{GEORGE III. 1780–1781}
Burke’s Plan of Economical Reform..... Rejection of Lord
Shelburne’s Motion for a Commission of Accounts......
Ministerial Bill for Commission of Accounts..... Bill for
excluding Contractors from Parliament rejected..... Motions
regarding Places and Pensions..... Political
Altercations..... Debates on the Increase of Crown
Influence..... Lord North’s Proposal respecting the East
India Company..... General Conway’s Plan of Reconciliation
with America..... Popular Rage against the Catholics; Riots
in London, etc...... Measures adopted by Parliament arising
out of the London Riots..... Parliament Prorogued.....
Trial of Lord George Gordon and the Rioters..... Admiral
Rodney’s success against the Spaniards..... Armed
Neutrality..... Rodney engages the French Fleet.....
Expedition against South Carolina..... Battle of Camden,
etc...... Affairs at New York..... Treason of Arnold and
Fate of Major André..... Maritime Losses sustained by the
British..... War with Holland..... General Election.....
Meeting of Parliament.
{A.D. 1780}
BURKE’S PLAN OF ECONOMICAL REFORM.
Although from the silence of ministers Burke might have presaged he fate
of his proposed plan of economical reform, yet he was greatly encouraged
to proceed in his task by the voice of the nation. During the Christmas
recess, petitions were got up in its favour in almost all the countries
and great cities of England, and associations were formed in order to
support a reform. Counter petitions were indeed framed, and in some
instances protests were signed, but still it remained evident that the
public feeling was with Burke. It was while the petitions in favour of
his plan were pouring into the house that he brought it forward. After
delivering an eloquent speech, which Gibbon says was heard with
delight by all sides of the house, and even by those whose existence
he proscribed, he detailed his scheme. This consisted of five bills,
comprising the sale of forest-lands; the abolition of the royal
jurisdictions of Wales, Cornwall, Cheshire, and Lancaster; the
abolition, also, of treasurer, comptroller, and many other officers in
the household, with the treasurer of the chamber, the wardrobe, etc.,
the boards of trade, green cloth, and works, the office of third
secretary of state, the office of keepers of the royal hounds, and
of many civil branches of the ordnance and the mint, with the patent
offices of the exchequer; the regulation of the army, navy, and pension
pay-offices, with some other departments not under due control; and
finally a better arrangement of the civil list so as to prevent for the
future any accumulation of debt, without any improper encroachment on
the royal prerogative. Lord North passed very high encomiums on the
author of this plan, and assured the house that no member was more
zealous for the establishment of a permanent system of economy than he
was; but he intimated that subjects so numerous and various required
time for reflection and as some of them affected the king’s patrimonial
income, he thought the crown should be consulted. All the bills, except
that which related to the crown-lands and to Wales, and the counties
palatine of Chester and Lancaster, were brought in, however, and the
portions of the plan submitted to deliberation occupied a considerable
part of the months of March, April, and May, and gave rise to many
animated debates, and several close divisions. But, in the end, all the
clauses were negatived, except that for abolishing the board of trade,
and the only saving to the country by this triumph of the opposition,
was about £6000 per annum!
REJECTION OF LORD SHELBURNE’S MOTION FOR A COMMISSION OF ACCOUNTS.
On the same day that Burke gave notice of his plan of economical reform,
the Earl of Shelburne gave notice that he would, after the Christmas
recess, move for a commission of accounts. In accordance with this
professed intention, on the 8th of February the noble earl, therefore,
moved for the appointment of a committee, to consist of members of both
houses, possessing neither employments nor pensions, to examine
the public expenditure and the mode of accounting for the same, and
especially to inquire into the manner of making all contracts; and at
the same time to take into consideration, what saving could be made,
consistent with public dignity, justice, and gratitude, by an abolition
of old and newly created offices, etc. In support of his motion the Earl
of Shelburne exposed the profusion pervading all branches of government,
and declared that his main object was to destroy that undue influence
which pervaded both houses of parliament. The motion was seconded by
the Earl of Coventry, who described the country as being in very
reduced circumstances: rents were fallen, he said, the value of land was
sinking, and farmers were on the high road to ruin. The Duke of Grafton
and the Marquess of Rockingham followed on the same side; the latter
declaring that a system had been established at the accession of his
present majesty, for governing the kingdom under the forms of law, but
really to the immediate influence of the crown, which was the origin of
all our national misfortunes. The motion was opposed by Lord Chancellor
Thurlow, and Lords Mansfield and Chesterfield, with other peers,
who urged that the motion was a violation of the inherent, exclusive
privilege of the other house to control the public expenditure. When
put to the vote it was lost by a majority of a hundred and one against
fifty-five.
