merchant princes. Early in November a committee was appointed for
investigating the nature of their charters, treaties, and grants, and
for calculating the expenses which had been incurred on their account
by government. In the course of this scrutiny two questions suggested
themselves to the committee; namely, whether the company had any right
to territorial acquisitions, and whether it was proper for them to enjoy
a monopoly of trade. Some of the members argued that the company had
a right, while on the other side some maintained that, from the costly
protection afforded it, government had an equitable claim to the
revenues of all territory acquired by conquest. It was the opinion of
the cabinet, that the state did not possess its proper share of the
company’s profits, and the chancellor of the exchequer conceived that by
either taking their territorial conquests into the hands of government,
or making them pay largely for keeping that management in their ow a
hands, the state would obtain that wealth of which it stood so much
in need. Chatham’s attention was drawn to this subject, but he merely
advised that Beckford should make a motion for examining into the state
of the East India Company, and remained still in the west of England.
This motion was made, and the house resolved itself into a committee of
inquiry, and called for papers. In the meantime the company suggested
an amicable arrangement, and presented a series of demands, among which
were—that the administration should prolong the charter to the year
1800, or to a further term, and to confirm to the company the sole and
exclusive trade of the East Indies for three years at least after the
expiration of the charter granted in the last reign; that it should
agree to an alteration in the inland duty upon tea, with the view of
preventing smuggling; that it should allow a drawback on the exportation
of tea; that it should alter the duties on calicoes and muslins; that
it should consent to some proper methods of recruiting the company’s
military forces, and for strengthening their cause in India; that it
should prevent the commanders of the company’s ships and others from
conveying any kind of warlike stores clandestinely to the East Indies;
that it should use its strong interposition with the court of France
to obtain large sums of money which the company had expended for the
maintenance and transport of French prisoners to Europe; and that it
should use its strong interposition likewise with the court of Spain
with respect to the Manilla ransom, that the company might obtain
indemnification for the great expenses incurred by that expedition. The
company laid before the house their charters, treaties with the native
sovereigns, letters and correspondence, and the state of their revenues
in Bengal, Bahar, and Orissa; but the whole affair was so complicated,
that the ministers could not make themselves thoroughly masters of
the subject. Not one would, in fact, undertake the management of the
business. They shifted the proposals from one to another, and could not
come to any determination what to accept or what to reject. At every
stage of the business it was attended with violent debates. Townshend
was strongly in favour of an amicable arrangement with the company,
laying great stress on the _quantum_ to be given for the prolongation of
the term of their charter, while Company declared that the salvation
of the country depended upon the proper adjustment of this nice affair.
Still Chatham kept aloof from the business, and he either would not from
illness, or could not from despondency, give his thoughts and directions
in writing as to what steps to take and what further motion to make. In
the end, therefore, after many divisions, a bill was framed, granting
nearly all that was asked for by the company, and binding it to pay
£400,000 per annum, in half-yearly payments, and to indemnify the
exchequer, should any loss be sustained in consequence of lowering
the inland duties on tea, and the allowance of the drawback on its
exportation. But the term of this contract was limited to two years;
commencing from the 1st of February of the current year; so that the
company had a further interference with their territories and wealth in
prospect: but till the expiration of that term, their territorial rights
were fully admitted.
While this subject was under parliamentary discussion, the proprietors
of East India stock demanded of the court, that, as the company had
gained so much territory and so many new advantages, a larger dividend
should be declared. In compliance with this demand the dividends were
increased from ten to twelve and a half per cent., which step called for
the interference of government. In order to check a proceeding which was
considered calculated to renew the gambling stock and share jobbing of
the memorable South Sea year, two bills were brought into the house by
ministers; one for regulating the qualifications of voters in trading
companies, and the other for restraining and limiting the making of
dividends by the company; fixing them at ten per cent. This latter bill
encountered a most violent opposition both by the company and in the
house, particularly by the lords, but it was carried, and received the
royal sanction.
AMERICAN TAXATION.
Soon after the reassembling of parliament Mr. Grenville, intent upon
taxing America, had proposed saddling that country for the support
of troops, &c., and the chancellor of the exchequer, in reply, pledged
himself to the house to find a revenue in the colonies sufficient to
meet the expenses. Accordingly, during the session, he introduced a
bill to lay certain duties on glass, tea, paper, and painters’ colours,
imported from Great Britain into America. This bill was carried through
both houses with the greatest facility, and another act passed with
equal facility, which placed these duties, and all other customs and
duties in the American colonies, under the management of the
king’s resident commissioners. These acts were followed by one more
justifiable. The assembly of New York had refused to comply with the
statute requiring a grant of additional rations to the troops stationed
in that province; and the refractory disposition of the colonists made
it manifest that their intention was to deny the jurisdiction of Great
Britain altogether. It was evident that a spirit of infatuation had
taken deep root in America, and it was easy to foresee that confusion
and bloodshed would one day ensue. Under these circumstances, and with a
view of checking the onward progress of the march of insubordination, an
act was passed, prohibiting the governor, council, and assembly of New
York from passing any legislative act, till satisfaction should be given
as to the treatment of the commissioners and troops, and submission paid
to the Mutiny Act. But no measure which the parliament of England could
devise, whether coercive or conciliatory, could tame the fierce spirit
which the Stamp Act had created, and the new scheme of duties on imports
was calculated to confirm in hostility to Great Britain. The breach grew
wider and wider, until at length it was past all remedy.
CHANGES IN THE MINISTRY.
Parliament was prorogued on the 2nd of July, with a speech from his
majesty, in which he acknowledged annuities of £8000, which had been
settled during this session on each of the king’s brothers; namely, the
Dukes of York, Gloucester, and Cumberland. During the recess, an event
occurred which threatened to overthrow the tottering cabinet. This
was the death of Charles Townshend, who suddenly expired on the 4th of
September. But before his death, there were signs of a dissolution of
the ministry, and Townshend was actually engaged in the projection of
a new administration. Lord Northington and General Conway had both
expressed a wish to resign, and the Duke of Grafton showed a greater
disposition for pleasure than for business, whence negociations were
opened by Townshend with the Rockingham party.
