the command of Generals Howe, Burgoyne, and Clinton. As the gauntlet
had been thrown down by America, and war had been resolved upon by the
English, it might have been expected that active operations would have
been commenced forthwith. Such was not the case. An English soldier
remarked:—“We were kept on the Neck twisting our tails and powdering
our heads, while the Yankees were gathering in our front and in our
flanks like clouds.” It seems to be generally acknowledged that this
inactivity was fatal to the cause of the British arms in America, and
that if General Gage had employed the troops, so soon as he received
such valuable reinforcements, he might have scattered the militiamen and
raw troops which hemmed him in, like chaff before the wind. Instead
of that, time was given them to increase their force,—to perfect
themselves in military evolutions,—to give consistency to their loose
lines, and to render the blockade more effective. At length, however,
this dreamy inactivity was broken. On the 8th of June, grown bold by
impunity, the provincial congress of Massachusets Bay resolved that the
compact between the crown of Great Britain and that colony was dissolved
by the violation of their charter; and they recommended the people to
establish a new and independent government. Four days after this
General Gage, still hoping to restore tranquillity without proceeding to
extremities, issued a proclamation, offering a full pardon in the king’s
name to all who would forthwith lay down their arms, excepting only
Samuel Adams and John Hancock, whose offences were described as “being
too flagitious to admit of any other consideration than that of condign
punishment.” The proclamation declared that all those who should not
accept the proffered mercy, or who should protect, assist, supply,
conceal, or correspond with such, were to be treated as rebels and
traitors. It also imported that as a stop was put to the due course
of justice, martial law should be established till tranquillity was
restored. This proclamation was considered by the Americans a prelude to
hostilities, and preparations were made by them for a final contest with
their mother country. And strange to relate they were still allowed
to act on the offensive. On the night of the 16th of June a strong
detachment of the blockading army passed unchallenged and unobserved
over Charlestown-neck, and occupied Bunker’s Hill, which was situate at
the entrance of the peninsula on which that town stood, and overlooked
every part of Boston. In the morning General Gage saw this important and
formidable height, which he had entertained some thoughts of occupying
himself, covered with works which seemed to have risen as it were by
magic, and with troops that were beginning to fire on Boston-neck and
the shipping. The general now awoke from his slumbers. A battery of six
guns was opened upon the Americans from Copp’s-hill in Boston, and about
the hour of noon a detachment from the English army was carried across
Charles River, which is about the breadth of the Thames in London, and
landed upon the peninsula of Charlestown. This detachment was under the
command of General Howe and Brigadier Pigott, who had orders, at all
risks, to drive the provincials from their works, and to occupy
the hill. The troops marched slowly, formed in two lines, but, on
approaching Bunker’s Hill, Howe perceived that the works were of more
importance than had been imagined, and that fresh columns of Americans
were arriving every minute, and he therefore halted, and sent to Gage
for a reinforcement. New troops were sent, and the whole, amounting to
more than two thousand men, proceeded to the attack. In doing so Howe
seems to have adopted the very worst mode which could have ben devised
for attacking the provincials. Instead of leading the troops in the rear
of the intrenchment, where there was no cannon to bear upon them, he led
them up the hill right in front, where the American artillery was placed
full in their faces. This was a most disastrous step. The troops were
formed in two lines, with the light infantry on the right wing, led by
Howe, and the grenadiers on the left, led by Pigott. In their front
were a few small field-pieces and howitzers, which began to fire at
intervals, during which the troops halted. In advancing the left wing
was fired on from some houses in Charlestown, and in the conflict which
ensued that town was set on fire and was soon burnt to the ground. The
whole detachment now moved up the hill, and the Americans, secure behind
their entrenchments reserved their fire till the British troops were
almost close to the muzzle of their guns. They then opened a terrible
discharge of cannon and musketry, and their volleys were so rapid and
skilfully directed that the British troops recoiled, and many fled
to the boats which had conveyed them, over the river. At this moment
General Clinton crossed Charles River with a number of resolute
officers, and having succeeded in rallying the fugitives he made them
re-ascend the hill, and join in a general charge made on the Americans,
with fixed bayonets. This time they succeeded. The provincials were
driven from their works, and they ran for their lives down the hill
in their rear. The troops took possession of Bunker’s Hill, but it was
purchased at a great cost: 1050, including eighty-nine commissioned
officers, being either killed or wounded, while the Americans scarcely
suffered a third part of that loss.
{GEORGE III. 1775–1776}
GENERAL WASHINGTON.
General Washington was great-grandson to John Washington, a gentleman of
respectable family, who had emigrated from England about the middle
of the preceding century, and had settled at Potomac, in Westmoreland
county, in the colony of Virginia. At this place the general was born,
and after receiving a plain education, he learned something of the
business of land-surveying, and was in the eighteenth year of his age
appointed surveyor of the western part of the territory of Virginia, by
Lord Fairfax, the proprietor of that country. After this, however,
he embraced the profession of arms, and distinguished himself in the
Canadian war, and especially on the day of Braddock’s defeat, when,
at the head of the provincial militia, he covered the retreat of the
British troops, and saved them from destruction. Subsequently, when the
French were driven from Canada and the war was over, Washington quitted
the army, and began his political life as a member of the general
assembly, to which honour his valour had been the chief instrument of
raising him. Shortly after his retirement he married a young lady, who
brought him a large fortune, and for sixteen years his attention was
principally divided between the management of his estates and his
duties as a member of the provincial legislature. When the quarrel first
commenced between America and the mother country he took no decided
part, and when it became serious, he was one of those who still hoped
to preserve the ties of allegiance which bound the colonies to the parent
state unbroken. When the rupture became inevitable, however—when the
sword had been drawn and blood had been shed, Washington stood forward
as the champion of independence. Perhaps he was the more induced to take
this step from an innate love of rank and power. He had joined the first
congress at Philadelphia, and his high character and the conspicuous
part he had borne in the Canadian war, caused him then to be appointed
on all committees where military knowledge was requisite. Doubtless he
foresaw that should matters be brought to extremities he would be called
upon to take a prominent part in the strife. And in this view he was not
mistaken. As before related, at the second general congress, when it
was necessary to select a commander, he was unanimously chosen by his
colleagues to the high office. It is said that he accepted the command
with great diffidence, and it is certain that he did so in the spirit
of a true patriot, for he declined all compensation beyond his actual
expenses.
The choice which congress made of a commander was favourable to the
cause of American independence. At this time Washington was in the prime
and vigour of life, and his fame and deportment were such that he could
command reverence even from the most fanatical part of the American
troops, who were disposed to own no other leader except “the Lord of
Hosts.” His bravery was proverbial, and his after operations sustained
his fame. It was immediately after the battle of Bunker’s Hill that he
was appointed commander-in-chief, and when he arrived at head-quarters
in Cambridge, he found the blockading army considerably discouraged by
the defeat sustained, and otherwise in no very satisfactory condition.
Much had been done, but still more remained to be done. Complaining of
his numerous deficiences, he thus wrote to congress:—“We have no store
of ammunition, no tools for intrenching, no engineers to direct the
construction of military works; we have no money, and want clothing:
there is a total laxity of discipline; and the majority is not to be
depended on in another action.” If the English had, at this time, made a
general assault, the Americans must inevitably have been driven from all
their positions, and the war would soon have been over. After the battle
of Bunker’s Hill, however, the same listless inactivity prevailed as
before, as though the capture of that hill was a full and final triumph.
Thus favoured, Washington set about remedying his defects in good
earnest. During the summer and autumn, he was occupied in organising his
troops, collecting his military stores, and concentrating his forces.
