CHAPTER X.

{GEORGE III. 1779–1780}

Trial of Admiral Keppel and Vice-admiral Palliser.....

Attacks on Lord Sandwich..... Investigation respecting the

Conduct of General and Lord Howe..... Relief to Protestant

Dissenters..... Debates on the Trade of Ireland..... War

with Spain..... Debates on the Militia Bill..... Bill for

the Impressment of Seamen..... Parliament prorogued..... The

Causes of the Rupture with Spain..... Spanish Attempt upon

Gibraltar..... French and English Fleets in the Channel.....

Affairs in the West Indies..... Operations in Georgia.....

Ineffectual Attempt of the Americans to reduce Savannah.....

British Incursions into Virginia...... Capture of

Stony Point and Verplanks..... British Expedition

against Connecticut..... Stony Point recaptured, but

deserted at the Approach of the British..... British

Garrison surprised at Paulus Hook..... American Disaster at

Penobscot..... American Retaliation on the Indians, &c.

Spanish Incursions..... Action between Paul Jones and

Captain Pearson..... Changes in the Ministry..... Meeting

of Parliament..... Lord Shelburne attacks Ministers in the

case of Ireland..... Lord Ossory’s Attack on Ministers

respecting Ireland..... Lord Worth’s Proposition for the

Relief of Ireland..... Debates on Economical Reform.

{A.D. 1779}

TRIAL OF ADMIRAL KEPPEL AND VICE-ADMIRAL PALLISER.

The trial of Admiral Keppel commenced on the 7th of January, at the

governor’s house, Portsmouth. It lasted thirty-two days, and the

unanimous sentence of the court-martial was:—“That it was their opinion

the charge against Admiral Keppel was malicious and ill-founded; it

having appeared that so far from having by misconduct or neglect of duty

lost an opportunity of rendering essential service to the state, and

therefore tarnished the honour of the British navy, he had behaved as

became a judicious, brave, and experienced officer.” The acquittal of

Keppel was followed by illuminations and other demonstrations of joy on

the part of the public, with whom he was in favour; and he also received

the thanks of the city and the two houses of parliament. On the other

hand, the house of Sir Hugh Palliser was broken open by a mob at

midnight, and the whole of the furniture either destroyed or thrown out

of the window, while effigies of the vice-admiral were carried about

suspended by the neck and afterwards burnt. Work for the glaziers was

also made by the destruction of the windows of the Admiralty, and of the

houses of Lords George Germaine and North. The mob even took the great

gate of the Admiralty from its hinges, and having collected all

the sedan chairs in the neighbourhood made a great bonfire in the

court-yard. Sixteen of the mob were afterwards captured by the soldiers,

and the rest were dispersed. A day or two after this, as the acquittal

of Keppel seemed to cast a stigma on the character of Sir Hugh Palliser

he demanded a court-martial on himself; first giving up his seat in

parliament and all his offices except that of vice-admiral. His trial

was held on board the “Sandwich,” in Portsmouth harbour and after the

lapse of twenty-one days the sentence of the court was:—“That, though

his conduct and behaviour in battle had been in many respects highly

exemplary and meritorious; they, at the same time, could not

help thinking it was incumbent upon him to have made known to his

commander-in-chief the disabled state of his ship, to which he

attributed his not joining; but that, notwithstanding his omission

in this particular, they were of opinion that he was not in any other

respect chargeable with misconduct or misbehaviour, and that, therefore,

they fully acquitted him.” Such was the termination of this ill-judged

contest, which was rather a contest between the two parties of Whig and

Tory than for personal honour and integrity of conduct. Though both were

acquitted, their reputations were injured by their trials, for neither

of them was ever afterwards employed in active service.

ATTACKS ON LORD SANDWICH.

That the trials of Keppel and Palliser were essentially party struggles

is proved by after proceedings in both houses of parliament. After the

Christmas recess, Mr. Fox moved a vote of censure upon Lord Sandwich

for sending Admiral Keppel to sea in the first instance with only twenty

ships of the line, and four frigates, at a time when a French fleet,

consisting, as there was reason to believe, of thirty-two ships of the

line, and certainly of twenty-seven with a great number of frigates, was

at Brest, and ready to put to sea; thereby hazarding the safety of the

kingdom. Fox also announced his intention of moving an address for the

removal of the first lord of the admiralty; asserting that there were

facts existing which would warrant his impeachment by the house. Keppel,

who had determined to resign his command of the fleet, joined in this

attack upon Sandwich, by declaring that on his first taking the

command, the fleet was in no very good condition; that afterwards the

admiralty-board had made some exertions, but even then had sent him to

sea too weak; that he believed the French fleet was as strong as was

represented in the papers which he found on board the frigates he had

captured; and that, upon that conviction, he was for the first time

obliged to turn his back upon the enemy. Lords North and Mulgrave

defended Sandwich and the admiralty-board; imputing some blame to

Keppel, and the motion was negatived by two hundred and four against one

hundred and seventy. Subsequently, Mr. Fox moved that the state of the

navy at the breaking out of the war was inadequate to the exigencies of

the service. In his speech, Fox observed, that nothing but good fortune

had saved the country from invasion and destruction; but Lord Mulgrave,

in reply, said, that all the “good fortune” had been on the side of

France—that nothing but “good fortune” had saved d’Orvilliers from

Keppel, and d’Estaing from Lord Howe. The latter admiral, who was now

in the house, showed that he was scarcely in a better temper with the

administration than was Keppel. He declared that he had been deceived

in accepting the command in America; that he had been ill-used while he

held that command; and that he would never again accept active service

under the existing ministry. On this occasion, Fox’s motion was lost,

but a few days after he moved that the omission to reinforce Lord Howe

in America before the month of June, and the not sending a fleet to the

Mediterranean, were instances of gross misconduct and neglect. Fox was

again outvoted, yet on the 19th of April he made his promised motion for

dismissing Lord Sandwich from his majesty’s presence and councils for

ever. This motion was likewise negatived, and a similar motion, made

a few days after in the upper house by the Earl of Bristol, shared the

same fate. Other motions hostile to Sandwich were made in both houses,

but they were all lost by majorities of nearly two to one. But even

these large majorities exhibited the waning influence and popularity of

the administration; for in the earlier days of Lord North’s government

the majorities were usually four to one.

INVESTIGATION RESPECTING THE CONDUCT OF GENERAL AND LORD HOWE.

The managers of the war-office were doomed to similar attacks as those

of the admiralty. Early in the session General Burgoyne imputing his own

misfortune and the failures of all other commanders, whether by land or

sea, to the administration, had moved that all the letters written

by himself and other commanders to government since the convention of

Saratoga, should be laid before the house. Lord North readily granted

these papers, and shortly after Sir William Howe, who was now in the

house of commons, as well as his brother the admiral, made a similar

motion for copies of all letters that had passed during his command

between him and the secretary of state for America. It was only against

Lord George Germaine that Howe wished to impute blame, and him he

charged with interfering on all occasions with the management of the

army in America; and of imposing restraints and schemes of his own,

which were conceived in utter ignorance of the country which was the

scene of the war. These papers were, also, willingly granted, and Lord

North further consented that the house should go into committee for

inquiring into the whole conduct of the American war. At the same time,

an application was made to the house of lords, to permit the attendance

of Earl Cornwallis, as a material witness. After this, however, Lord

North endeavoured to put a stop to this inquiry, by asserting that Sir

William Howe’s character was fully cleared by the letters produced, and

that government approved in the warmest manner of his services. But this

attempt was attended with great odium, and the examination of witnesses

was proceeded with. This examination lasted for two months, and the

officers examined were, Lord Cornwallis, Major-general Grey, Sir Andrew

Snape Ham-mon, Major Montresor, and Sir George Osborne, whose evidence

went to establish the facts that the force sent to America was not

equal to the task of subjugating America; that the colonists were almost

unanimous in their enmity and resistance to Great Britain; that the

nature of the country was beyond all others difficult and impracticable

for military operations; and that there was no fairer prospect of

success in any future attempt at conquest, than in those which had

already been made. On the other hand, Major-general Robertson, and

Mr. Galloway, a member of congress who had turned royalist, gave

contradictory evidence on all these points, and the latter was severe in

his censures on the military conduct of Sir William Howe. At the

request of Howe, this witness was directed to attend again for

cross-examination; but, on the day appointed, which was the 29th of

June, the general not being in the house, advantage was taken of this

circumstance to dissolve the committee, and thus no resolution was

passed upon this subject. Burgoyne was somewhat more fortunate than

Howe, as witnesses were heard in his favour and none against him. His

witnesses were Sir Guy Carleton, the Earls of Balcarras and Harrington,

Major Forbes, and Captain Bloomfield, who deposed that no general could

be braver or more beloved by his army. At the same time they could not

make out a case of good generalship in Burgoyne’s crossing the Hudson,

after the expedition to Bennington, or even give a good colour to that

expedition, so that their only evidence went to show that which all men

knew; namely, that Burgoyne was brave, persevering, and humane, and that

in advancing to and staying so long at Saratoga, he had acted according

to the best of his judgment. In the course of the examination, some of

the witnesses extolled the bravery of the Americans in action; but it

was also shown that Gates’s army were nearly six times as numerous as

that of Burgoyne’s, and that the latter were half-famished, so that it

did not require any extraordinary bravery to accomplish a victory other

them.

