asked if I had told them that she laid her com- 

 mands upon us. I said I had told them so distinctly, 

 and that they all refused with the greatest respect, 

 and a full sense of her kind intentions. She asked 

 what could be the reason of it all ; and I endeavoured 

 to explain that professional etiquette made it impos- 

 sible. She still was disconcerted, and said lawyers 

 were unaccountable people. A few weeks after, Kin- 

 naird, when he took his account to her, suggested that 

 the salaries of her ]aw officers were in arrear, never hav- 



VOL. n. *c 