His death set these aside, but several changes soon afterwards took
place among the great officers of state. The Earl of Chatham, afflicted
with the gout, and indisposed to business, still remained idle; and the
king therefore, authorized the Duke of Grafton to make the necessary
changes in the cabinet. All that could be done, however, before the
meeting of parliament, was to entrust the seals of the office of
chancellor of the exchequer to Lord Mansfield, chief justice of the
king’s bench, and to empower him to renew negociations with the Duke of
Bedford, in which the Duke of Grafton had been unsuccessful.
The ministry was in this unsettled state when the parliament met in
November. The principal point recommended to its attention by his
majesty was the high price of corn, with the consequent suffering of the
poor. This subject was also impressed on parliament by strong petitions
from all parts of the country; and an act was passed, extending the
prohibition against exportation, and encouraging the importation of
grain.
In the midst of these proceedings, Lord North was prevailed upon to
accept the chancellorship of the exchequer; Mr. Thomas Townshend, cousin
of the late Charles Townshend, succeeded him as joint paymaster of the
forces; and his place, as one of the lords of the treasury, was given
to Mr. Jenkinson. Soon after this, General Conway and Lord Northington
insisted on resigning, and fresh overtures were made to the Duke of
Bedford. That nobleman having been gained over, Earl Gower became
president of the council in the place of Lord Northington, and Lord
Weymouth secretary of state in lieu of Conway. At the same time the Earl
of Hillsborough was appointed third secretary of state, which was a new
office; and he was succeeded as joint paymaster with Lord North, by
the Duke of Bedford’s ally, Lord Sandwich. General Conway was
appointed lieutenant-general of the ordnance; and the ministry, thus
reconstructed, took the name of the Duke of Grafton’s administration. As
for the Earl of Chatham he was still a cipher, keeping aloof at Bath, or
at Burton Pynsent, or at Hayes in Kent, where he would neither see
nor speak to anybody. But he still retained the privy seal, and still
retained the emoluments of office, and the king was afraid to deprive
him of them.
{A.D. 1768}
Parliament, in this session, extended the act which restricted the
East India Company’s dividends to ten per cent.; but scarcely any
other business was transacted beside the voting of supplies. The king
prorogued parliament on the 10th of March, and on the 12th of that month
it was dissolved by proclamation, it having nearly completed its legal
term of seven years.
PROCEEDINGS IN AMERICA.
The new Revenue Act, which imposed duties on various articles of
merchandise, excited great resentment in America. It was looked upon by
the colonists, indeed, as a deceptive measure, having a similar object
to that of the Stamp Act, and it had the effect of reviving a question,
which the British parliament should have endeavoured to have consigned
to utter oblivion. The Americans, animated by a spirit of resistance,
would now no longer acknowledge that distinction between external and
internal taxation, on which they had at first grounded their claim
for relief. Their presses teemed with invectives against the British
legislature, and it was confidently asserted that England was resolved
to reduce the colonies to a state of abject slavery. The assembly of
Massachusets Bay took the lead in opposing the government, and it soon
engaged the other colonies to join in resisting the mother-country.
A petition was likewise sent by that house to the king, and letters,
signed by their speaker, to several of the British cabinet, containing
statements of their rights and grievances, and soliciting relief.
A letter was also sent to Mr. De Berdt, their agent in London,
instructing him to oppose the obnoxious measure on every ground of right
and policy. This letter adverted to the appropriation of the revenue
intended to be thus unconstitutionally raised—stating that it was to
supply a support for governors and judges, and a standing army. On both
these grounds, as well as its unconstitutional nature, the house opposed
it, remarking, on the subject of the standing army, in the following
terms, by way of remonstrance:—“As Englishmen and British subjects, we
have an aversion to a standing army, which we reckon dangerous to our
civil liberties; and considering the examples of ancient times, it seems
a little surprising that a mother-state should trust large bodies of
mercenary troops in her colonies, at so great a distance from her; lest,
in process of time, when the spirits of the people shall be depressed by
the military power, another Caesar should arise and usurp the authority
of his master.”
A circular letter was sent, in the name of the assembly of Massachusets
Bay, to the other provincial assemblies, informing them of the measures
already taken; and it was couched in such terms that it had the effect
of lulling the suspicions of some whose opinions were not so violent,
and of making many of them firm adherents to the cause of liberty. The
conduct of this republican assembly excited strong indignation in the
ministry. A letter was sent, by Lord Hillsborough, to the governor,
expressing great displeasure against those who had endeavoured to revive
the dissensions which had been so injurious to both countries, and
directing him to dissolve the assembly if it should decline to rescind
the vote which gave rise to the circular. This letter was laid before
the house; but instead of rescinding the vote, it justified the spirit
and language of the circular, and declared that, as it had been answered
by several of the assemblies, the vote had been already executed, and
could not therefore be rescinded. The conclusion of this uncompromising
reply was as follows:—“We take this opportunity faithfully to represent
to your excellency, that the new revenue acts and measures are not only
disagreeable, but in every view are deemed an insupportable burden and
grievance, with very few exceptions, by all the freeholders and other
inhabitants of this jurisdiction: and we beg leave, once for all, to
assure your excellency, that those of this opinion are no ‘party or
expiring faction;’—they have at all times been ready to devote their
time and fortune to his majesty’s service. Of loyalty, this majority
could as reasonably boast as any who may happen to enjoy your
excellency’s smiles: their reputation, rank, and fortune, are at least
equal to those who may have sometimes been considered as the only
friends in good government; while some of the best blood in the colony,
even in the two houses of assembly, lawfully convened and duly acting,
have been openly charged with the unpardonable crime of oppugnation
against the royal authority. We have now only to inform your excellency,
that this house has voted not to rescind, as required, its resolution;
and that, in a division on the question, there were ninety-two nays, and
seventeen yeas. In all this we have been actuated by a conscientious,
and finally, by a clear and determined sense of duty to God, to our
king, our country, and our latest posterity; and we most ardently wish
and humbly pray, that in your future conduct, your excellency may be
influenced by the same privileges.”
A letter to the same import was addressed, by the assembly, to Lord
Hillsborough. But this was its last act. When the governor had received
the above communication, he immediately dissolved it, and the
province was left for the remainder of the year without a legislature.
