 Thank you so much for that introduction, Murray. My paper pushes the temporal boundaries of this conference right to its limits as we end in the late 18th century. My approach and research really seeks to bring together new and traditional approaches to political culture, focusing on the intersection of social, political, and dance histories in late George and London. A ball is sometimes a more important event than one supposes, Princess Leven observed in the early 19th century. In George and Britain, balls were an essential and integral element of the annual season in London, a season which revolved around the political sphere of the Palace of Westminster and the court timetables of St. James's Palace, emanating outwards through the streets of St. James's and Mayfair towards Knightsbridge and beyond. The realm of politics was by no means divorced from the social events of the season, featuring... Okay. That better. Oh, yes. The realm of politics was by no means divorced from social events of the season, featuring a rota of balls, dinners, and soirees. Early political histories of the 18th century, including the works of Sir Louis Namier, trace the high-level political structures and machinations of state, parliament, and party politics. Whilst Namier's historiographical contribution to the study of 18th century politics may be considered fairly traditional, this paper provides a critical re-examination of the importance of patronage and political alliances. The jockeying and formation of networks at the top of society constitutes only a narrow segment of the diverse range of political engagement. Yet this view of politics was central to elite families forming political parties beyond the Palace of Westminster. My research demonstrates a new angle through which this traditional mode of politicking was enacted through the Prince of Wales and his coterie of female friends and via dancing. In the late Georgian period, the term politics had a significantly different meaning than merely relating to the administration of government policies. Indeed, the men and women in this paper referred to politics and politicking in the light of the strategizing and maneuvering of members of the Bonton and the events they hosted to win favor with their party or ministry. The seasonal politicking of the nobility and gentry in London is being analyzed most recently by Hannah Gregg and Amanda Vickery. Similar to their research, this paper classifies politics as being connected to the workings of parliament within the Palace of Westminster and beyond. The specific political role of domestic and social spaces and the ballroom in particular, however, has remained relatively unexplored. With London hailed as the locus of social and political power and influence, the ballrooms of the political elite were a critical extra parliamentary space as balls provided performative entertainment with the body on display and danced used as a tool to assert political declarations. This paper analyzes the politicking process of key members of the opposition in the Westminster election of 1784, assessing the ways in which balls and dancing contributed to the development of political consciousness and the formation of party in domestic spaces. Balls were held by elite families to promote and protect their social power and political credit. Politics infiltrated the sphere of social dance, blurring the boundaries between entertainment and political machinations. The lure of dance was not only used to win political adherence to various factions or parties, but it was also used to signal collective identity from wearing politicized clothing to performing allegiance through synchronous motion. Whilst dancing at balls indicated party cohesion, it could also be used to indicate factional divisions. Throughout this paper, I argue that the Prince of Wales was instrumental to the development of party politics as it was his love of the fashionable accomplishment that saw dance used as a tool for communication, transforming the ballroom into a space for political dialogue. With an absence of firm political parties that revolved around ideology at the beginning of George III's reign, factions developed based on the personality and charisma of the politician. By the time the Prince of Wales was set up with his own establishment in the 1780s, Charles James Fox reigned in opposition to William Pitt the Younger. These leaders of factions gathered together MPs and political families based around that leader's personality and charisma. Fox, for example, was remembered by Edmund Burke as a man to be loved. It is that personality that won supporters over to his spouse, the causes and ideologies of their leader. Personality was a key factor in the development of the politician's networks in his constituency and amongst his peers in parliament. Women were largely responsible for orchestrating and hosting balls and acting as lady patronesses for politicians and their supporters. While political leaders were able to draw proponents to their agendas through the strength of their personalities, hostesses bolstered the positions of these political groupings. Lamerizing, energizing and propelling them towards the development of party. Indeed, women's personalities were as vital as those of the politicians they supported. Frances Anne Crewe was remembered as an honorable, generous-minded creature, fair to all parties, to all sets, firm to old friends. Warmth and hospitality engaged her guests on behalf of her own family as well as the politicians they supported. She opened her doors to Whig supporters as did the Duchess of Devonshire to provide a form for political discussion. These women hosted events during the parliamentary session to bolster their family's social and political credit. The celebrity status achieved by the Duchess of Devonshire in her lifetime was an essential component of Whig's strategy, deploying glamour as a tool to generate support for the opposition. Indeed, Gillian Russell astutely argues that libertine flamboyance, female exhibitionism, and the