MINISTERIAL BILL FOR COMMISSION OF ACCOUNTS.
Immediately after Burke had introduced his plan of economical reform,
Colonel Barré, after declaring that he did not consider that reform
sufficiently extensive, gave notice that he should, on some early day,
move for a committee of accounts, to consist of a few men only, who
would act with the consciousness that the eyes of the public were fixed
on them. To the surprise of all parties, Lord North applauded this
proposal, expressed his surprise that a measure of such obvious utility
had not been thought of sooner, and declared that he was anxious to
adopt any plan that appeared likely to promote economy, and reduce the
public expenses to order and limit. The opposition congratulated the
minister, and Colonel Barré said he would prepare a bill for that
purpose; but while he was preparing it, Lord North himself brought in
a bill on the 2nd of March, which proposed gentlemen who had no seat
in parliament as commissioners of accounts. Barré complained of the
underhand dealing of the minister, but said that he would concur in the
measure, though he had been thus robbed of the honour of introducing it
himself. Other members of the opposition were not so liberal. Although
they were prepared to support the proposition, if left in the hands of
the gallant colonel, they spoke against the whole measure; denounced
it as a trick to create new places and salaries, and insisted that
the commission would do no good. The bill, however, passed, and six
independent gentlemen, among whom was Sir Guy Carleton, were appointed
commissioners of accounts.
BILL FOR EXCLUDING CONTRACTORS FROM PARLIAMENT REJECTED.
Sir Philip Jennings Gierke again introduced his bill for excluding
contractors from the house of commons. This time it was carried, and
passed through all its stages with little opposition from the ministers;
but it, was rejected in the upper house, as an illiberal stigma cast
on a respectable body of men, and as a mean compliance with popular
prejudices.
MOTIONS REGARDING PLACES AND PENSIONS.
On the 15th of February, Sir George Saville moved that an account of all
places with salaries, and all pensions payable at the exchequer or out
of the privy purse, with a list of the persons holding them, should be
laid before the house. In making this motion, Sir George encountered
a most violent opposition, and the debate was broken off by a sudden
illness of the speaker. Subsequently it was revived, and Lord North then
moved an amendment, restricting the account to such pensions only as
were paid out of the exchequer, and excepting those paid out of the
privy purse. This, however, gave such manifest dissatisfaction that
the minister was obliged to qualify it by moving in addition, that
the general amount of all pensions should be given, but without any
specification of names, and without stating the sums paid, except in
the case of those who were paid from the exchequer. But even with this
qualification, though ably supported by the minister himself in a long
and argumentative speech, and by Wedderburn, the attorney-general, and
Mr. Dundas, lord-advocate for Scotland, the amendment was only carried
by a majority of _two_, the numbers being one hundred and eighty-eight
against one hundred and eighty-six. A similar motion was made in the
upper house by Lord Howard of Effingham, but it was there negatived by
fifty-one against twenty-four.
POLITICAL ALTERCATIONS.