RELIEF TO PROTESTANT DISSENTERS.

The spirit of toleration which displayed itself during the last session

in favour of Roman Catholics, was again exerted in the present session

on behalf of Protestant Dissenting ministers and schoolmasters. A bill

to relieve them from some painful and absurd restrictions, was carried

with great facility.

DEBATES ON THE TRADE OF IRELAND.

During the month of January, Lord Nugent, after drawing a forcible

picture of the distress which existed in Ireland, gave notice

of his intention to move for the establishment of a cotton-manufactory

in Ireland, with a power of exportation to Great Britain, and a free

trade to America, Africa, and the West Indies. Subsequently a

committee was formed to consider the acts of parliament relating to the

importation of sugars into Ireland. The intended relief, however, was as

usual counteracted by commercial jealousy in England, and all that was

done by the commons was to pass two acts, for the growth of tobacco and

hemp, and the manufacture of linen in Ireland, and to make a pecuniary

grant, in consequence of a message from the throne. But this boon was

not sufficient to satisfy the desires of the Irish people, and possibly

had it been a hundredfold greater, it would not have been deemed

sufficient. It has always been the fate of that unhappy country to be

disturbed by restless spirits—by men who, while they profess to seek

the good of the country, seek only their own self-interests. On this

occasion, many self-styled “patriots” resolved to follow the example

of the colonists, and a non-importation agreement was set on foot in

Dublin, Cork, Kilkenny, and other places; the subscribers pledging

themselves neither to import nor to use any British goods which could

be manufactured in Ireland, till the Irish trade was freed from its

shackles. In the midst of this ferment, as rumours were afloat of a

meditated invasion by France, and Ireland was drained of its troops for

the American war, the maritime towns demanded protection. Government

was told by the lord-lieutenant, that the exhausted state of the public

revenues rendered it impracticable to embody a militia, whence the

people were given to understand that they might take measures to protect

themselves. This was an ill-omened step for ministers to take, when the

people of Ireland were everywhere displaying the feelings of rebellion.

By it the serpent’s teeth were sown, and they sprang up armed men. The

Irish obeyed the call with alacrity. Volunteers were embodied, equipped,

and disciplined at private expense, on every hand, and Ireland soon

exhibited the animating spectacle of a nation in arms. Ministers appear

to have been very early convinced of their error; for when they saw

these armed associations in their full strength, they, with the people

of England at large, prognosticated insurrection and civil war. Still

there was little or no disposition displayed on the part of ministers to

disarm the hostility of the Irish people by redress of grievances. After

the discussion of Irish affairs had ceased in the commons, the subject

was introduced in the Lords by the Marquess of Rockingham, who moved an

address for documents which might enable parliament to pursue measures

for promoting the common strength, wealth, and commerce of both nations.

The marquess, who was well acquainted with the state of Ireland, took

a severe review of the revenue, trade, and government, since the year

1755; and bitterly inveighed against ministers on the subject of the

military associations. The necessity for these associations, he said,

should have been prevented, or the people should have been legally

commissioned to take up arms under officers named by the sovereign—the

men who had taken up arms to repel invasion, might soon think of

employing them in resisting injustice and oppression. To prevent such

a consummation, in conclusion, he urged the necessity of redressing the

grievances, and of adopting some remedy to the deplorable distresses

under which the Irish people were groaning. The Marquess of Rockingham

was warmly supported by the Earl of Shelburne; and the only arguments

urged against the address by ministers were, the late period of the

session, and the necessity of proceeding with caution, and upon minute

inquiry and investigation. The result was that there was a kind of

compromise between the Marquess of Rockingham and the Earl of Gower,

president of the council—the latter pledging himself that a proper plan

for the relief of Ireland should be concocted by ministers during the

recess, and be ready to be laid before parliament at the opening of the

next session. Ireland, therefore, for the present, was obliged to put up

with a promise.

WAR WITH SPAIN.

On the 15th of June Mr. Thomas Townshend moved for an address, praying

his majesty not to prorogue parliament, until the inquiry into the

conduct of affairs in America should be completed. This motion was

negatived, but, on the next day, Lord North gave some information which

necessarily prolonged the session. He acquainted the house that

the Spanish ambassador, after delivering a hostile manifesto to the

secretary of state, had suddenly quitted London. This manifesto, North

said, together with a message from the king, would be laid before

parliament on the morrow. On the 17th, therefore, the message and the

manifesto were introduced. In the message, his majesty declared, in the

most solemn manner, that he had done nothing to provoke the court of

Spain; that his desire to preserve peace with that court was uniform and

sincere; and that his conduct towards that power had been guided by

the principles of good faith, honour, and justice. He was the more

surprised, he said, at the declaration of Spain, as some of the

grievances enumerated in that paper had never come to his knowledge,

and as those which had been made known to him had been treated with

the utmost attention, and put into a course of inquiry and redress. His

majesty’s message concluded by expressing the firmest confidence in the

zeal and public spirit of parliament, and the power and resources of the

nation. His majesty’s declarations concerning his conduct towards Spain

were fully borne out by the manifesto, which was a loose rigmarole, in

which scarcely anything else was clear than that war with Great Britain

was fully resolved upon. The opposition in both houses took credit to

themselves for having prognosticated, in the spirit of true prophets,

a war with Spain, and taunted ministers with folly and blindness in

imagining that such an event would not take place. Both houses,

however, were unanimous in their indignation against Spain, and in their

determination of supporting the war against the Bourbons. Addresses to

this effect were agreed to; but Lord John Cavendish moved for another

address, to be presented at the same time, praying that his majesty

would give immediate orders for the collecting of his fleets and armies,

and to exert the whole national force against the House of Bourbon.

As this motion involved the withdrawal of the troops from America,

ministers opposed it, and the secretary at war having moved an

adjournment, it was immediately carried by two to one. In the lords, an

amendment to the address, moved by the protesting Earl of Abingdon, was

also rejected by a large majority; as was also a motion made by the Duke

of Richmond, similar in its nature to that made in the Commons by Lord

John Cavendish.

DEBATES ON THE MILITIA BILL.

On the 21st of June Lord North proposed that the number of the militia

should be doubled, and that individuals should be authorised to raise

loyal corps to assist in the defence of the kingdom. This was agreed to

in the commons; but in the lords the clause enabling the king to double

the militia was rejected, thereby leaving the bill a mere skeleton.

When it was brought back to the commons thus mutilated, Lord North was

taunted by the opposition with having at length, after spreading the

spirit of disunion and discord on every hand, seen it enter into the

very cabinet itself. In reply, North, with wonderful equanimity of

temper, observed, that he could not agree in their lordships’ judgment

in considering his proposition impracticable: that his own experience

as lord-lieutenant of a county induced him to believe that the militia

could easily be doubled; but that his experience could not control the

opinions of the other house, where there were so many lord-lieutenants

of counties. However, he said, he accepted the power of augmenting

the home force as crumbs falling from their lordships’ table. A debate

subsequently occurred on the question which was mooted by a member of

opposition, as to whether or no the Militia Bill was a money-bill. It

was insisted by some that it was such to all intents and purposes; that

no amendment of the lords could be admitted in such a bill, without

a surrender of the most valuable privileges of the commons; and that,

therefore, the bill must be totally rejected. It was decided by a

majority, however, that it was not a money-bill, and consequently it

passed.

BILL FOR THE IMPRESSMENT OF SEAMEN.