Perceiving that it would be madness to attempt an assault on the
positions of the British troops, as some advised, he directed the
formation of entrenchments and works to defend his own from attack. In
order to give consistency to his lines he contracted them: the centre,
including the reserve, and under his own command, being at Cambridge;
the right wing, commanded by General Ward, resting on Roxburghe; and the
left, under General Lee, near the Mystic river. The British troops were
thus completely blockaded by land, and cruisers being fitted out by
congress for the purpose of intercepting military stores and supplies
destined for the British forces, considerable distress soon began to
prevail among them; yet nothing was done to rescue them from their
perilous situation. During the rest of the year the bands played “God
save the King,” and the Americans, as if in the spirit of mockery,
responded to the national anthem, by playing “Yankee Doodle.” In the
midst of this inactivity, on the 10th of October, General Gage was
recalled, and the command of the British troops devolved on General
Howe.
{GEORGE III. 1775—1776.}
[Illustration: 3–081–ticonderoga.jpg TICONDEROGA]
EXPEDITIONS AGAINST TICONDEROGA AND CROWN POINT, ETC.
Early in this year a party of Connecticut gentlemen, having procured a
loan of money, concocted a scheme for surprising the important post
of Ticonderoga, which was situate on a promontory near the junction of
lakes George and Champlain, and the key of communication between New
York and Canada. A few men were raised, which chiefly consisted of a
hardy race called Green Mountain Boys, and Ethan Allen, a Presbyterian
volunteer, was placed at their head. This force was unexpectedly joined
by Colonel Arnold, who after the battle of Lexington had received
a commission for the same purpose from the provincial congress of
Massachusets Bay. Arnold agreed to act under Allen, and they proceeded
together towards Ticonderoga. Captain Le Place, who commanded at
this fort, was a friend of Ethan Allens, and taking advantage of this
circumstance, Allen left his men in a wood hard by, and went to
the captain, and induced him to lend twenty of his soldiers for the
pretended purpose of assisting him in transporting some goods across the
lake. Allen having obtained his request, next made the soldiers drunk,
and then on the approach of night he drew his people from the woods,
and hastened to the fort. There were yet about forty soldiers with the
captain, but expecting no mischief there was not a single sentry on
duty, and the followers of Allen rushed into the place undetected,
and bade the soldiers lay down their arms. The captain asked by what
authority they required him to surrender the king’s fort, to which Ethan
Allen replied, like a Puritan of old times, “I demand it in the name of
the Great Jehovah, and of the congress.” There was no alternative, and
the captain responded to the demand: the place was captured with all
its store of ammunition and provisions. Ethan Allen next turned his
attention to the fort of Crown Point, which was reduced without any
difficulty, as there were neither found guard nor garrison therein.
Allen also surprised Skenesborough, a place occupied by Major
Skene, with his son and a few negroes, who were all made prisoners.
Intelligence of these events soon reached, congress; but though they
rejoiced at the spirit of enterprise displayed by Allen and his men,
they still feared that they might be charged with aggression at a time
when they were expressing a desire of accommodation; and under these
circumstances they recommended the committees of New York and Albany to
remove the stores to the south of Lake George, in order that they might
be restored when the breach was healed between Great Britain and her
colonies.
EXPEDITION AGAINST CANADA.
On the return of Allen from this enterprise, Colonel Arnold consented to
remain in garrison. Arnold, however, was not of a temperament to remain
inactive. Seeing a small sloop of war lying at anchor, at St. John’s,
at the north end of Lake Champlain, and feeling the importance of the
possession of this vessel, which was the only armed vessel the English
government then had in that water, he armed a little schooner, put some
of the guns he had captured upon large flat-bottomed boats, embarked his
men, and surprised and captured the sloop. Having begun his career with
such success, Arnold projected more extensive operations. In the month
of June he urged on congress the advantages of an expedition to
Canada, and offered with 2000 men to reduce the whole province. His
recommendations were adopted: 3000 men were sent, under the command of
General Schuyler and Montgomery, to Crown Point and Lake Champlain.
This force embarked in flat-bottomed boats to cross the lake and descend
the river Sorel, but when they landed they were attacked by a strong
body of Indians, who obliged them to steer their way back and return
to the Isle Aux Noix. Here Schuyler fell sick, and the command then
devolved on Montgomery, a man full of courage and enterprise, and whom
the Americans compare to Wolfe.
On the arrival of this invading force, General Carleton, governor of
Canada, had only two regiments of about four hundred men each, at his
disposal. These he ordered to Fort St. John, about twelve miles in
advance of Montreal, where they were augmented by a few officers sent
by General Gage. These officers arrived in July, and about the same time
Colonel Johnstone arrived at the same place with seven hundred Indians
of the Five Nations, all skilful in the use of the musket as well as the
tomahawk. These Indians were ancient enemies to the frontier Americans,
and they proposed an immediate attack on Ticonderoga and Crown Point.
Carleton, however, thought proper not only to reject their offer, but to
refuse their services in any shape. This was a sad oversight. Foregoing
their enmity to the Americans, these seven hundred Indian warriors
joined Montgomery, and he immediately resolved to lay siege to Fort
St. John, the only place that covered Montreal. At the same time, Ethan
Allen, who had now returned to the scene of action, conceived that
he could take Montreal by a _coup de main_ in an easier direction. He
attempted this with a hundred and fifty men in the dead of the night,
but the adventurous Presbyterian was not only defeated, but captured,
and put in irons as a felon and a traitor. In the mean time Montgomery
had detached three hundred men with two six-pounders to reduce Fort
Chamblée, situate on the tributary river Sorel, about five miles above
Fort St. John. His principal object in advancing against this fort was
to obtain sufficient ammunition wherewith to reduce that of St. John,
and he succeeded to his utmost wishes. The fort was reduced, and
Montgomery found plenty of ball, powder, cartridges, and arms in it, and
he then pressed the siege of St. John’s with great vigour. The garrison
offered a brave resistance, but it was all in vain: the fort was
surrendered, and Montgomery dashed across the river and entered Montreal
without opposition. As this town carried on an extensive trade, the
American troops obtained a good supply of proper clothing, after which
their commander, having secured the goodwill of the inhabitants by his
liberal treatment of them, resolved to advance upon Quebec, the capital
of the province. He carried out his resolution, although his volunteers,
anxious to get back to their firesides, quitted his ranks by hundreds,
and he had to leave a garrison in Montreal, so that when he put his
men in marching order his force did not exceed four hundred men. But
Montgomery hoped to meet Arnold under the walls of Quebec, and nothing
daunted by the desertion of his soldiers, and the smallness of his
force, he began to descend the St. Lawrence.
In the meantime Arnold had been entrusted with the execution of a daring
plan of his own forming. At the head of 1200 men, consisting chiefly of
New Englanders, he traversed the inhospitable deserts of the northern
states into Canada; deserts which had never previously been trodden by
the foot of a white man. Owing to the obstacles he encountered in his
dreary journey, he did not reach the first Canadian settlements on the
river Chaudière, which flows into the St. Lawrence, until the 3rd of
November. On arriving there his troops were famished, having been long
subjected to hunger, and reduced even to the necessity of eating the
leather of their shoes. The first step of Arnold was, therefore, to
divide them into separate companies, each of which ran off as fast as it
could to obtain food, shelter, and rest in the vicinity of the mouth of
the Chaudière. Arnold himself rested for two or three days at a small
village, in order to circulate the manifestoes he had brought with him,
and to allow his rear and stragglers to arrive. Having rested a few
days, on the 9th of November Arnold reached Point Levi, on the right
bank of the St. Lawrence, and immediately opposite to the town of
Quebec. It has been conjectured that if he could have crossed the river
at once, Quebec would have been captured. The wind, however, was so
strong at the time of his approach, that he could not venture, and this
gave time to Colonel Maclean and his Highlanders, who had been falling
back from Fort Chamblée, taken by Montgomery, to get into the menaced
city. On the 14th, the wind having, abated, Arnold crossed the St.