In the early part of this session Mr. Adam left the ranks of opposition,
and took his place under the ministerial standard. In doing so, he
declared that he could not concur in the pretended necessity of new
counsels, or new counsellors, since among those who stood candidates for
office he was unable to single out one by whom the state was likely to
be better served than by the present ministers. Charles Fox replied to
Mr. Adam, and his reply, as reported in the newspapers, being thought to
convey a personal reflection on Mr. Adam, a duel was the consequence,
in which Fox was slightly wounded. Duels appeared likely to become the
order of the day among members of parliament. In consequence of the
sudden removal of two lord-lieutenants, apparently on account of their
conduct in regard to county petitions, associations, and votes given
in parliament, Lord Shelburne moved for an address, to desire that his
majesty would be graciously pleased to acquaint the house whether he had
been advised, and by whom, to dismiss the said two noble lords for their
conduct in parliament. In the course of the debates on this motion,
which was negatived, Shelburne indulged in some personalities at the
expense of Mr. Fullarton, member for Plympton, and late secretary to
Lord Stormont in his embassy to the French court. Fullarton complained
to the house of commons of the behaviour of the Earl of Shelburne, and
shortly after a duel was fought between them in Hyde Park, in which the
noble lord was wounded. These transactions induced Sir James Lowther
to observe, in the house of commons, that this method of fighting, in
consequence of parliamentary debate and hasty words, seemed growing into
such a custom, that it behoved the house to interpose its authority,
as otherwise all freedom of debate would be at an end, and the British
parliament would be reduced to the condition of a Polish diet. The
friends of Mr. Fullarton said, it would be indelicate to enter into
a discussion on the subject in his absence; and the friends of Lord
Shelburne contended, that the words spoken by him were strictly
parliamentary, and contained nothing which could be interpreted in a
private or personal manner. But the house was not disposed to put its
ban on this false code of honour. The conversation ended in nothing,
except the hope that duels and wounds would make honourable members
speak with better manners. This hope, however, proved to be fallacious.
An altercation occurred on the 13th of March, between the speaker and
Lord North himself, in which much bitter language was used. Négociations
were in progress for the promotion of the attorney-general to the office
of chief-justice in the Court of Common Pleas, which office had been
promised to the speaker by the Duke of Grafton. Sir Fletcher Norton
expressed much dissatisfaction at his being set aside for another,
and Lord North denied that he was responsible for the promise of his
predecessors. The consequence was that the speaker, from this time,
joined the ranks of opposition, and loudly repeated their cries of
crown influence, abuse of prerogative, and rights of the people.
Being dissatisfied at not having his unjustifiable demands allowed,
he suddenly turned patriot, so that if he lost, the people might
congratulate themselves at having an advocate for once sitting in the
speaker’s chair of the house of commons.
DEBATES ON THE INCREASE OF CROWN INFLUENCE.
During the above debates county petitions were daily laid before the
house, and by the month of April the speaker’s table was almost buried
beneath them. They were ordered to be taken into consideration by a
committee of the whole house, and on the 6th of April a great public
meeting was held at Westminster, with the advice and concurrence of the
corresponding committee in the other parts of the kingdom, and with
the avowed intention of giving weight to these petitions. On the same
evening the house resolved itself into a committee, and Mr. Dunning
moved his celebrated resolution, “That the influence of the crown
had increased, was increasing, and ought to be diminished.” Dunning
remarked, that all the petitions agreed in one great fundamental point;
namely, that limits ought to be set to the alarming influence of the
crown, and to the expenditure of the public money by means of which that
influence had been obtained. He then exhibited, in a continued series,
the history and philosophy of constitutional law, and animadverted on
measures which endangered British rights and liberties in former years.