On the 23rd of June, at a late hour of the night, the attorney-general

moved for leave to bring in a bill for manning the navy, by resuming

protections granted to certain descriptions of seamen, watermen, and

their apprentices, and by taking away the right of _habeas corpus_ from

all persons of those classes impressed before the passing of this bill.

The late hour at which this motion was made was purposely chosen, in

order that the effect of the press-warrants might not be impeded by the

disclosure which the newspapers would have made throughout the country,

and in order that the fleet, on which the safety of the country

depended, might be manned without impediment. The attorney-general

admitted this, and the opposition could not deny the necessity of

dispatch, or that there were no other means of manning the fleet;

but they denounced the bill as a violation of sacred rights, and a

treacherous irruption into the dwelling-houses of citizens. The bill,

however—which was called the “Indemnity Bill,” from its retrospective

operation—was read twice on the same night, and when the house met

again it was passed and sent up to the lords, who agreed to it, after

inserting a clause in favour of colliers: it immediately received the

royal assent.

{GEORGE III. 1779–1780}

PARLIAMENT PROROGUED.

Several attempts were made to bring about an address against a

prorogation, but many members were now gone on their summer rambles, and

those who remained were chiefly impatient for repose, whence all these

attempts failed. On the 3rd of July, therefore, the king prorogued

parliament. In his speech the king returned his warmest thanks to both

houses for their great services and their long attendance; and at

the same time expressed his entire approbation of all they had done,

particularly of their measures respecting Ireland. The events of the

war, he said, had not given France cause for triumph, and he trusted

that that ambitious power would be compelled to wish that she had not,

without provocation or cause of complaint, insulted the honour and

invaded the rights of his crown. As regarded the hostility of Spain, he

repeated, that no blame could be attached to him. He then complimented

the high national feeling of the people by observing, that he considered

it as a happy omen of the success of his arms that the increase of

difficulties served only to augment the courage and constancy of the

nation. He concluded by remarking, that it was impossible to speak of

the continuance of the rebellion in North America without concern, and

that he had given such unquestionable proofs of his disposition to put

an end to those troubles, which led him to hope that the designs of the

enemies of Great Britain could not long prevail against the interests of

the colonists.

THE CAUSES OF THE RUPTURE WITH SPAIN.

Although the opposition were correct in their conjectures as to a final

war with Spain, ministers were by no means so blind as represented by

them. It had, indeed, required all the family influence of the greater

branch of the House of Bourbon, and all the activity and skill of French

negotiators to lead Charles III. into this new and unprovoked contest.

The Spanish monarch remembered how much he had suffered from his last

short war with England; he was alarmed also for the tranquillity of his

own colonies, if encouraged by the example of successful rebellion; and

he moreover shrunk from the unkingly action of fomenting insurrection

and allying himself with rebels. These were barriers which the King of

France and his negotiators had to break down before they could procure

the Spanish monarch’s aid in their designs. And in this they encountered

a great difficulty. Charles III. assured Lord Grantham, that he knew

nothing of the treaty between France and America until it was concluded;

and his prime-minister, Count Florida Blanca, declared that he

considered the independence of America as no less injurious to Spain

than to Great Britain. Many overtures, he afterwards confessed, had been

made, but his monarch had uniformly rejected the instances of France

to acknowledge the independence of the United States. Subsequently,

however, Charles III. was led to believe that revolution might

flourish in North America without reaching the south; that the final

hour of the British supremacy at sea, and consequently of the British

empire was at hand; and that the united House of Bourborn would then

have little else to do than to reach forth their hands and divide the

spoils. The Spanish monarch then, with these visionary hopes in view,

altered his line of conduct. On the first breaking out of a war with

France he pretended great anxiety for maintaining his treaties with

Great Britain, and expressed a compassionate interest for his brother

the King of England, and his utter abhorrence of the proceedings of

congress against so just and good a prince. He tendered his services as

a mediator, and when it was hinted that the King of England could not

submit a quarrel between him and his own subjects to another prince,

he expressed his readiness to mediate in the French part of the quarrel

alone, and to reconcile the differences existing between the courts of

St. James’s and Versailles. To this latter proposal it was replied, that

it was inconsistent with national honour to admit the interference of

a third power, till the views of France were known; and then Charles

expressed his readiness to open the negociation himself, so as to spare

both parties the humiliation of making the first step towards a peace.

He suggested, that each government should transmit its conditions to

Madrid, and that he should be allowed to draw from both a plan for the

conclusion of a treaty. To this the British ministers assented, and the

conditions they sent were comprised in this one article—that, assuming

the right of England to treat with her own colonies independently of

foreign intervention, as an unquestionable principle, if France would

cease her interference, and withdraw her troops from America, they

would readily concur in establishing the harmony which had subsisted

for fifteen years between the two crowns. On the other hand, the French

ministers required that England should withdraw her forces from America;

that she should acknowledge the independence of the United States; and

that the French court should be granted the power of bringing forward

additional demands for amending and explaining treaties. Such demands

as these could not be conceded, and then the King of Spain offered

these three different proposals of his own, as proper to produce a

pacification—namely, that there should either be a truce between

England and the colonies for twenty-five years, during which a peace

might be negociated, and the separate articles in dispute with France

amicably adjusted; or that there should be a truce with France,

including the colonies; or that there should be an indefinite truce

both with the colonies and with France, to determine only after a year’s

notice, during which plenipotentiaries of England, France, and America

might form a congress at Madrid, with Spain as a fourth party. This

latter convention was to be signed by the American agents at Paris,

subject to the approval of congress, which France was to pledge herself

should be obtained, and in the meantime the colonies were to enjoy

freedom of trade and independence, and the British forces were to be

either withdrawn from America, or greatly reduced. The British ministers

replied, that any such plan seemed to proceed on every principle which

had been disclaimed, and to contain every term which had been rejected;

and they declared, that if compelled to grant such extreme conditions,

it would be more consistent with the dignity of the British nation to

grant them directly to America, without the intervention of any foreign

power. Before this final reply reached Madrid, however, the Spanish

monarch threw off the mask, and ordered his ambassador to quit London,

leaving the manifesto behind him as a justification of war. This

manifesto contained nearly one hundred grievances; and not the least

of these was, that Great Britain had insulted Spain by rejecting her

mediation—a mediation which was evidently commenced with the one design

of inducing a rupture between the two nations.

SPANISH ATTEMPT UPON GIBRALTAR.

Before the rupture took place between England and Spain, the Spanish

ambassador had delicately hinted to our ministers, that, if they would

restore the rock of Gibraltar to his monarch, he would consent to remain

neutral. This price, however, was deemed too high by our ministers for

what must have been, after all, a doubtful neutrality; and hence, after

war was declared, the first thoughts of the Spaniards were directed to

the siege of that wonderful rock. Before hostilities commenced, indeed,

Florida Banca, in order to facilitate this grand object, had entered

into a regular treaty with the Emperor of Morocco; he calculating that,

by that act, the Moors would be prevented from supplying the garrison

of Gibraltar with provisions, as they had hitherto done, and that Ceuta,

the other pillar of Hercules on the African coast, belonging to Spain,

would be left unmolested by them during the siege. Having done this,

a large army was collected at St. Roque, Algeziras, and the Campo near

Gibraltar, and immediately after the declaration of war, this force

began its laborious operations for the reduction of Gibraltar. But

many events demand notice before the results of these operations are

recorded, for not a gleam of success attended their operations during

this year.

FRENCH AND ENGLISH FLEETS IN THE CHANNEL, ETC.