Opposition, however, was not checked by such a measure—rather it was
carried on with more spirit than ever. Riots took place at Boston and
Halifax, and arms and ammunition were provided, under the pretext of
anticipated war with France A meeting of delegates, from all the towns
of the province, was convened at Boston, which was attended by deputies
from every one except Hatfield. This convention sent a communication
to the governor, disclaiming all intention of performing any act of
government; professing to have met, in dark and distressing times,
to consult and advise measures for the peace and good order of his
majesty’s subjects in the province; and praying that he would call
together the legislative assembly. The governor refused to receive any
communication from the meeting, warned it of the irregularity of its
proceedings, and assured it that his majesty was determined to maintain
his entire sovereignty over the province. A deputation was then sent to
the governor by the convention, but it was refused admission into his
presence, and a committee of nine persons were appointed to consult on
the best mode of promoting peace and good order in the province. This
committee sent in its report, and the meeting drew up a petition to the
king, which was transmitted to the agent in London, and it then
broke up. This was on the 29th of September, and on the same day, two
regiments and a detachment of artillery from Halifax inarched into
Boston. These were soon after joined by two more regiments from
Ireland, under General Gage; and thus awed, the province was restored to
comparative tranquillity. But underneath this show of quiet there
were heart-burnings, which nothing but the recognition of American
independence could allay. Associations formed throughout the whole
length and breadth of America, by the exertions of the assembly of
Massachusets Bay, stirred up and kept alive the flame of discord, and
occasion need but fan it, and it would kindle into a blaze; the lurid
glare of which would be seen burning brightly, and raging furiously
across the wide Atlantic. The proceedings in America were but as yet, in
truth, the warnings of a terrible commotion—the first intimations of
an irruption, more frightful in its nature, and more disastrous in its
consequences, than the bursting forth of the fire-streaming bowels of
Mounts Ætna and Vesuvius, or the devastations of an earthquake. For the
storms of human passion, when they burst forth in war and bloodshed, are
more desolating to the human family, than any outbreak of visible nature
recorded in the many-paged annals of history.
DOMESTIC TROUBLES AND COMMOTIONS.
While America threatened some fearful catastrophe, Great Britain was
scarcely less disturbed by internal troubles and commotions. Much as
he desired the happiness of the people, the jewels set in his majesty’s
crown were intermixed with sharp, piercing thorns. This is plainly
observable in the previous pages, wherein the difficulties which had
beset his various administrations, and which chiefly arose from the
discordant passions of their members, are historically narrated. Burke
rightly observes:—“Our constitution stands on a nice equipoise, with
steep precipices and deep waters on all sides of it: in removing it from
a dangerous leaning toward one side, there may be a risk of oversetting
it on the other. Every project or a material change in a government so
complicated, combined, at the same time, with external circumstances
still more complicated, is a matter full of difficulties.” This is not
the language of a casual observer of men and manners, but of a profound
politician. It is borne out by his majesty’s early experience. The
scheme which he adopted soon after his accession of breaking the power
of the Whig aristocracy, and of calling men of different parties to the
service of the state, was not only surrounded with difficulties, but
fraught with clanger. Men looked with favour on the long-established
supremacy of these great families, and their influence and power were
therefore not easily broken. Bute sought to dissolve the spell; but the
hand of Bute was not that of a magician, and he signally failed in the
attempt. Broken, but not subdued, the aristocracy formed new parties,
and acted upon new principles, all calculated, when dictated by the
spirit of opposition, to annoy the sovereign, and disarrange the
machinery of the state. Cabinets, formed with nice art and care,
were unable to withstand their opponents; whence their frequent
disarrangements and dissolutions. The age became signalised by
ministerial revolutions and cabinet abortions; and why? because the
cabinets formed were not supported by public opinion. Parliament itself
had lost much of its credit with the people by reason of its indecisive
measures. It had forfeited their confidence, nor could the recall of
Pitt to the helm of state restore it to their favour, or rescue the
sovereign from the dilemma in which he had placed himself. Intractable
at all times, from the opposition he had met with, and from ill health,
he had become so imperious, that, like an old Roman consul, he would
fain have yoked the people, the cabinet, and the monarch to his
chariot-wheels. Moreover, since he had become an earl, he was a changed
man. He no longer sided with, but against, the people; sheltering
himself from their clamours in the stronghold of privilege. Hence it
was, that when he coalesced with others, he found no support on which
he could lean with safety, and by which he could assist the monarch. His
staff was but a reed on which, if he leant, it pierced his hand. This
Chatham felt; and though he clung tenaciously to office, from the fear
of displaying his weakness and incapacity, he only acted, when he did
act, behind the scenes. Ministerial exertions were also paralysed by
another cause. A prevalent notion existed that there was a mysterious
power about the court which worked to the detriment of the public good.
This was a constant theme of invective among the opposition, and, it
would seem, not without good reason. But there was another cause of
obstruction to the measures formed by government. This was found in
the democratical spirit, which now universally prevailed. Courted by the
aristocracy, who had till very recently
“Held them dangling at arm’s length in scorn,”
and grown comparatively wealthy since relieved from the pressure of
war, the population became restless, jealous, and insubordinate. The man
whose fortune was only made, as it were, yesterday, deemed himself as
great a man as the highest and noblest born aristocrat; while the man
who had squandered away his patrimony, sought to restore himself from
his fallen position in society, by assuming principles of patriotism
which in his heart he despised. Moreover, the conduct of their rulers,
which had been too frequently vacillating and manifestly corrupt,
taught the great body of the people to look upon them with suspicion and
distrust. Talk they as loud as they might of honesty of intention, of
unimpeachable integrity, and of pure patriotism, the people nevertheless
would not now believe them. Hence, political associations began to be
formed; taverns were made so many parliament houses; and the people
seemed as if they were resolved to take the government into their own
hands.
But oh! ye Muses, keep your votary’s feet
From tavern-haunts where politicians meet
Where rector, doctor, and attorney pause,
First on each parish, then each public cause:
Indited roads and rates that still increase;
The murmuring poor, who will not fast in peace:
Election zeal and friendship since declined,
A tax commuted, or a tithe in kind;
The Dutch and German? kindling into strife;
Hull port and poachers vile!—the serious ills of life.
THE RETURN OF WILKES, ETC.
Such was the state of society when writs were issued for a new election.
Encouraged by it, John Wilkes once more stepped upon the stage, and
offered himself as a candidate for the suffrages of the people. And, as
it has been well said, Mephistopheles himself could not have chosen a
better time for mischief. For, at this time, the populace had no idol in
whom they could place their confidence, and they hailed his reappearance
with delight. By their aid, indeed, he soon became enabled to insult his
sovereign, and to trample on the legislature with impunity. Unprincipled
as he was, he became the man of their choice, and their “champion bold”
in the cause of what was called liberty.