Afterwards he drew a highly-coloured and exaggerated picture of the
conduct of present ministers, and endeavoured to show that it tended
to produce similar mischiefs to those which had been produced by the
counsels of the House of Stuart. In particular, he criticised the
conduct of ministers with regard to Burke’s economical plan of reform,
which, he said, they were reducing to a nullity—to a thing naked and
shorn, and useless to the country; and he expressed a hope that the
people of England would resent the insults they had received from men
who added mockery and contempt to oppression and neglect. Those who
supported Dunning maintained that it was solely through the corrupt
influence of the crown that Lord North had retained his office so long;
that his sole occupation for years past had been to frame excuses and
expedients, in order to procure supplies from year to year; and that he
had neither method in his financial department, nor any comprehensive
scheme of any kind. The speaker, less convinced by the eloquent
pleadings of the petitions before him, than by his recent
disappointment, took part with the opposition. He insisted strongly
on the exorbitant power of the crown, and the increase of corrupt
influence; and contended, that it was the duty of the house to attend
to the demands of the petitioners. The effect which the arguments of the
opposition had upon the country gentlemen was so great that ministers
became alarmed. The lord-advocate of Scotland, Mr. Dundas, attempted
therefore to stifle inquiry, by moving, that the speaker do leave the
chair; and this failing, Lord North rose to defend his own conduct. He
spoke at considerable length, and in the course of his speech declared
that he was ready to retire from office whenever his sovereign and the
people desired it; adding, that if he had continued so long in office,
it was because the country had no faith in the wisdom and patriotism of
his opponents. His speech seemed to be lost to the members of the house,
and Mr. Dundas rose again to his rescue, proposing this time, as an
amendment to the original proposition, the prefix of the words, “That
it is now necessary to declare.” This was carried by a majority of
eighteen; and Mr. Dunning, pursuing his success, proposed and carried
a second proposition—namely, “That it was competent to the house to
examine into and to correct abuses in the expenditure of the civil list
revenues, as well as every other branch of the public revenue, whenever
it should seem expedient to that house.” A third motion, strongly
opposed to ministers, was also carried by Mr. Thomas Pitt, which set
forth “that it was the duty of the house to provide immediate and
effectual redress of the abuses complained of in the petitions.” Nor was
the minister permitted yet to retire to his peaceful slumber. Fox moved,
that the three resolutions should be immediately reported; and though
Lord North contended that this was unusual, violent, and arbitrary, the
resolutions and reports were severally reported and received, and were
agreed to and passed by the house without a division.
Elated by success, on the 10th of April, the committee being
reassembled, Mr. Dunning continued his attack. He moved, “That in order
to secure the independence of parliament and obviate all suspicion of
its purity, the proper officer should lay before the house, within seven
days after the meeting of parliament, every session, an account of all
monies paid out of the civil list, or any part of the public revenue,
to, or for the use of, or in trust for any member of parliament.” This,
though opposed by ministers, was carried; and Dunning then moved, “that
the persons holding the offices of treasurer of the chamber, treasurer
of the household, cofferer of the household, comptroller of the
household, master of the household, clerks of the green cloth and
their deputies, should be rendered incapable of sitting in the house
of commons.” This motion produced a long and earnest debate, but it was
carried by a majority of two, the numbers being two hundred and fifteen
against two hundred and thirteen. Thus far the opposition had been
triumphant: three days after, however, they were doomed to receive
a check. A bill, brought in by Mr. Crewe, for excluding all
revenue-officers from voting at elections of members of parliament, was
rejected by a considerable majority. Business was now interrupted for
ten days, by the sudden illness of the speaker; and when the house
reassembled the sentiments of members were found to have undergone a
change. On the 24th of April, Dunning moved for an address to the king,
deprecating “the dissolution or prorogation of parliament before proper
measures were adopted to fulfil the objects of the petitions.” This
motion, which was warmly and eloquently supported by the mover, and
Burke, and Fox, was rejected by a majority of fifty-one; the numbers
being two hundred and fifty-four against two hundred and three. Enraged
at this sudden and unexpected check, Mr. Fox rose to reprobate the
conduct of those members who had receded from the solemn engagements
into which they had so recently entered. A rude roar of voices was
raised to put him down, but Fox would not be silenced; and his friends
appealed to the chair to stop by its authority the disgraceful disorder.
Silence being imposed on every tongue in the house by the speaker, Fox
then delivered one of the severest philippics that was ever delivered
within the walls of the house of commons. The vote of that night, said
the impassioned orator, was scandalous, disgraceful, and treacherous:
it was impossible to contemplate without surprise and indignation, the
conduct of men, who, after resolving that the influence of the crown
was increased, and ought to be diminished—that the grievances of the
people ought to be redressed—and who had pledged themselves to that
house, the nation, and their constituents, to redress the grievances
complained of, now shamefully fled from their solemn engagement. It was
not against ministers and their friends that he lodged this complaint,
he remarked: it was against the men who sat on his side of the house,
and who had voted with him on the 6th of April. As for the ministerial
phalanx, he observed, he held them in the greatest contempt. They were
slaves of the worst kind, because they had sold themselves to work
mischief. Yet, base as they were, they had some virtues to pride
themselves on. They were faithful to their leader, consistent in their
conduct, and had not added to their other demerits the absurdity and
treachery of one day resolving an opinion to be true, and the next day
declaring it to be a falsehood. They had neither deceived their patrons,
their friends, nor their country with false hopes and delusive promises.