Lawrence and landed in safety. On reaching Quebec he formed his men on
the Heights of Abraham. But they were ill provided for maintaining a
siege, having no artillery, and therefore Arnold proposed nothing
more than to cut off supplies from the garrison till the arrival of
Montgomery. For this purpose he descended from the Heights of Abraham
and retired to Point Aux Trembles, twenty miles above Quebec. At this
place he was very near taking General Carleton and his staff prisoners,
for they had only quitted that place a few hours before his arrival.
Carleton, however, escaped, and arrived in safety at Quebec, where he
instantly set about making every preparation for its defence. Soon
after the two American corps joined, and they marched together to lay
immediate seige to Quebec. Montgomery had brought a little artillery
with him, and about the 20th of December they opened a six-gun battery
within seven hundred yards of the walls. Their artillery, however,
was too light to effect a breach, and they were all, moreover, soon
dismounted by the town-guns, fired by some seamen under the direction
of Colonel Maclean. The American commanders now removed their guns to a
safer distance, still continuing their ineffectual fire, with the hope
of amusing the garrison, and concealing their design of making an
assault in another direction. They now, in fact, were contemplating a
desperate enterprise, and one to which it was a long time before they
could obtain the consent of the officers and men. It was not, indeed,
till the New Englanders were promised the privilege of plundering the
town, that they would accede to the wishes of their commanders. But
this golden bait was swallowed, and the men promised to do all that was
wished. Accordingly, on the last day of this year, between four and five
o’clock in the morning, and in the midst of a violent storm of wind and
snow, it was determined to storm the place. The force was divided
into four small columns for this purpose: two of which, under Majors
Livingston and Brown, were to make feigned attacks upon the upper town,
while the other two, led by Montgomery and Arnold, were to make real
attacks on opposite sides of the lower town, where all the wealth of
Quebec was deposited. Montgomery had succeeded in passing the first
barrier, that of the block-house, and had reached the Pot-ash battery,
which he was on the point of attacking, when he was shot dead, with
Captain Macpherson, his aide-de-camp, and several other officers, with a
well-charged gun from that battery. The rest of the column which he
led instantly fell back, and in the mean time Arnold himself had been
severely wounded. He was passing through the narrow street of the
Faubourg St. Roque towards the Saut de Matelot, where there was a strong
barrier with a battery of two twelve-pounders, one of which on his
approach was fired, and shattered his leg in so fearful a manner that he
was carried off the field to the rear in anguish. One Morgan now led
the column, and he rushed forward and took this battery, and then pushed
rapidly to another about forty paces distant. But here he was foiled.
Guns loaded with-grape shot met him and his men in the teeth, while
a fire of musketry was opened on both their flanks, so that they were
compelled to retreat into some stone houses in the suburb of St. Roque.
The attempt signally failed. In the end Morgan and his followers, to the
number of 340 men, surrendered themselves prisoners of war, and nearly
one hundred were slain. The rest still continued to blockade the city,
encamping in the best manner they could behind the Heights of Abraham,
and being still commanded by Arnold. They maintained their position for
four long wintry months, and reduced the city to great distress, but
they were finally compelled to give up the enterprise.
DISPOSITION AND REVOLT OF THE VIRGINIANS.
In the great southern state of Virginia Lord Dunmore, the governor, made
a bold stand in support of the authority of the mother country. Knowing
that it was about to be used against him, he seized all the gunpowder in
the magazine at Williamsburgh, and put it on board a schooner then lying
in James’s River. This, however, involved him in a quarrel with the
corporation of that town, who demanded the powder back again. This was
refused, and Patrick Henry, the orator, encouraged by the news of the
victory at Lexington, excited some young Virginians to fly to arms, and
placing himself at the head of them, set out on his march to recover the
powder by force. He was prevented from making the attempt by some of the
delegates to the general congress, who advised him to be satisfied with
a sum of money offered in lieu of it by the king’s receiver-general. A
few days after, however, Lord Dunmore was compelled to deliver up all
the arms and powder that had been left on shore, and to take refuge with
his family in the Fowey man-of-war then lying at York. At the same time,
government-house was fortified and surrounded with artillery. A series
of irritating messages and letters then passed between his lordship and
the burgesses; the former declaring that his life was not safe among
them, and the latter asserting that he had nothing to fear. Lord
Dunmore, however, felt that he had cause for fear, and he resolved
to defy the provincials. Having divested himself of all authority,
he collected a small naval force, and carried on a sort of predatory
warfare against the province. Previous to his taking refuge in the Fowey
man-of-war he had stung the Virginians to the quick, by declaring that
since they were so eager to abolish a fancied slavery, in a dependence
on Great Britain, he would one day try how they liked an abolition of
real slavery, by giving freedom to all their negroes and indentured
servants, who were little better than white slaves. This plan he
endeavoured also to put into operation. Having established his
head-quarters at Norfolk, he proclaimed freedom to all slaves who would
repair to his standard, and fight for the king. Most of the negroes
who had the opportunity of escaping from their masters repaired to
his standard; and if he could have opened a road to the slaves in the
interior of the province, his measures would doubtless have been fatal
to the planters. The Virginians, however, were on the alert, and they
sent a force against him which compelled him to retire on-board again for
safety. The Virginians then took possession of the town of Norfolk, but
Lord Dunmore, incensed at their conduct, set fire to the wharfs, and the
flames spreading, the whole town was soon reduced to ashes, and
property was consumed to the value of £300,000. This was an unfortunate
occurrence, for it totally alienated the Virginians from the British
government. Lord Dunmore lingered in the river, or on the coast, till
the following summer, when, unable any longer to obtain provisions, he
joined the English army under Lord Howe. The cause for his lingering
thus long in the river appears to have been the hope he entertained of
being able to restore the affairs of government in the province. He
had some reasons for entertaining such a hope, for there were many
Virginians averse to the revolution or to its leaders, and who anxiously
desired that the cause of government might prevail. This was clearly
manifested at his departure for the main army at Boston-neck, for many
prepared to follow him by land, convinced that there was no safety for
men who entertained notions of loyalty. The houses, indeed, of all
those who wished to preserve their connection with England, on whatever
principles their wish might be grounded, were burnt to the ground, while
their estates were destroyed and their lives kept in constant danger.
CONDUCT OF CONGRESS TOWARDS NEW YORK, ETC.
Although the province of New York had sent delegates to congress, and
had been among the very first to attack the British settlements in
Canada, yet great uneasiness was felt with respect to that colony. It
was well known that many zealous loyalists lived in the province, and it
was also defenceless and open to the king’s troops by sea. Under these
circumstances congress appointed a Committee of Safety, consisting of
some of the most determined of the revolutionists, who were appointed to
take especial charge of this province. General Wooster was also directed
to march into New York, with some regiments of Connecticut men, With
the double object of keeping down the royalists, and preventing,
if possible, the landing of any British troops. The presence of the
Connecticut men, who quartered themselves near Haerlem, five miles from
New York, did more harm, however, to the cause of the revolution than
it did good, for it led to some severe quarrels between them and the New
Yorkers, as well as provoked the naval force in the neighbouring waters.