Wilkes had made an attempt to return to England during the Rockingham
ministry, but that party would not receive his overtures. Recently he
had also sounded the Duke of Grafton, with whom he had formerly been on
terms of intimacy; but his application for his mediation with the
king was treated by that nobleman with neglect and disdain. Thus
disappointed, and finding his situation at Paris, from his accumulated
load of debt, disagreeable, he at length resolved to brave every danger.
During the elections, he boldly presented himself at Guildhall, as
a candidate to represent the metropolitan city in parliament. He was
received with rapturous applause by the populace; but his present views
were frustrated by some of the good citizens of London, who exerted all
their influence to insure his defeat. Nothing daunted, however, Wilkes
immediately offered himself for the county, and he was returned by the
freeholders of Middlesex, by a very large majority. The mob, on this
occasion, was in a transport of joy. The air rang with shouts of
“Wilkes and Liberty!” and by way of exhibiting their exultation at their
triumph, they demolished Bute’s windows in the west, and the windows of
the mansion-house, in the east of the city.
Having secured his election for Middlesex, and confident of the support
of the people, Wilkes appeared, in the month of April, in the court of
king’s bench, and declared himself ready to submit to the laws of his
country. Lord Mansfield, then on the bench, suggested that as he was not
before the court by any legal process, no notice could be taken of his
professed submission, and he was permitted to depart. On retiring,
he was received with loud acclamations by the mob, and the general
impression was, that Wilkes had conquered the government, and that
the arm of the people was stronger than the arm of the law. Wilkes,
likewise, may have flattered himself that he was secure from all further
process; but, if so, he soon found himself deceived. Within a week, a
writ of _capias ut legatum_ was issued against him, and he was taken
into custody. Sergeant Glynn, his counsel, pointed out several errors
in the outlawry, and offered bail; but the judges decided that no bail
could be taken, and he was at once committed to the king’s bench
prison. But the populace was resolved to reverse this decree. As he was
proceeding over Westminster-bridge, they stopped the coach in which he
was conveyed, took out the horses, and dragged him in triumph through
the city, to a public-house in Spitalfields, where they retained him
till nearly midnight. Wilkes, however, thought proper, when the people
dispersed, to repair to the marshal of the king’s bench, out of whose
hands the mob had rescued him, and surrender himself. But as soon as
it was known that the “patriot” was in prison, the mob showed signs of
rescuing him again. Crowds collected around his prison-house, pulled
down the outward fence, and made a bonfire with it on the spot. An order
was sent to the horse-guards, and a body of soldiers were stationed near
the prison, but this only tended to increase the popular excitement.
Every day, for nearly a fortnight, the mob abused the soldiers, and the
soldiers threatened the mob, so that the metropolis was one continued
scene of riot and confusion; Wilkes adding fuel to the flames from
within the doors of his prison.
Such was the public temper when parliament reassembled on the 10th of
May. The people supposed that neither strong walls, nor stronger laws,
could prevent Wilkes from taking his seat in the house of commons, as
member for Middlesex; and they assembled in great numbers round the
gates of his prison, in order to escort him to Westminster. But the
gates remained bolted and barred, and Wilkes continued secure within.
They waited patiently for awhile, but when doubts arose whether they
should be permitted to see then-idol, their patience at first grew
into uneasiness, until at length it gendered into a storm of furious
disappointment and passion. Demands were made for his appearance,
but they were unheeded and unanswered. Their violence grew with their
clamour, and it was in vain that they were urged to depart in peace.
Stones and brickbats were aimed at the heads of the magistrates who
attempted to read the riot act, and the military by whom they were
guarded. Self-defence compelled the order to fire, which was readily
obeyed by the soldiers; the more so, because the companies selected for
the service were nearly all Highlanders and Lowland Scots, whose strong
national feelings had been wounded by Wilkes, in his North Briton. Four
or five persons were killed, and many more wounded; and among those who
perished was a youth of the name of Allen, who had taken no part in the
riot. One of the soldiers gave chase to a young man who had been
pelting them, and by mistake shot Allen in a cow-house, near St.
George’s-fields, while he was in the act of protesting his innocence.
This occurrence tended to increase the popular rage. At the coroner’s
inquest, a verdict of wilful murder was brought in against the soldier
who shot Allen, and two others were charged with aiding and abetting.
Maclean—for that was the name of the soldier who shot Allen—was
committed to prison, and warrants were issued against the others
as accessories. At the same time, Mr. Gillam, one of the Surrey
magistrates, who had given the order to fire, was indicted for murder. On
the other hand, the parliament then sitting voted loyal addresses to his
majesty on the occasion, with assurances that every measure, which was
adopted for the maintenance of the authority of the laws, had their
hearty concurrence; and Lord Barrington returned thanks to the officers
and men employed in this service, and directed that the crown lawyers
should defend the soldiers under prosecution. This had the effect of
exasperating the populace still more. They saw that the soldiers would
be acquitted—which was actually the case, and rewarded likewise—and
the exploit was named by the unenviable denomination of “The Massacre of
St. George’s-fields.” Exciting papers were stuck up in every part of
the metropolis, and even on the very walls of St. James’s-palace.
The mansion-house was assailed so frequently that a constant guard of
soldiers was necessary to defend it from demolition. The firm of civil
authority appeared too weak to control the unbridled passions of the
populace; and it was rendered still more impotent by other riots and
disturbances which broke out unconnected with politics. Coalheavers,
sailors, and watermen at this time complained of low wages, and of
frauds practised upon them by their employers; and Stepney-fields
likewise became a scene of combat which could only be quelled by the
military.
On the 8th of June, Wilkes’s case was again heard in the king’s bench.