Dunning spoke after Fox, and declared that the division of that night
was decisive as to the petitions of the people: it amounted to a total
rejection of their general and ardent prayer, and that all hope of
obtaining redress for the people from that house was at an end. Lord
North replied in a long speech, in which he endeavoured to throw a
protecting shield over those who had subjected themselves to Fox’s
reproaches, and to show that Dunning’s fears were unfounded. The
resolutions of the 6th of April, he said, were still in existence, and
that other measures might be proposed on them in which those who did not
approve of the means of redress proposed this day might readily concur.
Opposition, however, were evidently of opinion that their cause was
lost. Yet, on the 19th of May, Sergeant Adair moved the withholding the
grant of any further supplies till the grievances of the people were
redressed; and this motion being negatived, a week later Dunning moved,
“that the two resolutions passed on the 10th of April, be reported.” A
motion, however, from the opposite side of the house, “that the chairman
leave the chair,” which amounted to a dissolution of the committee, was
carried by one hundred and seventy-seven to one hundred and thirty-four.
Such was the termination of one of the most critical struggles which had
occurred in the house of commons during the reign of George III. Out of
doors astonishment was expressed on the one hand at the encouragement
which Mr. Dunning’s motion received from a large party who had so warmly
taken up the American war; and on the other, at the sudden change
of sentiment which had taken place among many who had supported that
motion. By some historians this change is attributed to influence,
corruption, and treachery. The charge, however, is not well founded, for
none of these causes could have been at work when they quitted the ranks
of ministers to vote with opposition. It seems, therefore, rather to
have arisen from the peculiar temper of the times, and to the condition
in which the nation was placed at this period. The violence of
opposition, also, and their exultation on their triumphs may have had
their effects on the minds of the more sober-thinking members of the
house: they may have become convinced that the movements of the leaders
of opposition, so far from being adopted from a love of their country,
had their origin in that bad feeling of human nature—self-interest.
LORD NORTH’S PROPOSAL RESPECTING THE EAST INDIA COMPANY.
On the 23rd of March, Lord North informed the house that the East India
Company had made no satisfactory proposals for the renewal of their
charter, and he moved that the speaker should give them three years’
notice, as ordered by act of parliament, previous to the dissolution of
their monopoly; and that the sum of £4,200,000 due from the public to
the company should be paid on the 25th of April, 1783, agreeably to the
tenor of the said act. Fox inveighed against this measure, as tending to
deprive us of our East Indian as well as our American possessions; but
Lord North having represented that a new corporation might be formed, if
the company did not offer a fair bargain to the public, his motion was
carried without a division.
GENERAL CONWAY’S PLAN OF RECONCILIATION WITH AMERICA.
On the 5th of May, General Conway offered a plan of reconciliation with
the American provinces, by removing all just cause of complaint, without
acknowledging their independence. This plan, however, neither pleased
ministers nor the opposition, and it was rejected by passing to the
order of the day.
{GEORGE III. 1780–1781}
POPULAR RAGE AGAINST THE CATHOLICS; RIOTS IN LONDON, ETC.
It has been seen that during the session of the year 1778, that an act
was passed for relieving the Roman Catholics from some of the heavier
penalties inflicted upon them in the preceding century. This measure
did not extend to Scotland, but as the Papists in that country were more
oppressed than those in England, and as they had claims upon government
and the legislature of the United Kingdom, by their loyalty, &c., it was
contemplated by ministers that they should be admitted into the benefits
of the Repealing Act. The people of Scotland, however, were not so
liberal in sentiment on this subject as the people of England. A cry
that Popery was about to be re-established was heard throughout the
country; and the Presbyterian preachers made their pulpits ring with
warnings and comminations. Associations were formed in various parts of
the kingdom to oppose the contemplated concessions, and the votes and
resolutions of these associations being published in the newspapers,
they gave rise to the spirit of persecution. In the month of January,
1779, copies of the following letter were dropped in every part of the
city of Edinburgh:—“Men and brethren, whoever shall find this letter
will take it as a warning to meet at Leith Wynd, on Wednesday next, in
the evening, to pull down that pillar of Popery lately erected there.