Congress, in fact, had much difficulty in preserving their cause in New
York. On one occasion they even issued an order that all such arms as
were fit for the use of the troops raised in the colony of New York, and
which should be found in the hands or custody of any person who had not
signed the general association, should be seized for the use of the said
troops. At a later period, congress even went a step further than this;
for they intimated to the members of the revolutionary government,
that they were to arrest and secure every person in their respective
colonies, whose going at large might, in their opinion, endanger the
safety of the colony or the liberties of America. Warned in time, Tryon,
the governor of New York, whom congress before had talked of seizing,
retired on board the Halifax packet, still communicating, however,
with the royalists on shore. In other colonies there was still less
difficulty in sweeping away the king’s governors. In North Carolina,
Governor Martin, after seeing his proclamation burnt by the common
hangman, sought shelter on board a ship-of-war that was lying off Cape
Fear: in South Carolina, Lord William Campbell, after vainly seeking to
rally the royalists, was obliged to follow his example; and though in
many of the other colonies the governors were not compelled to flee for
their lives, yet their authority was eventually superseded, and they
were compelled to bow to the storm by retiring from their seats of
government. One common spirit pervaded the United Provinces of America,
though it was more rampant in some colonies than others. The grand focus
of rebellion was still at Massachusets Bay, where, towards the close of
the year, in the course of predatory hostility, the town of Falmouth was
cannonaded and totally destroyed, in revenge for some offence relative
to supplies, and on the refusal of its inhabitants to deliver up its
arms. In return for this injury congress passed an act, in November,
granting letters of marque and reprisal, and establishing courts of
admiralty for the trial and condemnation of British ships. Congress also
determined to meet the force of Britain on her own element, and issued
orders for building a fleet of thirteen ships. The garrison of Boston
was supplied with provisions from England, a proportion of which was
intercepted by the American cruizers and the troops suffered greatly,
likewise, from the inclemency of the season. The inhabitants, also,
shared in their calamities, and their sufferings were greatly increased
by several edicts, issued by General Howe. Such was the state of America
at the close of this eventful year.
PROCEEDINGS IN ENGLAND.
While America was in arms, England was in a state of agitation. It has
been seen that soon after Wilkes had presented the violent address and
remonstrance of the livery to the king, that his majesty informed him
that he would receive no more petitions of the lord mayor and aldermen
but in their corporate capacity. Wilkes converted this into a fresh
wrong; and at the very next meeting of the common-hall another address,
still more violent in its tone, was approved. The king resolved that he
would not receive this petition sitting on the throne, and when this
was reported to the livery they resolved that it was a direct denial of
their rights; that the remonstrance should be printed in the newspapers;
and that the city members should be instructed to move for an
impeachment of the evil counsellors who had planted Popery in America,
and were the advisers of a measure so dangerous to both the king and his
people, as that of refusing to hear petitions. This latter resolution,
however, was not founded in truth—the king had simply said that he
would not receive it sitting on the throne, and the livery had resolved
not to present it under any other circumstances. After all, the
common-council thought proper to agree to a more moderate remonstrance,
which his majesty received, and to which he replied, that, while the
constitutional authority of this kingdom was openly resisted by a
portion of his American subjects, he owed it to the rest of his people
to continue to enforce those measures by which alone their rights and
interests could be asserted and maintained. Irritated by these and other
proceedings, government, on the 23rd of August, issued a proclamation
for suppressing rebellion, preventing seditious correspondence, etc.
Wilkes, as lord mayor, received orders to have this proclamation read in
the usual manner at the Royal Exchange. This order was obeyed;
but the patriot at the same time contrived to hold it up to the public
contempt by causing it to be read by one of the city officers, attended
only by the common-crier, contrary to the common rules of decency and to
all precedent. Soon after this the petition of congress was laid before
the king by Richard Penn and Arthur Lee, to whom the task of presenting
it had been deputed. It was well known to all the world that the
Americans had lifted up the standard of revolt, and were assembled in
hostile array against his majesty’s forces. This petition, therefore,
though it contained some loyal expressions, did not express the real
sense of the body it proceeded from—the words of their mouths might be
smoother than butter, but war was manifestly in their hearts. Hence
his majesty very justly considered the whole thing to be an insulting
mockery, and as congress likewise had neither been recognised by himself
nor his parliament, he resolved to give it no answer. But it was the
fate of the king, at this time, to have all his actions and words
misinterpreted. Although no man in his senses, whether Whig or Tory,
could have been so blind as not to see he was perfectly justified
in adopting this resolution, since his troops in America had been
slaughtered both at Lexington and Bunker’s Hill, yet it was interpreted
into harshness and obstinacy. A loud outcry was raised against it by a
portion of the nation, including more especially the Whig portion of the
city of London. An address, containing 1171 signatures, and purporting to
emanate from “the gentlemen, merchants, and traders of London,” was
got up, which reiterated the sentiments contained in the city of London
petitions, and predicting the most lasting and deadly consequences
from the quarrel between England and America. Three days after this,
however, a counter-address was presented to his majesty from another
section of the merchants and traders of London, which was followed by
others of a similar class from all parts of the United Kingdom. In fact,
the great body of the nation was still on the side of the king and the
government. Intelligence of the determined hostility of the colonists
had the effect even of converting foes into friends. In the course of
the autumn, the very liverymen of London, to the number of 1029, signed
an ultra-loyal address, which contained stronger language than the
counter petition of the merchants and traders of that great city, or
of any other address presented on the same side of the question. It
said:—“A malignant spirit of resistance to law and government has gone
forth amongst the Americans, which we firmly believe has been excited
and encouraged by selfish men, who hope to derive private emoluments
from public calamities—from the councils, the persuasions, the
influence of such men, may God protect your majesty! The interest, the
honour, the sovereignty of your kingdom of Great Britain, are now at
stake—as the guardian of those, we trust you will ever assist and
preserve them.” The petitioners pledged themselves to use all their
exertions in support of the laws and government, and finally implored
his majesty’s clemency towards all those of the colonists who might
return to their duty. There can be no doubt that ministers were active
in procuring such addresses as these; but at the same time it is equally
certain that the sentiments they contained proceeded from the hearts of
the people. The outrages committed at Lexington and Bunker’s Hill had,
in truth, exasperated the people at large, and this exasperation was
increased tenfold when, at a later period, news arrived of the invasion
of Canada. They saw that it was a rude attempt to pluck a jewel from the
British crown, and it excited feelings of resentment in their breasts
deep and lasting. Not a few Englishmen who maintained that the Americans
were justified in taking up arms to assert their own rights were
converted by this step adopted by congress. In a word, the cause of
the mother country was generally considered just, and was, therefore,
popular.
PROSECUTION AND TRIAL OF HORNE TOOKE, ETC.
Government was so well supported by public opinion, that wonder is
excited at the serious notice which it took of some attempts made by a
few factious demagogues of creating popular commotion, and of raising
themselves into an unenviable celebrity. Among this class John Horne
Tooke stood pre-eminently forward. Horne Tooke was first the supporter,
and then the rival of John Wilkes, but he had now completely succeeded
him in the favour of a certain dubious class of patriots. This was the
natural consequence of tilings. John Wilkes having been raised to the
dignity of lord mayor, and having regained his seat in parliament,
although he was still in some degree a thorn in the sides of ministers,
had become more circumspect than heretofore. He no longer harangued
at the public meetings of the populace, and was hence looked upon as a
renegade, and Horne Tooke stepped into his place. The supplanter proved
as bold as the man he had supplanted—stern “patriot” as Wilkes had
been. This was seen in the midst of the agitation into which England was
thrown by the events which had happened in America. At a meeting of the
“Society for Constitutional Information,” which had been formed in the
metropolis from the wreck of the “Bill of Rights Club,” Tooke moved,
“that a subscription be raised for the relief of the widows, orphans,
and aged parents of their American fellow-subjects, who, preferring
death to slavery, were, for this reason only, murdered by the king’s
troops at Lexington and Concord, on the 19th of April, 1775.” No mention
was made of the widows and orphans of the British troops, which had been
mown down by the rifles of the Americans from their hiding-places. That
was altogether another question: they might or might not be supported
by government, since it was clearly evident, from Horne Tooke’s motion,
that they had no business to obey the orders of their superiors. Horne
Tooke’s humane motion as it stood, therefore, was adopted—a vote of
£100 was carried, and ordered to be transmitted to Dr. Franklin. The
members, however, generally comprehended the peril of the case, and
hesitated to sign the order. But Horne Tooke was as bold as he was
humane, and he took all the responsibility on his own shoulders by
affixing his name to it. The whole affair was clearly too ridiculous for
the notice of government; but he was nevertheless prosecuted, sentenced
to pay £200, to be imprisoned one year, and to find securities for good
behaviour during three more. This was just the thing the patriot wanted.