His outlawry was reversed, because he had voluntarily surrendered: but
he was sentenced, for the seditious sentiments contained in the ‘North
Briton’, to be confined in prison ten calendar months, and to pay a fine
of £500; and for publishing the ‘Essay on Woman’, to pay a similar
fine, and to be imprisoned twelve calendar months, to commence at the
expiration of the term of the former imprisonment. He was, also, to find
security for his good behaviour for seven years—himself in the sum of
£1000, and two sureties in £500 each. On the trial, facts were divulged
very disgraceful to the temper of the people. In order to ensure
impunity for their idol, anonymous letters had been sent to
chief-justice Mansfield, threatening him, and insulting him by every
species of insult and intimidation. His lordship spoke feelingly and
wisely in delivering the judgment of the court on these unworthy and
unmanly proceedings:—“The last event,” said he, “which can happen to a
man never comes too soon, if he falls in support of the law and liberty
of his country; for liberty is synonymous with law and government: as
for himself, the temper of his mind, and the colour and conduct of his
life, had given him a suit of armour against these arrows.”
The sentence passed against Wilkes tended only to increase his
popularity. Though immured within the walls of a prison, he became now
in the very zenith of his fame. Subscriptions were raised to pay off his
debts; valuable presents were conferred on him; and his portrait met the
eyes of the passers-by, over the doors of the public-houses, in
every part of the kingdom. The popularity of Wilkes was, if possible,
augmented by the issue of the trials of the magistrate and soldiers
for the murder of Allen, and those who fell in “the massacre of St.
George’s-fields.” They were all acquitted; and instead of being censured
for a breach of discipline by the authorities, Maclean received from
government the sum of thirty guineas for his sufferings on a false
accusation. This was exceedingly impolitic; for it had the effect of
further exasperating that huge-chafed monster, the populace, whose power
is not to be provoked or despised with impunity.
RESIGNATION OF LORD CHATHAM.
A ministry so hetrogeneous in its composition as that which now
administered the affairs of Great Britain could hardly be expected to
act in union and with firmness at this critical season. The Earl of
Chatham gave proof that he was not disposed to act with the opponents
of Wilkes, by declaring to Sir William Beauchamp, who was contesting the
election of Middlesex with Sergeant Glynn, and who applied to him for
his assistance and countenance, that he constantly declined meddling in
elections. His disinclination to act at all was, also, elicited by the
Duke of Grafton, who sighed “after a life much more pleasing to his mind”
than that of presiding over the government. Grafton urged the Countess
of Chatham—for he dared not trouble his lordship—to state whether she
thought her lord would resign. The countess, in reply, assured the noble
duke that there was but little prospect of his ever being able to enter
much into business; and intimated, that he was privy to, and highly
disapproved of, an intention entertained of dismissing Lord Shelburne;
adding, that he would never consent nor concur in such a removal, his
services being of great importance to the administration. All the while
the Earl of Chatham knew that it was Lord Shelburne’s intention of
resigning voluntarily, which he did immediately after, having for his
successor, as secretary for the southern department, Lord Weymouth from
the northern, in whose post the Earl of Rochford was placed. From this
cause, and being also displeased with the conduct of his colleagues
regarding America, Chatham at length resolved to tender his resignation.
He wrote to the Duke of Grafton, informing him that his health would
no longer permit him to be useful to his majesty, and begging that his
grace would lay him at his majesty’s feet, with his utmost duty and
earnest request, that he would grant him his royal permission to resign
the privy seal. It was in vain that the Duke of Grafton endeavoured to
dissuade him from his purpose, on the grounds that his services were
at this moment indispensable. His request was repeated in more positive
terms, and a letter was sent also to the king to the same intent. His
majesty now tried whether the refractory lord could not be brought to a
proper sense of his duty. He wrote in reply:—“As you entered upon this
employment in August, 1766, at my own requisition, I think I have a
right to insist on your remaining in my service; for I with pleasure
look forward to the time of your recovery, when I may I have your
assistance in resisting the torrent of factions this country so much
labours under. This thought is the more frequent in my mind, as the lord
chancellor and the Duke of Grafton take every opportunity to declare
warmly their desire of seeing that: therefore I again repeat it, you
must not think of retiring, but of pursuing what may be most conducive
to your health, and to my seeing you take a public share in my affairs.”
It is probable that the Earl of Chatham was not so sanguine as his
majesty concerning his ability to resist “the torrent of factions,”
for he shrunk from his task in coward fear. In his reply, affliction,
submission, gratitude, veneration, and despair was seen in almost every
line, and he insisted upon adhering to his purpose. Accordingly, he sent
the privy seal by Lord Camden, who delivered it into the king’s hands,
and who, to increase the monarch’s embarrassments, wished to resign
likewise. Overcome by his majesty’s entreaties, however, Camden
consented to remain in office.
The resignation of Chatham did not excite greater interest than the
resignation of the meanest officer in the state. Even Thackeray, his
admiring biographer, was obliged to make this confession:—“A greater
contrast in the feelings of the cabinet and the nation upon the present
resignation of Lord Chatham to those which were evinced upon his
dismission from office in 1757, and upon his retirement in 1761, can
scarcely be imagined. His dismission in 1757 excited one common cry of
enthusiastic admiration towards himself, and of indignation towards his
political opponents. The attention, not only of Great Britain, but
of the whole of Europe, was attracted by his resignation in 1761; and
although the voices of his countrymen were not so universally united
in his favour as upon the former occasion, the event was considered as
affecting the interests of nations in the four quarters of the globe.
The resignation of Lord Chatham, in 1768, was, in fact, nothing more
than the relinquishment of an appointment in which he had long ceased
to exercise his authority, or to exert his abilities. It was expected by
the ministry—it was little regarded by the people of Great Britain—it
was almost unknown to the continent of Europe.” So low had the Earl of
Chatham descended from his giddy height of popularity—so little to be
depended upon is the breath of the people.
On the contrary, the causes which led to the retirement of Lord
Shelburne, had the effect of increasing the reputation of that
ex-minister, and of endearing him to the public. The ancient republic
of Genoa had long been endeavouring to reduce the Corsicans to her
obedience, but was compelled to give up the contest in despair. She
resigned her right of sovereignty—real or pretended—to Louis XV.; and
the French fitted out an armament to take possession of Corsica by force
of arms. The Corsicans maintained that they were not to be bought and
sold like revolted subjects and rebels; and their chosen chief, General
Paoli, represented the cruelty of the case to all Europe, addressing
himself in a special manner to England. As islanders and freemen, the
English warmly sympathised with them. The Earl of Chatham and Lord
Shelburne, likewise, felt deeply interested in the cause of the
Corsicans; and the latter authorised Lord Rochford, the ambassador at
Paris, to address a spirited remonstrance to the French cabinet on the
subject. These orders, however, were not supported by the rest of the
administration; the French court took no notice of the remonstrance; and
Lord Shelburne was compelled to resign. Corsica was therefore abandoned
to France, who established her supremacy by shedding much blood. This
naturally created feelings of respect for Lord Shelburne in the breasts
of the English people; and, as naturally, the feelings of contempt for
his cold, calculating, official colleagues.