cultivation of public celebrity was used to define the Prince of Wales's party in defiance of the Farmer George probity associated with the king. These women consequently hosted suppers and balls, bolstering support for their political candidates, whether connected by family, friendship or faction. Outside the rigid ceremony of George III's court, the king's brothers and sons used dance to break away from the traditional power of the monarchy in support of the opposition. The Prince of Wales's position in society and his fondness for dancing made him a sought-after guest for any hostess of the bone tome. The Prince of Wales's establishment in the early 1780s fundamentally changed the type of political jockeying for power. As the flamboyant and energetic heir apparent made being an opposition fashionable. The reversionary interest was a pervasive influence over the bone tome, with fashionables flocking to support the Prince of Wales and his faction in the West End homes of the opposition. The 1784 general election has been intensely analyzed by historians, but very little has been written on the role of dancing within the campaign. Indeed, balls and dancing were staples in the political candidates arsenal to treat borough and county constituencies during Georgian elections. Election balls were used to generate support for political candidates prior to the final poll and to thank voters for their support afterwards. However, they were also used to secure members of the bone tome to government and opposition parties. The rivalry between Fox and Pitt the Younger played out nationally, but in the constituency of Westminster, the campaigning in the streets was for Fox and his opponents, Baren Hood and Sir Cecil Ray. With Westminster's close proximity to court and the homes of the political elite, the election of these local MPs was projected onto the national stage. While the polls were open for 40 days, electioneering for the borough began much earlier. The three candidates addressed the electors in a meeting in Westminster Hall on February 14th, 1784, prompting Fox's female supporters, including the Duchess of Devonshire, Lady Dunn Cannon, Lady Melbourne, Mrs. Buvery and Mrs. Crew to canvas on his behalf from March in advance of the prorogation of parliament on April 6th. By the closure of the polls on May 17th, the final votes were cast for Baren Hood with 6,588 votes, Charles James Fox with 6,126 votes and Sir Cecil Ray with 5,895. Prior to the election and the final poll which saw both Fox and Hood elected for Westminster, the Prince of Wales actively promoted Fox, playing a key role on March 17th with the ball at Carleton House. The decoration of the newly refurbished home was the press's primary focus, yet private correspondence revealed that the ballroom was a political space that was astutely read by guests. Horace Walpole attended wherein he was surprised to note that the Amazons of both parties were invited and not a scratch was given or received. That Walpole specifically commented upon this detail indicates that inviting political rivals to his balls was an unexpected practice on the part of the Prince of Wales. Similarly, Mary Hamilton, courtier and sub-governor to the Prince's sisters, recounted that amongst the guests was no distinction of party as there were both the ins and outs. Indeed, she observed that the Prince's attentions were properly divided and nothing in my opinion could be more proper, more gracious, more like a gentleman and a prince than his behavior. What a pity that one who knows so well how to do what is right ever fails doing so. In behaving appropriately towards his guests in this instance, the Prince of Wales conversely highlighted the lack of such hospitable behavior on previous occasions. However, the ultimate purpose of the ball at Carleton House was to generate support for Fox prior to the election and indicate the Prince of Wales's position as leader of the opposition. The election of Fox to his seat in Westminster two months later on May 17th was seen as a crucial victory for the opposition against the Crown, despite the majority for Pitt the Younger as Prime Minister. After the announcement of the poll, Fox was chaired in a procession that led from the Hustings to Devonshire House. The route traversed the City of London into Mayfair from the Hustings in Covent Garden onto the Strand to Parliament Street. The procession continued up to circle the courtyard of Carleton House, down Pal Mall, past the political clubs on St. James's Street before concluding at Devonshire House where Fox addressed the crowd. The route really celebrated the victory of Fox as an MP and acknowledged the support of his elite patrons. A plethora of festivities ensued, including a dinner at Devonshire House, a breakfast fate at Carleton House, and a ball at Mrs. Cruz in Groveron Square. The fate at Carleton House on May 18th was attended by approximately 600 fashionables, many of whom donned Fox's colors of blue and buff, as well as Fox laurels and Fox medals around their necks. Attending the fate at Opposition Headquarters solidified a collective identity for those opposed to the Prime Minister and the Monarch. The company assembled for a déjeuner at the breakfast fate at around noon or one o'clock with dancing between four and seven o'clock in the afternoon before a supper. The Derby Mercury reported that four bands of music were disposed at a proper distance in the garden, allowing for music to be heard throughout the event. The breakfast fate was strategically timed so that sounds of music, dancing, revelry, and merriment would be heard emanating from Carleton House as George III's official procession to open parliament passed through St. James's Park. The event demonstrated the significant political influence the heir apparent had accrued, and by deliberately sliding the king, proclaimed the personal and political differences between Monarch and heir, father, and son. The Prince of Wales spent the afternoon dancing country dances and coutillions with his friend and ally, the Duchess of Devonshire, a