One of the earliest measures after war was declared by Spain, was the

junction of the fleets of the house of Bourbon. On a sudden d’Orvilliers

sailed out of Brest, with thirty French sail of the line, and being

joined by thirty-eight Spanish ships of the line, he made his way

for the English coasts. At this time our fleet, which did not exceed

thirty-eight sail of the line, was under the command of Admiral Hardy;

and while he was cruizing in the soundings, the French and Spaniards

appeared off Plymouth. One ship of sixty-four guns and a number of

coasting-vessels were captured by them; but after parading two or three

days before Plymouth, they were driven out of the Channel by a strong

east wind. The same wind which drove the French and Spaniards out of

the Channel had prevented Hardy from entering it; but at length the wind

shifted to the westward, and he, in sight of the enemy, then gained its

entrance, and England was safe. For, although d’Orvilliers, conscious

of his superior strength, wished to engage Hardy out of the Channel,

he would not hazard a battle in the narrow sea, where the advantage

of numbers would have been lost for want of sea-room, and where

the navigation would have been dangerous. Hardy, therefore, having

outmanoeuvred the French admiral, proudly anchored at Spithead; and soon

after the coast was covered with troops, volunteers, and militia, while

fresh ships were fitted out, and cruizers at sea were recalled to

the channel. Such a formidable front was shown, that the French and

Spaniards were compelled to retire. They sailed for Brest where they

lay for several months inactive and useless, and where thousands of

them died from a terrible sickness which had broken out among them while

laying off the English coast. Added to this misfortune, the Spaniards,

who had sent their ships to sea in the hope of achieving high and mighty

enterprises, soon found that this naval war with England was to follow

the general rule, and to cost them ships and wealth, which they could

not well spare. In the course of this year the British captured a

large Spanish frigate off the Western Islands, and another off Cape

Finisterre; a Spanish register-ship, carrying a considerable treasure

from Lima to Cadiz; a rich Manilla ship, said to be the richest taken

since the galleon captured by Lord Anson; another plate-ship with

200,000 dollars in specie and a quantity of bullion, &c.; and finally,

a great variety of small Spanish craft. At the close of the year,

therefore, the Spanish monarch had reason to deplore his rashness in

entering into this war.

AFFAIRS IN THE WEST INDIES.

During the year the transatlantic war was carried on with various

success. In the month of January, Vice-admiral Byron arrived at

St. Lucie with nine sail of the line, and there joined Rear-admiral

Barrington. This compelled the Count d’Estaing to act on the defensive.

He took refuge in Martinique, where he remained five months, and nothing

could induce him to issue from his safe retreat. While here he was

joined by some ships under Count de Grasse, and fresh land-troops

also arrived from France. On the other hand, Byron’s fleet was also

reinforced by some ships under Admiral Rowley. Both fleets, however,

remained inactive till Byron sailed away to escort our homeward-bound

West India fleet to a certain latitude. The French admiral now detached

a small force to St. Vincent, where the Caribs joined the French,

and where the English garrison thus assailed capitulated. After this

d’Estaing proceeded with his whole fleet and 9000 land-troops to

Grenada. Lord Macartney, the governor, had only one hundred and fifty

regulars, and about three hundred militia to oppose to him; but he made

a brave resistance with this little force, and even repulsed the first

assault of nearly 3000 French troops. His lines, however, were stormed,

and after Macartney had retired into the fort he was compelled to

surrender at discretion. Before he surrendered, however, Admiral Byron,

who had returned from escorting the trade, appeared off the island, and

attempted its relief. An engagement took place between the British and

French fleets, in which some of the English ships were disabled, and the

French lost 1200 men killed, and 2000 wounded. Night put an end to the

action, and although in the course of the day the white flag was

seen waving over the capital of Grenada, which was a proof that Lord

Macartney had been compelled to surrender, Byron remained on the scene

of action, hoping that the enemy would engage him again on the morrow.

In the morning, however, he discovered that d’Estaing had gone back to

Grenada and Byron bore away to St. Christopher. Great alarm prevailed

among our remaining West India Islands, for d’Estaing had boasted that

he would capture the whole during the summer; but he soon sailed away to

Hispaniola, and then to the coasts of Georgia and Carolina to aid the

Americans.

OPERATIONS IN GEORGIA.

After Lower Georgia had submitted to Colonel Campbell, he resolved

to prosecute his success by an advance into Upper Georgia. In this

expedition he met with few interruptions. On his approach to Augusta,

the second city of the province, the American troops fled from the town,

and the inhabitants took the oath of allegiance to the British monarch,

and formed themselves into companies for their own defence. Campbell

was now not far from a part of North Carolina where the majority of

the population were known to be royalists, and he detached

Lieutenant-colonel Hammond, with two hundred infantry mounted on

horseback, to encourage them to take up arms. The progress of the royal

arms in the Southern States was alarming, and the provincials resolved

to arrest it. In the month of January, congress despatched General

Lincoln to take the command of some regiments raised in North-Carolina,

and to unite them with the remnant of the army of Georgia. Lincoln took

post on the north bank of the river, about fifteen miles above the town

of Savannah. He was thus posted and preparing for action when Colonel

Campbell made his expedition into Upper Georgia. Soon after this

Campbell returned to England, and Augusta was evacuated, as being too

distant a post to be supported. Lincoln now marched along the northern

bank of the river, with a view of crossing it and reconquering

Georgia. In the meantime General Prevost left Savannah, and marched for

Charlestown, the capital of South Carolina, in the hope of taking it by

surprise. He appeared before that city on the 11th of May, and on the

following day it was summoned to surrender. The summons was unheeded,

and Prevost having viewed the lines, which could not be forced without a

great loss of men, and knowing that the garrison was more numerous

than his troops, and that Lincoln was hastening to its relief, retired

towards Georgia. He took possession of John’s Island, which was

separated from the continent by a small inlet of the sea, commonly

called Stone River. His intention was to have remained in that island

until ammunition should arrive from New York, but discovering that

Lincoln was advancing to Lower Georgia, he departed for Savannah, to

defend the fortress, leaving Colonel Maitland, with a garrison of eight

hundred men, to protect St. John’s. An attempt was made by General

Lincoln to cut off this force, but his attack was bravely repulsed,

and the American general, dispirited by his non-success, attempted

no further operations until the arrival of the French fleet under

d’Estaing.

INEFFECTUAL ATTEMPT OF THE AMERICANS TO REDUCE SAVANNAH.

It was at the beginning of September that the French fleet arrived off

the mouth of the Savannah River. Its appearance was so sudden that

an English fifty-gun ship, a small frigate, and two store-ships were

surprised, and, after some severe fighting, captured. As soon as

d’Estaing arrived, Lincoln directed his march from South Carolina

to Savannah. Before his arrival d’Estaing landed about 3000 men at

Beaulieu, and marching straight to Savannah, summoned General Prevost to

surrender the town to the arms of France. Prevost, who had called in all

his detachments and garrisons in Georgia, and had put the town in the

best possible state of defence, declined answering a general summons,

and requested a suspension of arms for twenty-four hours. Imagining that

this period was required to draw up terms of capitulation, d’Estaing

granted these terms, fully calculating that, at the expiration of

the time, Savannah would be taken without the waste of a single shot.

Prevost’s motive, however, for requiring so many hours before he gave

his answer to the summons was, to give Colonel Maitland time to reach

the city to aid in its defence. Maitland arrived, after a laborious

march, and threw himself into Savannah with his eight hundred veterans,

and then Prevost informed d’Estaing that the place would be defended to

the last extremity. General Lincoln joined the French on the 16th, and

after spending a few days in quarrelling with d’Estaing for not waiting

for him, and for not summoning the place in the name of congress,

instead of the French king, having made up the quarrel they commenced

the siege. Their batteries were ready to open on the 14th of October,

and, in the meantime, the beseiged had not been idle. The defences had

been daily improved, and two successful sorties were made, in which

many of the allies were killed and wounded. The batteries were at

length opened: fifty-three large cannon and fourteen mortars kept up

an incessant fire upon the town. By this time the besieging army,

reinforced by the militia of South Carolina, under Governor Rutledge,

amounted to nearly 10,000 men, while General Prevost’s whole force did

not exceed a fourth part of that number. The batteries played upon the

town for five days, during which time no visible impression was made

upon the works, and but little injury was done to the houses. In the

midst of this firing, indeed, Prevost had contrived to mount nearly

one hundred guns, and all the open or weak parts of the town were

strengthened with impalements, traverses, abattis, and redoubts, the

last being constructed of green spongy wood and trunks of trees, with

the interstices filled up with mud and sand. Perceiving that he made

no progress, d’Estaing became impatient and alarmed, for he feared that

while he was taking Savannah, the British fleet in the West Indies might

capture all the French islands. His officers also suggested that if

the British fleet were to follow them to the Savannah River, the effect

might be fatal while so many were employed in the siege; and that if

they remained at the stormy season of the year upon that insecure coast,

the fleet might be scattered by storms, and destroyed piecemeal by the

British ships. Under these circumstances, contrary to the advice of

General Lincoln, the count resolved to try the effects of an assault

by storm, and on the morning of the 9th of October he made the rash

attempt. Before daybreak, after a heavy cannonade and bombardment,

and an unsuccessful attempt to set fire to the abattis, the French and

Americans, to the number of 5000, advanced to the right of the British

lines. They advanced in two columns; one being led by d’Estaing and

Lincoln, and the other by Count Dillon, an Irishman in the service of

France. The column under Dillon, mistaking its way, became entangled

in a morass near the fortress, and exposed to its fire; and while great

numbers were slain, the rest were unable to form. The other column

advanced against a redoubt, but as soon as it was discovered, the allies

became exposed to a continual blaze of musketry from its guns, and to

a murderous cross-fire from the adjoining batteries, which mowed down

whole ranks, and threw the head of the column into confusion. Other men

were urged on to fill up the gaps; and the column at length got to the

foot of the redoubt. Here the conflict became more dreadful than ever.