THE AFFAIRS OF WILKES.
By this time Sergeant Glynn had been elected for the county of
Middlesex. Glynn was the friend and companion of Wilkes, and it happened
that some of the chairmen of his opponent killed a man of the name
of Clarke in an affray. At this period, such events were by no means
uncommon, but as Sir William Beauchamp was a ministerial candidate, the
populace spread surmises abroad, and circulated accusations detrimental
to his character. He was charged with being an employer of assassins,
and two of his chairmen were tried at the Old Bailey for murder. They
were acquitted, but this only tended to increase the popular excitement
against the ministers. Wilkes still more inflamed it by his intemperate
conduct. Lord Weymouth sent a letter to the bench of magistrates for the
county of Surrey, expressing the warmest approbation of their conduct,
and recommending them to quell all tumults on their first rising by
the aid of the civil and military power. This letter, or a copy of it,
having fallen into the hands of Wilkes, it was published by him, with
an inflammatory preface, in which he called the affair in St. George’s
Fields “a horrid massacre, and the consequence of a hellish project
deliberately planned.” Irritated by his imprisonment, Wilkes, indeed,
seems now to have set his fortune on the cast of a die, and the only way
of playing the game successfully, seems to have been, considered by him,
that of inflaming the passions of the people, already enraged beyond
endurance, to the utmost. But the ministers resolved that he should
not act with impunity, and this last act determined them upon taking
effectual measures to overthrow his cause, finally and for ever. But the
determination taken by them only aided the “patriot” in his ambitious
projects, and tended to increase their own unpopularity.
{GEORGE III. 1765–1769}
MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.
Parliament, with the Duke of Grafton at its head, assembled on the 8th
of November. In his speech his majesty alluded to the signs of commotion
among the continental powers which now existed; to the state of our
American colonies, especially to the proceedings at Boston, which he
denounced in strong terms; and to the late abundant harvest, which he
viewed with satisfaction, as having come opportunely to the relief of
his poorer subjects. In the house of lords the address was agreed to
unanimously, but the commons offered many objections, criticising
the conduct of government with reference to America, Corsica, and
its continental policy, whence it was not carried without much angry
feeling.
The first question debated was that of corn. To prevent the recurrence
of scarcity, a bill was prepared for enlarging the prohibition against
exportation, and for preventing distillation from wheat. A more
effectual mode of securing plenty would have been to have passed a bill
for the better cultivation of the lands already in use, and for the
enclosure of large tracts of land then uncultivated. But government
had no extended views at this period, and, moreover, its attention was
absorbed in the consideration of the one all-engrossing subject—civil
discord.
DEBATE ON WILKES.
Before the session was a week old, Wilkes and the parliament were at
open war. Determined upon keeping up the spirit of animosity among
his admirers, the great agitator presented a petition to the house
of commons, by means of Sir Joseph Mawbey, one of the members for
Southwark, which recited all the proceedings of government against him,
and claimed redress and liberty as a member of that house. A violent
debate took place, and it was agreed that Wilkes should have liberty
to attend the house to support his allegations, and that he should
be allowed the assistance of counsel. He was to appear on the 2nd of
December, but in the meantime a member moved for an Inquiry into the
occurrences in St. George’s Fields, and of the conduct of the military
employed on that occasion. This motion was negatived, and when Burke,
who acted as leader of the Rockingham party, renewed it, it shared
the same fate: some observed because many members were afraid of
investigating the subject too closely.
{A.D. 1769}
The house postponed the hearing of Wilkes and his counsel, and this
postponement was several times repeated. They were unheard on the
23rd of January, when Mr. Martin, member for Gatton, moved, “That John
Wilkes, Esq., although he is convicted of publishing a seditious libel,
is entitled to privilege of parliament.” An amendment was moved by Lord
North to the effect, “That John Wilkes, Esq., although he is convicted
of printing and publishing a malignant, seditious, and scandalous libel,
and of printing and publishing three obscene and impious libels, and now
stands committed to the king’s-bench prison, by virtue of two several
judgments in the court of king’s-bench, for the said offences, is
entitled, by privilege of parliament, to be discharged from his
imprisonment for the said offences.” After a fiery debate, the amendment
was carried by a large majority; and Mr. Martin, feeling himself
disgraced by its making him the patron of sedition, obscenity, and
impiety, moved, “That, in entering in the votes of this day the
proceedings of the house upon the said question, the original motion
be stated, with the proceedings of the house in making the several
amendments thereto.” This was reasonable, but when put to the vote it
was rejected.
By these proceedings the temper of the house towards Wilkes was fully
manifested, and it seemed morally certain that when his petition was
taken into consideration it would prove a failure. It was on the 27th of
January that this debate fairly commenced. On that day Lord North moved
that the petitioner’s counsel should be confined to two specified points
only; namely, to prove the allegations in his petition, which asserted
that Lord Mansfield had altered the record of his indictment the day
before his trial in Westminster-hall; and that Mr. Carteret Webb,
solicitor to the treasury, had bribed one Curry, a man in Wilkes’s
employment, to purloin the copy of the “Essay on Woman,” for which
he was undergoing imprisonment. This motion was agreed to, though not
without fierce opposition, and Wilkes appeared at the bar of the house
on the 31st, to make good these allegations. He objected, that as a
member he could not legally appear there without taking the oaths, but
this was overruled, he then proceeded to support his allegations,
but all he could substantiate was, that Lord Mansfield had made an
alteration on the record, and as this was in accordance with ancient
custom, and had been sanctioned by all the judges, the house agreed,
without a division, that the petitioner had not made good the two
allegations upon which he had been heard, and that his petition was
frivolous.
The tables were now turned. Lord Weymouth made a complaint in the upper
house, regarding a breach of privilege, in publishing his letter sent
to the magistrates of Surrey, with an inflammatory preface. A conference
between the two houses had been held, and Wilkes was charged with this
misdemeanour before the bar of the commons. But at that bar Wilkes
not only avowed himself the author of the publication, but claimed the
thanks of his country for having exposed Weymouth’s “bloody scroll.”