He had an opportunity of making a sarcastic speech, and his hopes were
elated by the prospect of enjoying a still larger share of the popular
favour. Probably he felt certain that he should one day carry the city
mace, like his ancient friend John Wilkes. The best way to crush a
demagogue is to let him pass unnoticed. Notwithstanding, the offence
of Tooke was a direct challenge to government, and if it had refused
to notice such an insult, its authority might have been despised by
the section he headed, and therefore greatly diminished. Government,
however, laid itself open to animadversion, by committing Mr. Sayre,
an American merchant, to the Tower, on a charge of high-treason. It was
declared on oath, by Mr. Richardson, an adjutant in the Guards, that Mr.
Sayre had told him he intended to seize the king at noon-day, in his way
to the house when it again met, to carry him out of the kingdom, occupy
the Tower, and overturn the government. This would have been clearly
the labour of “another Hercules,” and the information should have
been treated with a sneer of contempt; but Lord Rochford seems to have
considered that the enterprise of this most magnanimous American was not
impracticable, and he therefore committed him to the Tower. But whether
Mr. Sayer proved the adjutant’s statement to be false, or whether the
king conceived that he was in no danger, does not appear, but certain it
is that the American was set at liberty, after five days’ incarceration,
and Lord Rochford had to pay him £1000 damages, on a suit for illegal
imprisonment.
MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.
Parliament met this year on the 26th of October. The speech from the
throne, on this occasion, was unusually long and energetic, and, as
might be expected, its chief topic was the revolt of the colonies. His
majesty remarked:—“Those who have too long successfully laboured to
inflame my people in America by gross misrepresentation, and to infuse
into their minds a system of opinions repugnant to the true constitution
of the colonies, and to their subordinate relation to Great Britain,
now openly avow their revolt, hostility, and rebellion. They have raised
troops, and are collecting a naval force; they have seized the public
revenue, and assumed to themselves legislative, executive, and judicial
powers, which they already exercise in a most arbitrary manner, over the
persons and properties of their fellow-subjects; and although many of
these unhappy people may still retain their loyalty, and may be too wise
not to see the fatal consequences of this usurpation, and may wish to
resist it; yet the torrent of violence has been strong enough to compel
their acquiescence, till a sufficient force shall appear to support
them. The authors and promoters of this desperate conspiracy have, in
the conduct of it, derived great advantage from the difference of our
intention and theirs. They only meant to amuse, by vague expressions
of attachment to the parent state, and the strongest protestations of
loyalty to me, whilst they were preparing for a general revolt. On
our part, though it was declared in your last session that a rebellion
existed within the province of Massachusets Bay, yet even that province
we wished to reclaim, rather than subdue. The resolutions of parliament
breathed a spirit of moderation and forbearance; conciliatory
propositions accompanied the measures to enforce authority; and the
coercive acts were adapted to cases of criminal combination among
subjects not then in arms. I have acted with the same temper—anxious
to prevent, if it had been possible, the effusion of the blood of my
subjects, and the calamities which are inseparable from a state of
war; still hoping that my people in America would have discerned the
traitorous views of their leaders, and have been convinced, that to be a
subject of Great Britain, with all its consequences, is to be the freest
member of any civil society in the known world. The rebellious war now
levied is become more general, and is manifestly carried on for the
purpose of establishing an independent empire. I need not dwell upon
the fatal effects of the success of such a plan. The object is too
important—the spirit of the British nation too high—the resources with
which God hath blessed her too numerous—to give up so many colonies,
which she has planted with great industry, nursed with great tenderness,
encouraged with many commercial advantages, and protected and defended
at such expense of blood and treasure.” His majesty continued, that it
was now necessary to put a stop to these disorders, and that, for this
purpose, he had greatly increased his naval establishment, and augmented
his land-forces. He had sent, he said, Hanoverian troops to Gibraltar
and Port Mahon, to replace such British regiments as should be drawn
from those garrisons for service in America; and he had received
friendly offers of foreign assistance. His majesty also professed his
readiness to forgive the colonists when they became sensible of their
error; for which purpose, to prevent inconvenience, he would give, he
said, a discretionary power to commissioners to grant general pardons,
who might, he thought, be likewise entrusted with authority to restore
the free exercise of its trade and commerce to any colony on making
its submission. He concluded by informing both houses, that he saw no
probability of any impediment to his measures from the hostility of
foreign powers, since they had expressed their friendly assurances.
The address proposed by ministers was, as usual, a mere echo of the
speech, and an amendment was proposed in the commons, by Lord John
Cavendish, recommending that the whole should be expunged except the
_pro forma_ introductory paragraph, and that the following should be
substituted,—“That they beheld with the utmost concern the disorders
and discontents in the colonies rather increased than diminished by
the means that had been used to suppress and allay them; a circumstance
alone sufficient to give them just reason to fear that those means were
not originally well considered, or properly adapted to their ends. That
they were satisfied by experience that the misfortune had, in a great
measure, arisen from the want of full and perfect information of the
true state and condition of the colonies being laid before parliament;
by reason of which, measures injurious and inefficacious had been
carried into execution, from whence no salutary end could have been
reasonably expected; tending to tarnish the lustre of the British arms,
to bring discredit on the wisdom of his majesty’s councils, and to
nourish, without hope of end, a most unhappy civil war. That, deeply
impressed with the melancholy state of public concerns, they would,
in the fullest information they could obtain, and with the most
mature deliberation they could employ, review the whole of the late
proceedings, that they might be enabled to discover, as they would be
most willing to apply, the most effectual means of restoring order
to the distracted affairs of the British empire, confidence to his
majesty’s government, obedience, by a prudent and temperate use of its
powers, to the authority of parliament, and satisfaction and happiness
to all his people. That by these means they trusted to avoid any
occasion of having recourse to the alarming and dangerous expedient
of calling in foreign forces to the support of his majesty’s authority
within his own dominions, and the still more dreadful calamity of
shedding British blood by British arms.” An acrimonious debate followed
this proposal, in which the opposition vehemently arraigned the
principle and conduct of the contest; assumed the facts contained in the
speech to be untrue; condemned the confiding such important fortresses
as Port Mahon and Gibraltar to foreigners; and exposed the idea of
conquest to ridicule. In reply, Lord North urged the necessity of
regaining the colonies, and exposed the extravagant pretensions of
the colonial assemblies, as well as of the general congress, and the
encroachments on all the rights of the parent state. He also defended
the conduct of ministers, maintaining that they had tried conciliation,
but that the attempt had signally failed: lenity on the part of
government and parliament being construed by the Americans into weakness
and fear. Parliament had, he said, during the last session obviated the
objections made to the right of taxing their colonies by permitting the
Americans to tax themselves in their own assemblies; and yet not one
assembly would offer a single shilling towards the common exigencies of
the state. He observed, that to repeal every act passed relating to the
colonies, since the year 1703, would indeed terminate the dispute, as
from that moment America would be raised to independence: at the same
time he vindicated those acts from the charge of being either ungenerous
or unjust. The amendment was rejected by a majority of two hundred and
seventy-eight against one hundred and eight, and the original question
was then carried without a division.