For a few minutes the French and American standards were planted on the

parapet, but they were soon hurled from thence. The fire of the redoubt

and the batteries being aided by a well-posted armed brig flanking the

right of the British lines, made the whole column stagger and reel like

drunken men; and Colonel Maitland, seizing the critical moment, issued

forth with a mixed corps of grenadiers and marines, and charged them at

the point of the bayonet. This charge decided the contest. The French

and Americans were driven far beyond the ditch, leaving behind them

about nine hundred killed and wounded; while, on the part of the

English, there were only fifty-five killed, wounded, and missing.

D’Estaing himself was wounded, as were also several French officers of

rank, and the Polish Count Pulawski here finished his career. The issue

of this battle determined the siege: the allies immediately separated,

the provincials retiring to their homes, and the French setting sail

for the West Indies. D’Estaing had scarcely embarked when his fleet

was dispersed by a storm; and while some reached their destination, the

rest, with the count himself, sailed for France.

BRITISH INCURSIONS INTO VIRGINIA.

During the operations in Georgia, the British fleet under Sir George

Collier, who had succeeded Admiral Gambier, had been attacking Virginia,

in which attack he was aided by a detachment of soldiers under General

Matthews. Their first attempt was an expedition to the Chesapeak, where

they demolished Fort Nelson, the grand defence of the American dock-yard

at Gos-port; and a similar scene of destruction was exhibited at the

town of Suffolk, Kempe’s Landing, Tanner’s Creek, and other places in

the lower part of the district. At the same time, the “Otter” sloop, and

the privateers sailing far up the bay, took a great number of prizes,

and burned, or caused the Americans themselves to burn, a great number

of vessels. In the end, indeed, scarcely any American craft were left

floating on these waters. The last exploit of this expedition was to

demolish the fort and destroy the navy-yard of Portsmouth; when Collier

and Matthews returned to New York, after an absence of only twenty-four

days.

CAPTURE OF STONEY-POINT AND VERPLANKS.

A few days after the arrival of Collier and Matthews at New York,

another detachment, under General Vaughan, and accompanied by Sir Henry

Clinton himself, proceeded up the Hudson against Verplanks-neck, and

Stoney-point, where Washington’s people were erecting fortifications.

A division of the army landed on the eastern side of the river on

Verplank’s-neck, while the commander-in-chief proceeded to the western

side against Stoney-point. Both these posts, which commanded the Hudson,

and by means of which Washington had kept up his communication between

the middle and northern colonies, were captured, with the loss of

only one man wounded. At Fort Lafayette, which was the main defence of

Verplanks-point, all the garrison surrendered as prisoners of war;

but, at Stoney-point, the garrison fled at the approach of the British

troops. Sir Henry Clinton left considerable garrisons at these places,

and then returned to New York.

{GEORGE III. 1779–1780}

BRITISH EXPEDITION AGAINST CONNECTICUT.

General Clinton, soon after his return to New York, proposed inflicting

a severe chastisement on the Connecticut people, and tempting Washington

down from the highlands to defend the sea-coast. For this purpose

a detachment of land-troops under Major-general Tryon, supported by

Admiral Collier, advanced on Connecticut. They first attacked Newhaven,

where they destroyed the artillery, ammunition, and stores, with all

the vessels in the harbour. Fairfield was next attacked, and having

encountered a severe opposition by the inhabitants, when the place was

captured it was reduced to ashes. The same fate awaited Norwalk and

Greenfield; and Tryon then intended to make a descent at New London, the

great rendezvous for the Connecticut privateers. As the militia of this

state, however, were by this time joined by some regular troops detached

from Washington’s army, he deemed it expedient to return towards New

York to obtain reinforcements. The fleet fell back, therefore, on Long

Island, to wait for an additional supply of troops and ammunition. In

this expedition much spoils were captured.

STONEY-POINT RE-CAPTURED, BUT DESERTED AT THE APPROACH OF THE BRITISH.

Washington, roused by these disasters, undertook operations which not

only prevented Clinton from reinforcing Tryon, but compelled him to

recall the whole of that devastating expedition. Before the garrison

could put Stoney-point in any defensive order, he dispatched General

Wayne to fall upon it by night, and the troops left there by Clinton

were all either killed or taken prisoners. Wayne opened a fire

across the river upon Fort Lafayette, expecting to see another strong

detachment appear from the ranks of Washington on the land side of

that fort. This detachment did not appear in time; for when Clinton

discovered this reverse he sent a detachment up the river, in

transports, to assist the garrison, and their arrival occurred almost

simultaneously. On the arrival of the transports, the Americans gave

up their brief siege of Fort Lafayette, and retreated, as did those

likewise who had retaken Stoney-point. Clinton himself had followed the

transports in full force, hoping that Washington would quit his position

to defend Stoney-point; but when he found that his hope was fallacious

he returned to New York.

BRITISH GARRISON SURPRISED AT PAULUS-HOOK.

The successful enterprise of General Wayne was followed by a similar

enterprise against a British garrison at Paulus-hook on the Jersey

coast. This was conducted by General Lee, who, on the 17th of July, fell

suddenly upon that garrison, and killed about thirty and captured one

hundred and sixty prisoners. The Americans, however, were speedily

expelled from Paulus-hook, without having destroyed either the barracks

or artillery. Their retreat was as disgraceful as their attack had been

spirited and well conducted.

AMERICAN DISASTER AT PENOBSCOT.

During the month of June, General Francis Maclean, who commanded the

British troops in Nova Scotia, proceeded with a detachment of six

hundred and fifty men in transports, conveyed by three sloops of war, to

the Bay of Penobscot, in order to form a settlement, and to establish a

post which might serve the double purpose of checking the incursions

of the people of Massachusets Bay into Nova Scotia; and to obtain

ship-timber for the use of the king’s yards at Halifax and other ports

in America, He had already commenced the construction of a fort on the

Penobscot River, when a hostile armament, consisting of 3000 troops,

which had been fitted out by the executive government of Massachusets,

appeared in the bay to thwart his designs. Being prevented from entering

the harbour by the presence of the three English sloops of war, which

were anchored right across the mouth; on the night of the 28th of June,

the American troops climbed up some steep precipices on the opposite

side of that tongue of land; dragged up some artillery, and erected a

battery within a few hundred yards of the unfinished fort. But Maclean

was prepared for this manouvre. He had filled up his bastions with logs

of timber; had carried a sort of _chevaux-de-frise_ round the fort;

and had constructed platoons and mounted his artillery. He, therefore,

returned fire for fire, and the American troops being chiefly militia,

or undisciplined recruits, soon grew weary of the business, and longed

to return. They were commanded by General Lovel, who perceiving that he

could not effect his object with such lovers of home, applied to General

Gates for a reinforcement of regular troops. A regiment was sent by

Gates; but before this force arrived Sir George Collier came to the

assistance of Maclean with a squadron and some land-troops; and the

Americans, leaving their works, ran to their ships, embarked, and

endeavoured to make for Boston harbour. But this was now impracticable.

Two of the largest vessels, in endeavouring to gain the open sea, were

intercepted, and one was captured; while the other ran on shore and was

blown up by her own crew. The other American ships entered the mouth of

the Penobscot River, where they were abandoned by the Americans, both

soldiers and sailors, who landed and fled for their lives. Nearly all

the ships were captured or destroyed by the British sailors, who were

close in their wake; while the fugitives who had landed in a wild

country, had to traverse a pathless desert for upwards of a hundred

miles, before they could reach any human habitation. On their route a

quarrel took place between the seamen and landsmen, and a battle was

fought in which fifty or sixty lives were lost, and a great many more

perished from fatigue and famine. This exploit terminated Sir George

Collier’s career. When he returned to New York he found himself

superseded by Admiral Arbuthnot, and he returned to England. The season

for action was not yet over, but a rumour that d’Estaing intended to

attack New York, compelled Sir Henry Clinton to forego all thoughts of

further operations, and he even withdrew the garrison from Rhode Island,

for the purpose of concentrating his force.