It was immediately resolved by the commons that he was guilty of a
seditious libel, calculated “to inflame and stir up the minds of his
majesty’s subjects to sedition, and to a total subversion of all good
order and legal government.” This was on the 2nd of February, and on the
following day Lord Barrington moved, “That John Wilkes, Esq., a member
of this house, who hath at the bar of this house certified himself to
be the author and publisher of what this house has resolved to be an
insolent, scandalous, and seditious libel, and who has been convicted
in the court of king’s-bench of having printed and published a seditious
libel, and three obscene and impious libels, and by the judgment of the
said court has been sentenced to undergo twenty-two months imprisonment,
and is now in execution under the said judgment, be expelled this
house.” A long and vehement debate followed this motion, Burke,
Grenville, Beckford, and others taking the part of Wilkes, but the
motion was carried by a large majority at midnight, and a new writ was
issued for the election of another member for Middlesex.
Burke denominated the expulsion of Wilkes from the house as the fifth
act of the tragi-comedy acted by his majesty’s servants, for the benefit
of the agitator, at the expense of the constitution. As for Wilkes
himself, he was nothing daunted by it, for after indulging in many
witticisms at the expense of his adversaries, he declared that he would
stand again for Middlesex, and expressed his conviction that he should
be returned. And the event answered his expectation. Liberty and Wilkes
were now synonymous terms, and no ministerial candidate had a chance
of obtaining the popular favour in preference to him. He was rechosen
representative for Middlesex free of all expense to himself, but
the house declared him incapable of being elected during the present
parliament. The popularity of Wilkes, however, increased in proportion
as the opposition to him in the house assumed a vindictive character.
The agitator, in fact, only laughed at his adversaries, and said he
would try again. Great efforts were made this time by the ministerial
party to ensure his defeat, but it was to no purpose. Assisted by the
public press, the mob, and many opulent merchants, who deemed him the
champion of liberty, Wilkes was again triumphantly returned member for
Middlesex: his opponent, Mr. Dingley, not being able to get himself
named for fear of the mob’s violence. But again the house of commons
declared Wilkes’s return null and void, and ordered a new writ.
The popular feeling was displayed on the occasion of this second
election in a very unequivocal manner. The partisans of Dingley met
at the King’s-arms tavern, in Cornhill, for the purpose of proposing a
loyal address to his majesty, in contradiction of certain instructions
which had been prepared by the city. This was prevented by the Wilkites,
who mingled among them, and who created such an uproar, that nothing
could be agreed upon. At a second meeting, however, in another place,
the Dingleyans were more successful; but on the 22nd of March, when
they went to present the address, they were beset by a countless mob,
shouting, “Wilkes and liberty—liberty and Wilkes for ever!” They were
even pelted with dirt from the kennels, and assailed with every species
of violence and insult. A hearse was dragged before them, covered with
paintings, representing the death of Allen, in St. George’s-fields, and
the murder at Brentford by Sir William Proctor’s chairmen. So violent
was the conduct of the mob, that many of those who were going with the
address made off through by-streets, or ran into houses for protection.
Few remained when they arrived at the court of St. James’s, and the mob
attempted to pass through the gates with their ominous vehicle. This was
resisted by the guard, and when the mob persevered, Lord Talbot rushed
out and seized two of them, while the soldiers on duty captured fifteen
more, and they were carried to prison.
In opposing the election of Wilkes, therefore, there was considerable
danger. Hence, when the third writ was issued, Colonel Henry Lawes
Luttrell, who was then sitting in the house as member for Bossiney,
conceived that he, as a military man, might assist ministers in their
dilemma by offering himself as a member for Middlesex. To this end he
vacated his seat for Bossiney, and the house ordered the sheriffs to be
in attendance with a large number of extra constables round the hustings
at Brentford, for the preservation of peace. Encouraged by this care,
and by the colonel’s boldness, two other candidates appeared at the
hustings, to solicit the suffrages of the people. But all the care
of the government, and all the exertions of the candidates were vain.
Wilkes was a third time re-elected, and illuminations throughout the
whole city of London testified the triumph of the people. The house of
commons, however, was firm in its opposition to the popular idol and the
popular feeling. A motion was made, and carried by a large majority,
to alter this return, and to insert the name of Luttrell in place of
Wilkes. The freeholders of Middlesex, looking only at the poll-book,
exclaimed against the iniquity of this measure, as Luttrell had not
above a fourth part of the votes which were entered on behalf of Wilkes;
and they presented a petition to the commons, begging them to rescind
their motion. An animated discussion followed this petition, but
Luttrell was confirmed in his seat by a still greater majority. The
exertions of the people were, therefore, rendered null and void, but
Wilkes was as great a favourite with them as ever. Ten days after,
he was chosen alderman of the city of London; and he was represented
everywhere as a meritorious patriot, who was suffering for the cause
of the people. And it cannot be denied that the conduct of ministers
towards Wilkes assumed rather the aspect of vindictive persecution than
that of strict justice. It was this that gave to Wilkes the importance
he had obtained in the sight of the populace—an importance which his
merits and his talents could never have given him.
DEBATES ON AMERICA.
During this session, committees had been appointed by both houses to
examine and report upon papers relative to American affairs, which
were submitted to them by the crown. Measures of rigour were urged by
majorities in both houses. The lords voted strong-resolutions relative
to the unwarrantable and rebellious conduct of the legislature and
people of Massachusets-bay, and recommended, in an address to the king,
that the criminals should be brought over to England and tried by a
special commission, according to a statute of the thirty-fifth of Henry
the Eighth. It was moved in the commons that they should concur in this
measure; and, after a long and spirited debate, in which many warning
voices were lifted up against it, the motion was carried. This was on
the 26th of January, and a few days after the subject was again brought
before the house of commons, and the ministers were again warned of the
danger of driving matters to extremities. Mr. Rose Fuller moved that the
address should be recommitted, but no arguments which he, or any speaker
that took part with him adduced, could alter the disposition of
the house upon the subject, and his motion was negatived by a large
majority. On the 14th of March, the subject of American affairs was
resumed. This was occasioned by a petition, or remonstrance, from New
York, which denied the right of parliament to tax the Americans in any
way. Lord North proposed that such a paper should not be received. He
was opposed by Mr. Grenville, Mr. Burke, and Colonel Barre; but the
house had made up its mind to show no favour to the Americans, and Lord
North’s motion was carried. Colonel Barre reminded the house that he
had predicted all that would happen on passing the Stamp Act, and he now
boldly asserted, that if ministers persisted in their present course,
the whole continent of North America would rise in arms, and these
colonies perhaps be lost to England for ever. But the ministers were
deaf to argument, remonstrance, and warning, and they still determined
upon rigorous measures. Later in the season, Governor Pownall moved,
in a long speech, that the revenue acts affecting America should be
forthwith repealed. This was the only mode of preserving the allegiance
of that country; but it was pleaded that the session was too far
advanced to enter upon the subject—all important as it was—and its
discussion was therefore deferred till the next meeting of parliament,
and then it was too late.