A similar amendment was moved in the house of lords by the Marquess of
Rockingham, and a debate equally warm ensued. Lord Gower frankly avowed
that he with his brethren in office had been misled in their conduct
with respect to American affairs. New York, he observed, had been forced
into hostile measures by the insurgents of Connecticut, and he predicted
that if the friends of government were well supported by a force from
England, the colonies would be brought to a sense of their duty without
the shedding of more blood. The Earl of Shelburne termed this prediction
rash, and advanced it as an incontrovertible fact, “that the commerce of
America was the vital stream of this empire.” At the same time, while he
considered that the independence of the colonies would be the result of
the contest, he confessed that this result would be the ruin of Great
Britain. The house was next startled with the declarations made by the
Duke of Grafton, now lord privy seal. His grace boldly condemned all
the proceedings with regard to America during the last twelve months,
asserting that he had been deceived and misled upon the whole subject,
and that ministers had induced him to lend his countenance to those
measures, by withholding information and misrepresenting facts. Grafton
also declared that nothing less than a total repeal of all the American
acts which had passed since the year 1763, could now restore peace
and happiness, or prevent the most fatal consequences to this country:
consequences, he said, which he could not think of without the utmost
degree of grief and horror. He concluded by declaring that in his
present ill state of health, nothing could have induced him to have left
his house, but a conviction of his being right,—a knowledge of the
dangerous state of the country, and a sense of what he owed to it, as
well as to his conscience. The Bishop of Peterborough, who had spoken
and voted for coercive measures in previous sessions, acknowledged a
similar change in his sentiments to those of the Duke of Grafton, and
imputed his previous views to misinformation, and deception on the part
of the ministers. This defection, however, did not produce much effect
in the house. Ministers descanted powerfully on the great question at
issue,—using similar arguments to those which had been employed in
the commons, and in the end the Marquess of Rockingham’s amendment was
rejected by a majority of sixty-nine to twenty-nine, while the original
address was carried by seventy-six to thirty-three, including proxies. A
protest was signed by nineteen peers.
On the report of the address in the commons, the opposition took
occasion to go over nearly the whole of the ground again. The main stand
which they took, however, in this debate, was the measure of entrusting
Gibraltar and Minorca, the keys of the Mediterranean, to Hanoverian
troops. This they maintained was repugnant to the Bill of Rights, and
an alarming precedent of foreigners introduced, and armies raised by
a British monarch without the consent of parliament. It was, in fact,
loudly denounced as illegal, and in the highest degree unconstitutional.
In answering this objection, Lord Thurlow reminded the house that the
clause in the Bill of Rights embraced no part of the king’s dominions
beyond the limits of Great Britain; that it did not extend to the
colonies; and that not a man had been brought, or was to be brought
into the kingdom without the consent of parliament. Wedderburne urged
similar arguments, and he, with others, represented the urgent necessity
of the case, and the danger of delay. A precedent was also quoted for
bringing troops into England at a critical period, inasmuch as Dutch
troops had been brought over from Holland by George II. in 1745, during
the rebellion in Scotland. In the midst of the storm by which he was
assailed, Lord North acknowledged himself the adviser of this measure,
and treated the opposition with much levity,—but he was obliged to
yield to the representations of some of his friends, and to state in
conclusion, that though he still considered he was right, yet as other
gentlemen, for whom he had ever had the greatest deference, seemed to be
of another opinion, he had no objection, notwithstanding any votes
now given, that the question should be brought again, in a regular and
parliamentary manner, before the house, when he would abide by their
determination; and if the measure was found unconstitutional, he would
rest a defence on the ground of necessity alone, and receive, as was
usual in such cases, the protection of an act of indemnity. This was
good parliamentary generalship. Many who would have voted against him,
now veered round to his side, and upon a division, the address was
passed as reported by a majority of one hundred and seventy-six against
seventy-two.
On the 1st of November a similar conflict occurred in the house of
lords. The Duke of Manchester moved in that house, “That bringing into
any part of the dominion of Great Britain the electoral troops of his
majesty, or any other foreign troops, without the previous consent of
parliament is dangerous and unconstitutional.” This motion was supported
by arguments that the clause in the Bill of Rights ought to extend to
the colonies; that the Hanoverian troops would not be under the control
of our military law, etc.; that it was not by any means advisable to put
them in possession of Gibraltar and Minorca; and that the king had no
right to maintain even in a colony, or conquest, or in any part of
the British dominions, any other troops than were consented to by
parliament. To these arguments it was replied, that the clause in the
Bill of Rights specified “within the kingdom,” and also “in time of
peace;” that the foreign troops were not “within the kingdom,” and that
it was a time of war, and not of peace: that the expression, “within the
kingdom,” did not include our colonies; and that should that latitude be
given the expression, the rebellious state of America would justify the
employment of British troops even upon the principles of the Bill of
Rights. It was also argued that the king had at all times during actual
war or rebellion, been competent to raise and keep up an army; that in
such a case the Bill of Rights had made no distinction between an
army of natives and an army of foreigners; that foreigners, since the
revolution of 1688, had not only been hired, but even brought into the
kingdom; and that there was an existing and paramount necessity at
this time for the employment of such troops. Ministers prevailed: the
previous question was moved and carried by a majority of 75 against
32. Two days after, a similar resolution was made in the commons by Sir
James Lowther, and was there disposed of in a similar manner. About the
same time the Bill of Indemnity passed the lower house, but in the upper
house it was rejected, on the grounds that it was alike unnecessary and
dishonourable to the administration.
CHANGES IN THE MINISTRY.
During the debate which followed the motion of the Duke of Manchester in
the house of lords, the Duke of Grafton had denounced the introduction
of foreign troops into Gibraltar and Minorca, as inconsistent with the
tenor of Magna Charta. This, coupled with his former declarations as
to the conduct and the measures of his colleagues, had the effect of
obtaining his dismissal from office. The privy seal, which his grace had
held, was given to the Earl of Dartmouth, and, to the surprise of all
men, Lord George Sackville, who had been subjected by the sentence of a
court-martial to much obloquy, and had recently taken a decided part
in all the coercive measures, was made secretary for the American
department. At the same time the Earl of Rochford retired, and was
succeeded as secretary for the southern department by Lord Weymouth. But
what created most astonishment was, that the young and profligate Lord
Lyttleton, who had distinguished himself by the severity of his attacks
upon the administration at the opening of this session, and who had been
connected with Chatham and Temple, was called to the privy-council, and
appointed to the sinecure office of chief-justice in eyre beyond
Trent. Thus “bought,” he agreed to defend the very measures he had so
energetically attacked.
THE MILITIA BILL.
In conformity with a passage in the speech from the throne, Lord North,
on the 30th of October, brought in a bill for enabling the king to
assemble the militia in cases of actual rebellion. On the second
reading, this bill was warmly opposed, on the supposition that it gave
the monarch such prodigious additional power, as to render him totally
independent of the people. It was said to be, in fact, “empowering the
crown to draw the militia out whenever it thought fit, as a pretence
could never be wanted for the purpose, while there was a black Caribb
remaining in St. Vincent’s, a runaway negro in the mountains of Jamaica,
or a Hindoo rajah left on the coast of Coromandel.” In the end, however,
the second reading of the Militia Bill was carried by the large majority
of two hundred and fifty-nine against fifty. On the third reading
several amendments were moved, but were all rejected, and it was finally
carried with a rider, proposed by Sir George Saville, limiting the
duration of the bill to seven years. In the month of December a bill was
brought into the house of commons by Lord Mountstuart for establishing a
militia in Scotland; but the house was so thin at the time, that it
was scarcely discussed. The bill was reproduced in the course of the
session, and was eagerly patronized by the Scotch members; but it met
with a strong opposition from the English country gentlemen, and
was finally rejected by a majority of one hundred and twelve
against ninety-five. By its opposers the bill was considered both as
unnecessary, and as a dangerous innovation; but the opposition, it would
appear, chiefly arose from national prejudices: Scotsmen might, it was
said, as they were subservient to ministers, if they obtained a militia,
employ it against the liberties and constitution of England. Lord North
supported the bill; but he found himself in the unusual predicament of
voting in the minority.
{GEORGE III. 1775–1776}
THE NAVY AND LAND ESTIMATES.