AMERICAN RETALIATION ON THE INDIANS, ETC.

During this year the Americans took a terrible revenge on their old

enemies, the Indians. At the head of 5000 men General Sullivan undertook

an expedition against the Indian tribes beyond the Mohawk River and

upon the upper course of the Susquehanna. In the month of August he

encountered a body of eight hundred savages and two hundred whites,

under Brandt, Butler, and others acquainted with the art of war; whom,

after a bloody conflict, he defeated. Sullivan then penetrated into

the very heart of their country, where his followers destroyed houses,

corn-fields, gardens, fruit-trees, and everything that would afford

sustenance to man or beast. Such were the positive orders of congress,

and Sullivan proved himself to be their willing agent in the evil work.

Congress passed a vote approving his conduct, but Washington, whose

exertions were crippled by the expedition, in consequence of the great

force employed in it, inveighed bitterly against it, and in the end

Sullivan retired from public service in disgust. While this terrible

chastisement was inflicted on the tribes northward of Pennsylvania and

New York, similar expeditions were Kent out from the southern provinces

for the same purpose. On the other hand, whilst the Americans were

spreading devastation and laying waste the towns of their savage

enemies, the Indians, whose appetite for revenge was whetted by their

disasters, made incursions into the provincial settlements, and made

severe retaliation.

SPANISH INCURSIONS.

As Spain had concealed her hostile intentions towards England until

preparations for war were completed, it was not a matter of surprise to

see her commencing hostilities on the other side of the Atlantic, with

all the advantages of early information and previous design. No sooner

was war announced than Don Bernardo Galvez, Governor of Louisiana, made

an incursion into West Florida, and invested and captured a British fort

garrisoned with five hundred men, at the mouth of the Ibbeville. The

fate of almost the whole of the Mississippi was involved in the fall of

this fort, for the Spaniards overran a district of 1200 miles in extent;

and only left the eastern part of the province, with the strong fort of

Mobile untouched. With equal alacrity the Spanish Governor of Honduras

commenced hostilities against the British cutters of logwood in the Bay

of Honduras, and plundered the principal establishment at St. George’s

Key. The logwood-cutters, who were chiefly sailors and men of a

daring spirit, retreated before the Spaniards, and kept together in an

inaccessible place, until the Governor of Jamaica dispatched Captain

Dalrymple, with a small body of Irish volunteers, to convey to them

a supply of arms. Sir Peter Parker dispatched a sloop of war to

co-operate, and this sloop, having taken Dalrymple and his party on

board, quickly drove the Spaniards from St. George’s Key and all

that part of the coast. The sloop was shortly after joined by a small

squadron under Captain Luttrell, who had been cruizing to intercept two

Spanish register-ships, which had taken refuge under the strong fortress

of St. Fernando de Omoa. Dalrymple, Luttrell, and the chiefs of the

British bay-men resolved to attack this fort, which was the key of the

whole settlement of Honduras; and a motley force of log-wood-cutters,

sailors, soldiers, and volunteers proceeded against it. They had no

artillery available for the purpose, and therefore they resolved to

take the fort by surprise and assault. As they approached they were

discovered by the garrison, but the works were nevertheless carried by

escalade; and the garrison were so panic-stricken at the bold movement,

that the Spanish governor could not keep them to their guns. One

hundred escaped by flight, and the rest, amounting to five hundred men,

surrendered as prisoners of war. The assailants now made for the harbour

in search of the register-ships; and although the greater part of

the treasure had been removed to a place of safety, there was still a

galleon in the harbour, and an immense quantity of quicksilver, which,

with other objects that fell into the hands of the conquerors, were of

the estimated value of 3,000,000 dollars. The loss of the quicksilver

was severely felt by the Spaniards, and they offered to redeem it at

any price. They also made liberal offers for ransoming the fort; but the

captors, preferring the public good to private emolument, refused all

terms. At the same time they restored the plate found in the churches,

to procure the liberation of some logwood-cutters who had been taken

at George’s Key. A garrison was left to defend Fort Omoa, but the

unhealthiness of the station led to its evacuation, and it was recovered

by the Spaniards. They found the guns spiked, however, and the works for

the most part demolished.

ACTION BETWEEN PAUL JONES AND CAPTAIN PEARSON.

One of the most active partisans in the American cause was the

celebrated Paul Jones. This man was a native of Scotland, and the son of

a gardener of Galloway. He had taken to the sea at a very early age,

and had finally settled in Virginia. At the breaking out of the war he

offered his services to congress, and a commission was given him,

under which he cruised among our West India Islands, where he made

many prizes. His nautical skill and his success were so great that he

acquired the name of the best of all corsair captains. In 1777 he was

appointed to the command of a French-built ship under American colours,

and he then proceeded upon a cruise to the coast of Britain. Many were

the exploits which he transacted. He took many prizes in places where

the American flag had never before been seen; he made a descent at the

mouth of the Dee, near to Kirkcudbright, and plundered the house of the

Earl of Selkirk; and he made another descent on the Cumberland coast,

spiked the guns of the fort at Whitehaven, and burned one or two

vessels. He also cruised up and down between the Solway and the Clyde;

scaring the whole coast, after which he returned to Brest, boasting that

he had kept the north-western coast of England and the southern coast of

Scotland in a constant state or alarm. In the summer of the present year

he returned to cruise along our eastern coasts, having at this time a

squadron manned by desperadoes of various countries under his command.

Alarm spread from Flamboroughhead to the Frith of Tay, for the name of

Paul Jones had become synonymous with all that is terrible. His great

object this year was to intercept the Baltic trade, which was under the

convoy of Captain Pearson, in the ship “Serapis,” of forty guns, and

Captain Piercy, in the “Countess of Scarborough,” of twenty guns. This

fleet arrived safely off the Yorkshire coast, when Paul Jones appeared

to encounter it. Captain Pearson made a signal for his convoy to bear

down under his lee; and he himself made way to get between the enemy’s

ships and the convoy. The “Countess of Scarborough” took a similar

position, and while the enemy was advancing, the merchant-vessels made

their way in haste to the shore. At length the squadron of Paul Jones,

consisting of three large ships, a cutter, and a brig, reached the

“Serapis” and the “Countess,” and a terrible conflict took place between

the former and the “Bon Homme Richard,” a two-decker, carrying forty

guns, and which was Paul Jones’s own ship. The two ships were brought

into such a situation that the muzzles of their guns came in contact,

and in this manner the action continued with the greatest fury for two

hours, during which time Jones, who had far more men than his opponent,

vainly attempted to board, and the “Serapis” was set on fire ten or

twelve times. The fire each time was extinguished, and Captain Pearson

had the best of the battle; but, in the meantime the “Countess of

Scarborough” had been disabled by the other ships of the enemy, and then

one of the frigates came to the assistance of the “Bon Homme Richard.”

Almost every man on the quarter or main-decks of the “Serapis” was

killed or wounded by the united fire of the enemy; and the calamity was

increased by the accidental ignition of a cartridge of powder near one

of the lower deck-ports, and the flames spreading from cartridge to

cartridge all the way aft, blew up the whole of the officers and people

that were quartered abaft the mainmast. In this state Captain Pearson

was compelled to strike his colours, and Captain Piercy was under the

necessity of following his example. The “Bon Homme Richard,” however,

was in a still more pitiful condition than the “Serapis.” Her quarters

and counter on the lower deck were driven in; all her guns on the deck

were dismounted; her decks were strewed with killed and wounded; and she

was on fire in two different places, and had seven feet of water in her

hold. On the day after the battle Paul Jones was obliged to quit her,

and she sank with a great number of her wounded on board. The prizes

were carried by their captor into the Texel, and the French government

gave Paul Jones thanks, in the name of Louis XVI., and conferred upon

him the Order of Merit! Congress, also, at a later date, sent him a vote

of thanks, and promoted him to the command of a new ship, called the

“America!”

CHANGES IN THE MINISTRY.

During the recess, some partial changes occurred in the administration.