EAST INDIA AFFAIRS.
During this session the charter of the East India Company was prolonged
for the further term of five years, on conditions similar to those in
the last agreement. The company was to continue to pay £400,000 per
annum, and to continue to export British goods, at an average of equal
value with those sent to India during the last five years. The company,
however, was now allowed to increase its dividend to twelve and a half
per cent., provided it did not in any one year put on more than one per
cent. If any decrease of dividend was found to be necessary, then the
sum payable to government was to be reduced proportionately, and if the
dividend fell to six per cent., it was to cease altogether. This bargain
had scarcely been renewed when intelligence arrived from Hindostan, that
Hyder Ally had reduced the company, after an expensive war, to sue for a
dishonourable peace, and India stock fell rapidly.
PROROGATION OF PARLIAMENT.
Early in this session it was announced in a message from the king,
that, in consequence of a deficiency in some branches of the revenue
appropriated to the civil list, debts had been contracted to the amount
of £513,511, which his majesty trusted that house would enable him to
discharge. The opposition demanded the production of papers to account
for these arrears, which were promised by Lord North, if they would vote
the money first. This proposition was warmly opposed, but, in the end,
the house showed its loyalty by voting the money. On the 9th of May, the
king went down to prorogue parliament. This was the day after the last
vehement debate and division on the election of Wilkes; and as he was
passing from the palace to the house of lords, he was grossly insulted
by the populace. In his speech, his majesty exhorted the members, with
more than ordinary earnestness, to exert themselves in their several
counties to repress the efforts of the disaffected, and in maintaining
public peace and good order.
DISCONTENTS IN ENGLAND AND IRELAND.
There was great occasion for his majesty’s advice to the members of
parliament, but they were powerless to effect that which he desired, and
which was a “consummation devoutly to be wished” by every lover of good
order. During this summer, discontent was more prevalent than at any
preceding period of this reign. The disputes with the Americans, and
the expulsion of Wilkes from his seat in parliament, had the effect of
keeping the public mind in a state of constant excitement. This latter
cause gave the greater umbrage to the people, because a man was sitting
in his place who was supported only by a minority. This involved a
constitutional right of great importance, and a question was mooted,
whether expulsion constituted disqualification during the current
parliament. The pen of Dr. Johnson was employed in proving
the affirmative; his chief argument being, that the power of
disqualification was necessary to the house of commons, for otherwise
expulsion would not be a real, but a nominal punishment. Other pens were
employed in proving the contrary; and among them was that of Junius,
whose argument rested on the axiom that political expediency does not
prove existing law, and who defied his opponents to produce any statute
applicable to the subject. Junius also argued that, although the
house of commons could expel, the concurrence of every branch of the
legislature was necessary to incapacitate. Junius, whose extraordinary
powers as a writer on politics have rarely, if ever, been surpassed,
was the most bitter antagonist of the present government. The Middlesex
election was eagerly embraced by him as an opportunity of advancing the
great object he had in view—namely, that of the restoration of the
Whig aristocracy to power. He dipped his pen in gall for this purpose,
attacking the Duke of Grafton’s administration with virulent invective
and energetic eloquence, if haply he might effect its overthrow. He
marred his fame, however, by an exhibition of personal resentment
against individual members of the cabinet, and by putting forth foul
calumnies from his secret hiding-place against the highest characters
in the realm. Political writers may be bold in uttering truth, but when
they use slander as one of their most powerful weapons, then they sink
their characters as men, and forfeit their claim to be heard by society.
But this was not the opinion in those days of turbulent excitement.
Junius was heard and heeded by the mass, and though he did not break
up the administration, which was the main object he had in view, his
writings had the effect of confirming the people in their opposition to
government. Faction was so prevalent that ministers sought to counteract
it by procuring loyal addresses from various parts of the country. Only
four counties, a few corporations, and the two universities responded to
their call; while, on the other hand, numerous petitions of a contrary
tendency, were got up without any difficulty. Discontent ruled dominant
before the legislature reassembled, both in the city of London, and
throughout the whole country. With a view of embarrassing government,
Alderman Beckford was again elected to the mayoralty, although some
ancient by-laws forbade the same person to be chosen twice within
the space of seven years. This objection was urged, but overruled by
precedents. Ministerial troubles grew on every side. Ireland, as well
as England and America, was in a state of trouble and commotion. At
this time it was overrun by Levellers, White-boys, Oak-boys, and
Hearts-of-Steel—factions which were bound together by secret oaths
and a mutual detestation of tithes. Nor was the Irish parliament less
disorderly. In the month of October a bill was brought into the Irish
house of commons for increasing the military establishment in that
country, which was recommended by the lord-lieutenant, and although
it was carried, it was not till after it had encountered a violent
opposition. In the month of November, also, the Irish commons claimed
the right of framing all money-bills, which hitherto had been sent over
to them by the English cabinet. They rejected the one sent over this
year, and although they voted a more liberal supply of their own
freewill, the lord-lieutenant would not recognise the newly-claimed
right. He called it a violation of the law, and an encroachment upon
the king’s prerogative. He entered his protest against it, and he then
suddenly prorogued parliament before it had done any business. Thus
his majesty was surrounded by troubles in almost every part of his
dominions. England, Ireland, and America were all arrayed against him,
and insubordination was the order of the day. What made his situation
more critical was, that he had not a minister of sufficient ability to
guide the helm of the state, so as to keep it clear from the rocks and
the shoals by which it was surrounded.