The number of forces to be employed by sea and land in the ensuing
year indicated great designs: 28,000 seamen, and 50,000 men for the
land-service being voted. Yet great as this force was, it was not
considered sufficient for the emergency even by the opposition, who said
that the establishment was far too great for peace, and far too small
for such a war as ministers were embarking in. This, indeed, was the
opinion of Lord Barrington, secretary at war, who used his utmost
endeavours, both with the ministers and the king, to obtain a force
commensurate with the undertaking. He in particular urged the necessity
of reducing America by means of a powerful fleet, stating it as his
opinion that its reduction could never be accomplished by the army,
which was the staff on which ministers rested. But it was in vain
that Lord Barrington warned and advised his colleagues in office, and
counselled the king. It was held, that at present the naval force must
be accompanied with an army, and the estimates of ministers were made
and carried accordingly. The sentiments of Lord Barrington on this
subject are fully shown in a letter which he wrote at an earlier date
to the Earl of Dartmouth, then secretary for America. In this letter
he remarked:—“First, I doubt whether all the troops in North America,
though probably sufficient for a pitched battle with the strength of the
province, are enow to subdue it, being of great extent and full of men
accustomed to fire-arms. If the Massachusets—with whom the inhabitants
of Connecticut and Rhode Island are said to have made common cause—were
conquered they must be kept under by large armies and fortresses, the
expense of which would be ruinous and endless. Second, because the most
successful conquest that can be imagined must produce the horrors
and bloodshed of civil war. Third, because a conquest by land is
unnecessary, when the country can be reduced, first, by distress, and
then to obedience, by our marines totally interrupting all commerce and
fishery, and even seizing all the ships in the ports, with very little
expense and bloodshed. To this might be added the punishment of the
factious chiefs by impeachment or bill, if their persons can be secured;
but till then any judicial proceedings would provoke, not hurt, and
confer the palm of martyrdom without the pain of it, which is the
perfection of fanatical beatitude. In respect to the other colonies
south of New England, a strict execution of the Act of Navigation, and
other restrictive laws, would probably be sufficient at present; and a
small addition of frigates and sloops would so execute those laws as to
prevent all commerce with foreign states. Those colonies should also
be left to deal with the Indians, the mother country withdrawing
the establishments made since the beginning of the late war for the
management of the Indian affairs, and kept up till this day at a great
expense. Though we must depend on our smaller ships for the active
part of this plan, I think a squadron of ships of the line should be
stationed in North America, both to prevent the intervention of foreign
powers, and any attempt of the colonies to attack our smaller vessels by
sea.” Lord Barrington next advised the removal of the troops from
Boston to Canada, Nova Scotia, and East Florida, till they could
be successfully employed, and then continued: “If these ideas are
well-founded, the colonies will in a few months feel their distress;
their spirits, not animated by any little successes on their part, or
violence of persecution on ours, will sink; they will be consequently
inclined to treat, probably to submit to a certain degree; and in my
humble opinion, the whole is then over, for then, with dignity, we may
make them concessions.” Had this system of blockade been adopted, there
can be little doubt but America would have been preserved to England,
for the Americans had then no fleet or any formidable fortifications on
their coast. The advice, however, was rejected, and Lord Barrington was
only prevented resigning office by the express desire of the king. But
though Lord Barrington not only did not concur in the plans pursued by
ministers, but sought to set them aside, yet as secretary of war, he
obtained the chief odium of their failure. The principal blame, however,
seems to be attached to the king: the plans were in reality his own, and
he imposed them upon Lord North and the administration.
PETITION OF NOVA SCOTIA.
At the opening of this session, a petition was presented to both houses
from Nova Scotia, which proposed to grant to his majesty in perpetuity
a duty of poundage, _ad valorem_, on all commodities imported into the
colony, not being the produce of the British dominions in Europe or
America, bay-salt only excepted, by which means the amount of the
revenue would keep pace with the wealth of the province. Ministers
conceived that this loyal petition would serve as an example to the
other colonies, and therefore gave it their support. They suggested
a duty of eight per cent.; but objections were drawn from the
unproductiveness compared with the old duties, and the small chance
of other colonies following the example of a district which had always
occasioned an expense to government, and ministers themselves finally
abandoned it: nothing was heard of the petition after it went into
committee.
PETITION OF CONGRESS.
On the 7th of November, a copy of the petition of congress alluded to
in the king’s speech was laid before the lords. On its presentation,
the Duke of Richmond seeing Mr. Penn below the bar, moved for his being
examined before they entered upon the discussion of the petition. This
was rejected by a majority of fifty-six against twenty-two, and the
noble mover then made another motion, that Mr. Penn should be
examined on the next day, which, after a long debate was conceded. The
examination was conducted by the Duke himself, and the opinions elicited
from it were, that the members of congress were men of character and
intelligence; that the people considered themselves able to resist the
arms of Great Britain employed to enforce the obnoxious acts; that the
war was begun in defence of their liberties, and not with any desire
of obtaining independence; that unless conciliatory measures were
immediately pursued, it was probable connexions with foreign powers
would be formed, which they would not be easily induced to renounce;
and that they were dissatisfied with the reception of their petitions,
though inclined to acknowledge the authority of Great Britain in all
matters, except taxation. Penn was an honest man, and doubtless sincere
in his sentiments, but he had certainly been deceived, like many others,
and even some members of the congress itself. On this evidence, however,
the Duke of Richmond moved that this petition, hollow as it must
have appeared to men of deep reflection, was sufficient ground for a
conciliation of the differences existing between America and the mother
country. He was supported by Lords Shelburne and Sandwich, but the
refusal to answer the petition was defended by Lords Dartmouth and
Lyttleton, and the motion was negatived by a majority of eighty-six
against thirty-three. On the side of government the Americans were
denounced by Lord Lyttleton as audacious rebels; their sentiments as
insiduous and traitorous; and their expressions of loyalty, false and
hollow. On the other hand, opposition justified their conduct, and
patted them on the back by assurances, that their native courage and the
nature of their country rendered them an invincible people. Indeed, it
cannot be doubted, that the views taken by the opposition in the British
parliament, and the sentiments which they uttered on every favourable
occasion, had the effect of confirming the colonists in their opposition
to government, and stimulating them to increased exertions in order to
gain a free, full, and final triumph.
MOTIONS OF THE DUKE OF GRAFTON.
On the 15th of November the Duke of Grafton moved the following
resolutions: “That ministers should lay before the house an account of
the number of forces serving in America, with their several stations,
etc., previous to the commencement of hostilities; that they should lay
before the house the exact state of the army now in America; that
they should produce all the plans that had been adopted for providing
winter-quarters for those troops; that they should also produce an
estimate of the forces now in Great Britain and Ireland; and that they
should, finally, lay before the house an estimate of the military force
necessary to be sent against America, with a precise account of the
number of artillery, etc.” In opposing these motions, ministers argued
that nothing would better please the Americans than a full disclosure of
our measures and resources, and that such a disclosure would be contrary
to every rule of office, as well as to every maxim of war and common
sense. The debate wandered to the original causes of the dispute, and
the real object and intention of congress; and after these grounds were
again gone over—the opposition warmly contending that the Americans
were not aiming at independence, and ministers as warmly contending,
and indeed fully demonstrating that they were—the Duke of Grafton’s
resolutions were negatived without a division. The chief speakers on the
side of ministers were the new convert, Lord Lyttleton, who contended
that everything proved the assertion; and Lord Mansfield, whose speech
carried conviction to many minds which had before been perplexed with
doubt upon the subject. Mansfield adduced historical facts to prove that
the people of New England had been aiming at independence, almost from
her earliest infancy; and he maintained that Great Britain could not
concede any one claim which was demanded without relinquishing all, and
admitting disseveration and independence. He concluded by warning the
house that measures of conciliation would only furnish grounds for new
claims, or produce terms of pretended obedience and submission.