Lord Stormont was made secretary of state, in the room of Lord Suffolk,

deceased. Earl Bathurst was made lord president of the council, Earl

Gower having resigned office in disgust; the Earl of Hillsborough

succeeded the Earl of Weymouth as secretary of the southern department;

and the Earl of Carlisle was nominated first lord of trade and

plantations, which was an ancient office resuscitated. Mr. Thurlow

had received the great seal, with a peerage, last session, and he

was succeeded as attorney-general by Wedderburn, while Wallace took

Wedderburn’s place of solicitor-general.

MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

Parliament met on the 25th of November. In his speech the king called

upon the two houses to exert their efforts along with him in defence

of their country against the unprovoked attacks of their enemies;

congratulated his hearers that the designs and attempts of France and

Spain to invade this kingdom had been frustrated; exalted the exemplary

conduct of the national militia; returned his cordial thanks to all

loyal subjects who had stood forward in the present momentous trial; and

recommended the state of Ireland to consideration. Nothing was said by

his majesty concerning America or the Americans, but the commons were

told that it was with extreme concern that his majesty saw the great and

inevitable expenses which his naval and military forces would require.

His majesty concluded by saying, that, trusting in Divine Providence,

and in the justice of his cause, he was firmly resolved to prosecute the

war with vigour.

The address was opposed in the house of lords by the Marquess of

Rockingham, who moved an amendment, omitting every word which it

contained except the title, and inserting a prayer instead, beseeching

his majesty to reflect on the extent of territory, the power, the

opulence, the reputation abroad, and the concord at home which

distinguished the commencement of his reign; and now on the endangered,

impoverished, enfeebled, distracted, and even dismembered state of his

kingdom, after all the enormous grants of successive parliaments. The

amendment concluded by requesting his majesty to resort to new counsels

and new counsellors, without further loss of time, as the only remedy

for the existing evils. In his speech, the Marquess of Rockingham

censured the facility with which the two ambassadors, Lords Grantham and

Stormont, had suffered themselves to be deceived by the craft of France

and Spain; asserted that the clause in the speech which spoke of the

blessings of living under his majesty’s happy government, was insulting

to the common sense of the house, as all those blessings were turned

into curses; attacked the first lord of the admiralty on various points

connected with his administration; attributed all the discontents in

Ireland to the folly and bad faith of ministers, who had made promises

which they had not performed; and, finally, denounced the war in America

as bloody, malignant, and diabolical. In reply, Lord Stormont imputed a

great part of the misfortunes which surrounded us to the incautious

and violent language used in parliament. Lord Mansfield expressed his

conviction that nothing but a comprehensive union of all parties could

effect the salvation of the country. How far the temper of the nation

and the state of parties might admit of such a coalition he could not

decide; but the event, he said, was devoutly to be wished. The amendment

was negatived by eighty-two against forty-one.

A similar amendment to that of the Marquess of Rockingham, was moved in

the commons by Lord John Cavendish. In both houses, also, the arguments

and invectives employed were allied in character. The ministers were

accused of ruining both army and navy by their compliances with court

predilections; by their fear and jealousy of every officer of merit;

by their criminal tardiness; and by their want of a consistent plan of

military operations. Charles Fox went a step further than most of the

speakers in opposition. He declared that treachery and not ignorance

must have prevailed in the national councils, to reduce the nation to so

miserable a condition; and he warned ministers that when the nation was

reduced to such a state of wretchedness and distraction that the laws of

the land could afford no relief, the law of nature would put arms into

the hands of the people, and then they, who had caused the evil, would

suffer for their mal-administration. In reply, Lord North indignantly

denied that any treachery was resorted to by ministers, and called

upon the opposition to stand forth like men, and make good such vague

accusations. Laws, he said, existed for the protection of the innocent;

and if his accusers adhered to the laws, he had nothing to fear. Lord

North, also, defended with considerable ingenuity the management of the

war; asserting that, from its extensive nature, it was impossible to

keep a force superior to the enemy at every point; and affirming that

the fleets of France and Spain, which had been raised to the ruin

of their finances, had gained neither honour nor advantage, and were

already falling into weakness and decrepitude. The amendment was

negatived by two hundred and thirty-three against one hundred and

thirty-four.

LORD SHELBURNE ATTACKS MINISTERS IN THE CASE OF IRELAND.

Although Ireland had been misgoverned for centuries, yet opposition, in

the course of these debates attributed every mischief in that country

to the present ministers. In both houses assurances were given that

satisfactory plans of relief were in contemplation, but even then

opposition were not disarmed. Having procured a summons of the house, on

the 1st of December the Earl of Shelburne moved a resolution, declaring

ministers highly censurable for having neglected to take measures for

the relief of Ireland, in conformity with the address of the lords to

his majesty during the last session. In introducing this motion, the

Earl of Shelburne declared that the government of Ireland had been

abdicated, and that the people would be justified, by the principles of

the constitution and the laws of self-preservation, in taking back its

power into their own hands. In the course of his speech he read the

address of both houses of the Irish parliament, which declared that

nothing less than free trade would rescue that country from ruin; and

he asserted that all classes of society concurred in this opinion.

Ministers were defended by Lord Hillsborough, who maintained that no

delay could be fairly imputed to them; that measures for the relief of

Ireland must emanate from parliament, and were not to be entered upon

without due information and consideration; and that ministers had been

active in collecting such information and making arrangements, the

result of which would shortly be laid before the house. The debate was

chiefly rendered remarkable by some words uttered by Earl Gower, who had

lately retired from the administration. After stating that he must, in

fairness, oppose the motion, as ministers required a few days for

their exculpation, he remarked:—“I have presided for some years at the

council-table, but have seen such things pass of late that no man

of honour or conscience could any longer sit there.” The motion was

rejected by eighty-two against thirty-seven.

LORD OSSORY’S ATTACK ON MINISTERS RESPECTING IRELAND.

On the same day that Shelburne made his motion, Lord North communicated

some additional papers respecting Ireland, and gave notice, that he

would, in about a week, move for a committee of the whole house to enter

upon this subject. Opposition, however, seem to have considered Ireland

a vulnerable point in the phalanx of the ministry; and before the time

intimated by Lord North had expired, the Earl of Upper Ossory moved a

vote of censure in the commons upon ministers for their neglect of the

affairs of that country. This motion was seconded by Lord Middleton, and

supported by Dunning, Burke, and Charles Fox, who, in general pursued

the dangerous course of drawing parallels between the situation of

Ireland and that of America. It was asserted, for instance, that

ministers having failed in reducing the colonies by force, were ready

to make large concessions to Ireland; but that the Irish people had

suffered more from the loss of her share in the trade of America than

from any other cause. It was also said, that if the thunders of the

cabinet had not been hurled against Ireland; if Dublin had not been

treated like Boston, and if Cork and Waterford had not been reduced

to ashes like the towns of America, it was not through the enlightened

policy of ministers, but from fear of the consequences of adopting

stringent measures toward those refractory cities. These sentiments were

exceedingly unwise, for at this very time armed associations and

the non-importation agreements were in full force in Ireland, and a

rebellious spirit displayed itself in the Irish parliament-house and

throughout the whole length and breadth of the kingdom. In order

to compel the British government to concede a free trade the Irish

parliament had, indeed, according to the instructions received from

their constituents, voted a money-bill for six months only, instead of

two years, as usual; and the charges which opposition brought against

ministers were as fallacious as they were unwise and unjust. This was

fully proved by Lord North in his reply, who showed that the grievances

complained of originated ages anterior to the existence of his ministry,

and that the restrictions upon the trade and industry of the Irish

people arose from our general system of trade; which, though conceived

in ignorance and founded on prejudice, was so confirmed by habit that

it seemed to become part and parcel of our very constitution. Lord North

referred to the hostility which had been shown towards the attempts

which had been made in the two preceding sessions to obtain a moderate

relaxation of these restrictions, in proof of the truth of his

assertions. Those who had undertaken the task, he observed, had been

thwarted by their constituents, and by the people of England generally,

as well as by the majority of the house. Something had been done, but

more would have been done had it not been for the temper, prejudices,

and habits of the people and the parliament. In conclusion, he contended

that ministers had done more for Ireland than any other cabinet for the

last century. They had enlarged the trade of that country; had given

bounties to encourage the Irish Newfoundland fishery, and the growth of

hemp and tobacco; had permitted the exportation of woollen cloth, &c.;

and had conferred many other benefits on the people. The motion was

negatived by one hundred and seventy-three against one hundred.