choice that was both conventional and political. As the highest ranking woman at the fate, custom obliged the Prince of Wales to dance with her. Beyond precedence, it was also a statement of political alliances and victory, acknowledging the Cavendish family's financial support during the campaign and the Duchess's role in canvassing for Fox. The Prince of Wales also honored Sophia Walpole, the wife of the honourable Horatio Walpole, later Earl of Orford. He was the MP for Kings Lynn in 1784, a staunch member of the opposition, and the Duke of Portland's cousin by marriage. As the Duke of Portland was the Duke of Devonshire's brother-in-law, dancing with Sophia Walpole was a similarly potent demonstration of the opposition's political networks. The election ball hosted by Mrs. True on May 18th to celebrate Fox's victory was similarly employed as a political tool and was highly reported on in the press. The company gathered on mass in Fox's colours and the Prince of Wales' feathers for the ball which began at 10 o'clock in the evening and lasted until six or seven o'clock following morning. The Derby Mercury reported that the Prince of Wales arrived, fashionably late, with his chosen quadril or cotylion set who danced the most elegant figure dance that could be formed. The opening dance featured Fox canvassers, including the Duchess of Devonshire, her sister Lady Duncanon and Miss Keppel. The figure dance showcased familial networks as Mr. Greville's presence in the dance as one of Mrs. True's brothers paid tribute to her, paid tribute specifically to her role within the campaign. With gambling as a fashionable hallmark of the wig elite, the Prince of Wales' quadril set also highlighted his connections to Brooks, the opposition club in St. James's. As another of the dancers was Tom Stepney who helped to run the Farrow Bank there. Similarly, Lady Banfield was the wife of Sir Charles Warwick, the Theronage Banfield, who as MP for Exeter voted with the opposition and had been elected to Brooks in February 1784. These elegant dancers were selected not only for their political connections and skills, but it was also for their aptitude on the ballroom floor. The figure dance itself was an important emblem of victory, being danced by only four couples aligned in a square, all couples facing inwards. As a dance form, the Catillion was foreign elite and exclusive. Performing a fashionable French dance highlighted the glamour of the now fashionable opposition. Its square formation, limited to only eight dancers, afforded its members an exclusivity of contact, suggestive of deeper intimacy in comparison to the more open English country dance with its long ways sat. The Prince of Wales's quadril thereby performed their cohesion in dance, embodying their political networks and alliances. Following the figure dance, the Prince of Wales danced both minuettes and country dances, starting each with the Duchess of Devonshire. The minuet was a presentation dance while the country dances were more sociable, encouraging the mixing of the dancers. Celebrating electoral victory and displaying political allegiance through dance was critical to solidifying party spirit amongst the opposition members. The language used to describe these events clearly reflected the performative nature of dance. The participants referred to not always as dancers, but as performers. Dance made these celebrations politically potent as the performers demonstrated their allegiances through a non-verbal medium in which their bodies represented their political beliefs. Networks and alliances were made flesh as the choice of partners and dance form built and signaled a collective party identity. Attending and dancing at Balls was an established feature of the season in Georgian London. Within the homes of the nobility and gentry, Balls were strategically deployed to accrue support and reveal divisions within the political elite. By the 1780s, the activities of the opposition reached new heights with the arrival of the Duchess of Devonshire and the Prince of Wales. Their glamorous scathe attracted attention and really ratcheted up the political significance and implications of entertainments. The Prince of Wales' flamboyance in the ballroom and in society generated a cohesive community and identity against the state nature of George III's court. However, in doing so, the opposition galvanized Pitt the Younger to generate support for the government through his female relations and supporters, albeit less successfully than the fashionable opposition. The ballroom as an intersection of mobile elements was a space that was astutely read by members of the political elite through the material culture of clothing and decorations, lists of ball attendees and descriptions of dancing in the press and in correspondence. Recognizing that domestic and social spaces played an immense role in Georgian politics, women competed to organize balls and soirees, actively swaying political processes outside of the Palace of Westminster. Women were instrumental to glamorizing the political process using dancing and balls to symbolize and generate support for the opposition or government. A reevaluation of traditional political histories through space, actors, and their activities lends vital nuance to Georgian politicking. With a recognition that a ball was a more important event than one supposes, the activities within the ballroom are brought into sharper focus. The Prince of Wales and his supporters were adept at turning attendance at events, including dance and the dances themselves into public statements of political allegiance. Bodily performances provided opportunities to create political cohesion and indicate factional divisions. Indeed, the opposition adapted the provincial tradition of Georgian election balls for larger political ends. Publicized by the press, dancing and balls entered the arsenal of 18th century political families as tools for the expression of political identities, alliances, and networks. These parties were truly scenes of party politics. Thank you.