THE LAND TAX INCREASED.
On the 13th of November Lord North moved in the commons that the
land-tax should be raised to four shillings in the pound. An amendment
was moved by the opposition that it should be three shillings instead
of four; but this was negatived by a large majority, and the original
motion was carried. War with America had been warmly advocated by
the country gentlemen, and some of the opposition sarcastically
congratulated them upon this enviable first-fruits of their coercive
measures; while others attempted to gall them by declaring that it would
prove a perpetual mortgage on their estates. To say the least of it, it
was an ungracious return made by Lord North for their support, and it
seems to have had the effect of considerably cooling their fiery ardour
for war.
BURKE’S SECOND CONCILIATORY MOTION.
On the 16th of November, Burke again proposed measures of conciliation.
After presenting a petition against the prosecution of the war, he moved
“for leave to bring in a bill for composing the present; troubles, and
quieting the minds of his majesty’s subjects in America.” This bill
was formed on the model of the statute of Edward I., _de tallagio non
concedendo_. He proposed in it the total renunciation of taxation; the
repeal of all obnoxious laws and acts of parliament passed since
the year 1706; a full amnesty for all offences; and a recognition of
congress, in order to a final adjustment of the existing quarrel. In his
speech, which occupied more than three hours, Burke did not conceal that
his motion would involve a dissolution of the cabinet, and he justified
this on the ground that ministers had brought the country to the very
verge of ruin. He urged that delay was dangerous; that if the quarrel
was continued the Bourbons would take it up; that this country was
incapable of coping with America if thus seconded; and that America
could be retained by her good inclinations alone. He observed, also,
that three plans seemed to be afloat with regard, to America: the
first, simple war with a view to complete conquest; the second, that of
ministers, force mixed with negociations; and the third, peace grounded
on concession. It was in the spirit of the last, he said, with which he
made his motion. Burke’s principal opponent was Governor Pownall,
who exposed many fallacies in his reasoning. Pownall denied that any
renunciation, repeal, or amnesty would have any other effect than
that of increasing the pride and resistance of the Americans. He also
maintained that if repeal had any effect at all it must be extended as
far back as to 1672, and asserted that the Americans themselves demanded
a repeal up to 1763, of which Burke’s bill fell three years short. He
remarked:—“They complain of the admiralty jurisdiction: now that is as
old as the act of navigation. To my argument it is nothing how far this
is right or wrong, grievous or otherwise; but the Americans complain
of it; and, if the bill which is to afford redress and concede to their
complaints must be effectual in order to gain their confidence, this
bill does not go far enough.” The house, however, was of opinion that it
went too far, for after all the best orators of opposition had contended
for its principles, with vehement eloquence, it was rejected by a
majority of two hundred and ten, against one hundred and five. But this
was a nearer division than had taken place for a long time on these
questions, and which was doubtless the effect of the recent increase
of the land tax: there is much sympathy between men’s pockets and their
opinions.
LORD NORTH’S PROHIBITORY BILL.
On the 20th of November, Lord North proposed a measure for the
prohibition of all commercial intercourse with America. This bill
authorized the commanders of his majesty’s navy to make prize of all
American ships and goods, whether on the high-seas or in harbour; and a
clause was inserted, which rendered every American taken in them liable
to serve as a common sailor in our ships of war, and to be considered
as a volunteer. As this prohibitory bill comprehended every species of
commerce along the coast of the confederated states, all former acts,
including the Boston Port Bill, were to be considered as repealed by it.
A clause, however, provided for pardon to all revolters on their return
to obedience, and commissioners were to be appointed to give effect to
its terms, as well as to inquire into any real grievances of which the
colonists might have to complain.
Lord North, in introducing this measure vindicated his own ministerial
conduct. The dispute about taxation, he said, was not commenced by him,
but by his predecessors in office; and, he asserted, that as he found
the country and parliament determined not to surrender the right, he had
embraced their cause. He added, that if the colonies, by appealing to
arms, chose to make war the medium, he must pursue that medium, although
he would constantly keep peace in view as the true point to be obtained.
The minds of the opposition were inflamed by the bill and these
declarations of the warlike minister. Fox especially declaimed against
the bill, asserting that it tended to destroy all trade with America,
and that it would cut off all hopes of future accommodation. In the
course of his speech he accused the ministers of wishing to ruin our
manufacturers in order that they might enlist in the army; and he
concluded by moving as an amendment, that the whole body and title of
the bill should be omitted, excepting only the portion which repealed
the Boston Port Bill, and the restraining acts. The debate now grew
hotter than before. It was argued that such a proposition would be a
formal abdication of our government of the colonies, and might, with
such omissions, be termed a bill for effectually carrying into execution
the decrees of congress, by completing the union of Americans between
themselves, and exciting them to make foreign alliances. The question
being put, therefore, the amendment was rejected by one hundred and
ninety-two to sixty-four. In the course of this debate, Lord Howe, who
was soon to sail with the fleet for America, remarked feelingly that no
struggle was so painful as that between his duty as an officer and as a
man: if left to his own choice, he said, he would decline serving, but
if commanded, he would perform his duty. To this General Conway replied,
that a war with our fellow-subjects in America differed widely from,
a war with a foreign nation; and that before an officer drew his sword
against his fellow-subjects, he should first be convinced that the cause
was just. Thurlow combated this notion with indignation, asserting that
if such a doctrine was established, it must tend to a dissolution of
government. In the course of the progress of this bill petitions from
the West India merchants were presented, and council heard against it.
It was also opposed in all its stages, and several amendments were moved
in committee, but it finally passed as it was originally framed, by a
majority of one hundred and twelve against sixteen only.
The debate on this bill in the house of lords was equally warm as
that in the commons. In the face of all matter of fact, the opposition
contended that the Americans were not in a state of rebellion: they had,
it was conceded, taken up arms, but they were driven to it by violence,
injustice, and oppression. Lord Lyttleton and Denbigh denounced these
sentiments as an immoderate licence of language, and the latter peer
asserted broadly, that those who defended rebellion were little better
than rebels themselves, there being no wide difference between traitors
and those who openly or covertly aided them! During the progress of the
bill several amendments were proposed, but always ineffectually; and
a petition was presented by the merchants of Bristol, praying that its
operation might be suspended: the bill, however, was read a third time
on the 21st of December, and was passed without a division. On the third
reading it was defended, together with the whole conduct of government
towards the Americans, by Lord Mansfield. Previous to this, intelligence
had been received of the march of the two American armies to our
Canadian frontiers, so that his lordship could now make a bolder stand
against the arguments of the opposition. He remarked:—“We are now
in such a situation, that we must either fight or be pursued;” and he
illustrated his position by an anecdote related of a Swedish general,
under Gustavus Adolphus, who, pointing to an advancing enemy, observed
to his troops:—“My lads, you see those men; if you don’t kill them
they will kill you.” His lordship then continued:—“If we do not get the
better of America, America will get the better of us. They have begun
to raise a navy; trade, if left free to them, will beget opulence, and
enable them to hire ships from foreign powers. It is said, the present
war is only defensive on the part of America. Is the attack on Canada
a defensive war? Is their prohibiting all trade and commerce with every
part of the British dominions, and starving our sugar-islands, acting
on the defensive? No; though these people never offended us, we will
distress them, say they, because that will be distressing Great Britain.
Are we, in the midst of all outrages of hostility, of seizing our ships,
entering our provinces at the head of numerous armies, and seizing our
forts, to stand idle, because we are told this is an unjust war, and
wait till the Americans have brought their arms to our very doors? The
justice of the cause must give way to our present situation; and the
consequences which must ensue, should we now recede, would, nay must,
be infinitely worse than any we have to dread, by pursuing the present
plan, or agreeing at once to a final separation.” This speech of Lord
Mansfield obtained a ready response in the house by the almost universal
approval of the peers assembled.