LORD NORTH’S PROPOSITION FOR THE RELIEF OF IRELAND.

Lord North brought forward his promised scheme of relief for Ireland on

the 13th of December. This scheme consisted of three propositions: to

allow a free export of wool, woollens, and wool-flocks; to allow a free

export of glass and all kinds of manufactured glass; and to allow a free

trade with all the British plantations on certain conditions; the basis

of which was an equality of taxes and customs. In supporting these

propositions Lord North entered minutely into the natural and inherent

rights of Ireland; combated many inveterate prejudices; declared that

the benefits of the two countries must be reciprocal and their interests

mutual; and in short collected into one point of view all the liberal

notions of commerce and policy which Burke and others of his party had

long laboured to impress upon parliament. If Lord North was actuated by

fear in making these large concessions, so also were the majority of

the members in the house, for the very men who had clamoured against

commercial concessions to Ireland, and had frustrated all measures in

favour of this line of policy by their votes, now consented to the three

resolutions, without the least opposition. Bills founded on the two

first propositions were brought in, and passed both houses, and received

the royal assent before the Christmas recess. The third proposition

was delayed till the sentiments of the Irish concerning it could be

ascertained. These sentiments were found to be favourable, and it was

therefore soon carried. A few other benefits were also conferred on the

Irish; suck as enabling them to become members of the Turkey Company,

and to engage in the Levant trade. The whole appeared to give great

satisfaction to the Irish nation. The acts were received as a boon,

and great loyalty and affection were expressed. Unfortunately, however,

ministers cut short their popularity by altering some bills, which

gave great umbrage to the Irish people, and taught them even to desire

independence. On this subject Dr. Miller writes:—“The bills altered on

this occasion were not, as in the former case, money-bills: that folly

the ministers did not venture to repeat: but one of them was a bill

involving the dearest interests of the people; and the alteration was

such as gave to the public mind the only impulse which it then required

for aspiring to constitutional independence. The Irish parliament, not

choosing that its military establishment should be longer regulated by a

British mutiny-law, transmitted a bill of similar import. The

minister, as if eager to indemnify himself for commercial concession by

constitutional spoliation, introduced an alteration by which the law

was to be rendered perpetual; and the Irish parliament, though it passed

the bill thus altered, was taught to look to freedom of constitution

as the necessary safeguard to freedom of trade; to assert its own

independence, while it unfettered the commerce of the country. When

the minister had first, by the altered money-bills, alarmed the

constitutional jealousy of the guardians of the public purse, he then,

by another alteration, rendering the mutiny-law perpetual, manifested

a desire of securing to government the uncontrolled direction of the

military power. Language could not more forcibly exhort the people to

be satisfied with no concessions merely commercial; but to insist that

their country should be acknowledged as an independent, though not a

separate state.”

{GEORGE III. 1779–1780}

DEBATES ON ECONOMICAL REFORM.

While Lord North was endeavouring to allay the bad passions of the Irish

people, a spirit of disaffection arose in England. The cause of this

was the expenses of government: expenses which were for the most

part unavoidable, but which in some cases may have arisen from lavish

expenditure. But whatever was the cause, there was a long, loud, and

universal cry in the country for economical reform, and it soon became

the subject of debate in both houses of parliament. On the 7th of

December the Duke of Richmond moved in the lords for an address

to beseech his majesty to reflect on the manifold distresses and

difficulties of the country; to represent that the waste of the public

treasure required instant remedy, and that it was necessary to adopt

that economy, which, by reforming all useless expenses, creates

confidence in government, gives energy to its exertions, and provides

the means for their continuance; to submit to his majesty that a

reduction in the civil list would be an example worthy of his paternal

affection for his people and his own dignity, and calculated to diffuse

its influence through every department of the state; and to assure his

majesty that the lords would readily concur in promoting so desirable

a purpose, and that every one of its members would cheerfully submit

to such reductions of emoluments as he might think proper to make. In

support of this motion, the Duke of Richmond entered into a detailed

statement of the existing vast military establishment; showed by a

number of calculations the great increase of the national debt since the

commencement of the American war; and urged the necessity of economical

reform, suggesting that the king himself should set the example, that

all classes of society might follow it. In the course of his speech,

his grace contrasted the state of this country with the wise system of

economy adopted by France under Neckar; asserting that our formidable

neighbour was rising to wealth as fast as we were sinking in poverty.

Yet with all his zeal for reform, the Duke of Richmond advocated the

continuation of the pensions bestowed on the Pelhams, Walpoles,

and Pitts, families of his own party, as being too sacred for the

sacrilegious hand of parliament to touch. In reply, the lords in

administration confessed that the expenditure was enormous, and that

there had even been some want of economy; but while they made this

confession, they opposed the motion, chiefly on the ground that it could

not be of any great service, or at all adequate to the object proposed.

It was insisted by them that the civil list could not bear any

diminution; that it would be degrading to parliament, after having voted

an augmentation, now to declare their inability to pay it; that the

complaint of the waste of the public money was not substantiated by any

kinds of proof; and that the nation was not so poor or reduced as the

noble duke had represented. The motion was rejected by seventy-seven

against thirty-six.

The subject of economical reform was introduced into the lower house by

Mr. Burke on the 15th of December. Burke gave notice of his intention to

propose some very important regulations after the Christmas recess,

and in doing so, he also took occasion to extol the financial system of

Neckar, to which he attributed the re-production of the French marine

out of the wrecks and fragments of the last war. He anticipated, he

said, a cool reception of the propositions he should make, since they

would have a tendency to weaken court influence. He could only, however,

make an offer, and if it was rejected the people must effect their own

salvation. All the grievances of the nation, he observed, arose from the

overgrown influence of the crown, and this influence was the creature

of the prodigality of the commons. The operation of this influence,

he said, was not confined to the superior orders of the state; it had

insinuated itself into every section of the community. Scarcely a

family in all England was so hidden or lost in the obscure recesses of

society, which did not feel that it had something’ to hope or to fear

from the favour or displeasure of the crown. Government, he argued,

should have force adequate to its functions, but no more; for if it had

enough to support itself in abusing or neglecting them, they must ever

be abused or neglected. Men would rely on power for a justification of

their want of order, vigilance, foresight, and every other virtue or

qualification of statesmen. The minister then might exist, he said, but

the government was gone. He continued:—“It is thus that you see the

same men, in the same power, sitting undisturbed before you, although

thirteen colonies are lost—thus the marine of France and Spain

has grown and prospered under their eye, and been fostered by their

neglect—thus all hope of alliance in Europe is abandoned—thus three

of our West India islands have been torn from us in one summer, while

Jamaica, the most important of all, has been neglected, and every

inquiry into that neglect stifled—thus Ireland has been brought into

a state of distraction which no one dares to discuss.” The disease of

government, Burke remarked, was a repletion; the over-feeding of the

stomach had destroyed the vigour of the limbs. He continued, that he had

long ascertained the nature of the disorder, and its proper remedy; but

as he was not naturally an economist, and was averse to experiment, he

had not made hitherto any attempt to apply that remedy. Now, however, he

was assisted by the temper of the times, and though he would not at that

time disclose all the particulars of his plan, he would, nevertheless,

state its end, objects, and limits. He proposed a regulation which would

give £200,000 per annum to the public service, and annihilate a portion

of influence equal to the places of fifty members of parliament, which

would effectually remove the sources of corruption. This was the end

and objects of his resolution. As regarded its limits, nothing, he said,

which was held by any individual under a legal tenure would be invaded.

Equity and mercy would be remembered in those cases where innocent

persons had been decoyed into particular situations through the

prodigality of parliament: the alterations would chiefly affect those

who held offices from which they might be removed by ministerial

arrangements. No employment really useful to the public would either be

abolished or abridged of its emoluments, A fund, also, fully adequate

to the reward of merit, would be left, and an ample provision would

be secured to the crown for personal satisfaction, and for as much

magnificence as was compatible with the distressed state of the nation.

These propositions, Burke added in conclusion, were made with humility

and integrity: he hoped that they would give confidence to the people,

and strength to the government; that they would render the war vigorous,

and peace refreshing. Burke’s plan received high commendation from

several members on his own side of the house, and especially by his

friend and disciple, Charles Fox; but on the ministerial side of the

house a profound and ominous silence prevailed. As Fox observed, it

was evident there was not sufficient virtue in the house, or rather

self-denial, to carry such a plan of economical reform.