THK NEW PRUSSIAN PROPOSALS. 
29 
was natural, therefore, that Grenville, uninformed of the real indiffer¬ 
ence of Austria to the Netherlands, and personally suspicious since 1791 
of the methods and purposes of the Prussian court, should be inclined 
to an Austrian rather than to a Prussian alliance. Pitt, on the other 
hand, was, by the credit attaching to his diplomacy in virtue of the 
Triple Alliance of 1788, more favorable to a close friendship with 
Prussia. After the withdrawal of Prussia in 1794 no hope was seri¬ 
ously entertained of effective aid from that quarter, though in moments 
of desperation Pitt, and at times even Grenville, renewed futile attempts 
to .secure it. These divergences of opinion in the Cabinet had not as 
yet amounted to a real disagreement, but the divergence existed and 
was in some degree at least a factor in determining the diplomatic 
action of the English government. The Prussian withdrawal was in 
no sense the result of Grenville’s hostile attitude, but the quick turn tq / 
Austria was a distinct victory for a line of policy long considered and 
now matured by him. Momentarily, however, an Austrian convention 
seemed impossible of achievement, due not to any opposition by Pitt, 
but to the inability of the two governments to agree upon terms. 
PORTLAND’S ACCESSION AND THE NEW PRUSSIAN PROPOSALS. 
July, 1794, to February, 1795. 
While events rather than personal ascendency were thus bringing „ 
Grenville’s foreign policy into the foreground, an incident of home 
politics disclosed the fact that Pitt was the master in that field at least,/ 
and that he did not have so high a regard for Grenville’s diplomatic!, 
services as to be unwilling to sacrifice him to the needs of party organi-/ 
zation. Tentative suggestions in July, 1792, for the accession of the 
Portland wing of the Whig party had resulted in November of that 
year in definite proposals by Pitt for a coalition.* These were refused, 
and it was not until July, 1794, that the breach between Fox and Port-' 
land had reached the point where complete rupture was inevitable. I 
Portland headed a defection of Whig politicians composed of men who 
* The negotiations for a coalition with Portland in 1792 have not been proved to 
the satisfaction of historians. Oscar Browning in “ England and France in 1793 ” 
concludes that no definite proposals were made by Pitt, and that Malmesbury’s 
account is untrustworthy, being based wholly on Loughborough’s statements. The 
letters in the Dropmore MSS. are meager, but they indicate that in July, 1792, Pitt 
was making efforts to gain the support of Portland, and they prove that in No¬ 
vember terms were actually proposed by Pitt and w T ere refused. Pitt to Grenville, 
July 22, 1792 ; Dundas to Grenville, Aug. 9; Pitt to Grenville, Nov. 18; Bucking¬ 
ham to Grenville, Nov. 27. Dropmore, II, 294, 299, 335, 344. 