Signed, A Protestant. P. S. Please to read this carefully, keep it clean
and drop it somewhere else. For king and country. Unity.” In a great
city, whatever mischief may be set on foot, there will always be found
too many volunteers to put it into effect. Thus it was at Edinburgh.
This summons was obeyed, and the pillar of Popery, which was the
habitation of a Catholic priest with a chapel attached to it, was
demolished. Similar scenes occurred in Blackfriars Wynd in Edinburgh,
and even the magistrates of that city partook in a great measure of the
mob-feeling. They failed to throw the shield of protection around those
who were persecuted; and although they finally allayed the popular
commotion, by telling the people that the bill for repealing the penal
statutes against Papists in Scotland was thrown aside, yet the spirit of
persecution was so rampant among them, that the objects of their hatred
were obliged to conceal themselves from their view. A similar spirit
was displayed at Glasgow, where the mob destroyed the property of a Mr.
Bagnal, who was suspected of Popery, and drove him and his family from
their houses. The popular violence in all parts of Scotland, indeed,
was of such a nature as to compel ministers to forego their intention
of bringing forth a bill for the relief of the Roman Catholics of that
country, until at least it should have somewhat subsided. But this
success of the Scotch associations and mobs, unfortunately led to a
similar display of the spirit of persecution in England.
It was thought by some who were adverse to the measure passed in 1778,
that by efforts equally vigorous on this side of the Tweed as on the
other, its total repeal might be procured. Accordingly, a Protestant
Association was formed, which, like the associations for economical
reforms, had its ramifications, its committees, and its correspondents
in all parts of England. The president of this association was Lord
George Gordon, brother of the Duke of Gordon, who had effectually aided
and abetted the riots in Scotland. Of all men in the world Lord George
Gordon was the most unfit to preside over a Protestant Association. He
was a member of parliament it is true, but he was chiefly remarkable
there for his eccentric habits, slovenly dress, and by a progressive
insanity, which on some occasions partook of the nature of oratorical
inspiration. He was, however, known to be firm in his hatred towards the
Papists, and adverse to any relief being afforded to them. Thus, in
May, 1779, when Burke presented his petition in favour of toleration,
he moved that it should be thrown over the table! At the same time, he
declared, that every man in Scotland, except a few Papists, was ripe for
insurrection, and would die rather than submit. After he was made head
of the Protestant Association his violence seems to have increased.
Thus, in the beginning of the present session, he declared that the
king was a Papist; and on one occasion he said that he would present
a petition long enough to reach from the speaker’s chair to the
centre window at Whitehall, out of which Charles I. had walked to his
execution! The grand aim of the Protestant Association was, indeed, to
get up a monster petition, in order to procure the repeal of the late
concessions to the Roman Catholics, This was the creature of Lord George
Gordon’s own brain. Having presented several anti-Catholic petitions
from the county of Kent, he made it his business to get up a similar
petition from the good citizens of London, which he considered might
have the effect of overawing ministers; and procuring the repeal of
the obnoxious act. Aided by the heads of the Protestant Association,
he canvassed the capital and the neighbourhood; and by his exertions he
quickly obtained 120,000 signatures to his petition. These signatures
were chiefly the handwriting or _marks_ of men of the lower orders of
society, and who were as far from being Protestants as they were from
being Papists. And this may also be asserted of many members of the
Protestant Association. Some well-meaning people may have enrolled their
names as members, but it is certain that for the most part they were men
regardless of the profession of religion. Moreover, it is clear that the
principles of the Protestant Association were rather of a political than
of a religious nature; or, at all events, it is certain that politics
mingled themselves in the question. There is no doubt, however, that
Lord George Gordon himself was a dangerous fanatic; the more so, because
his station in life gave him influence among the rude and ignorant
multitude. This was his character before he became president of
the Protestant Association, and it became still more evident as
his popularity increased. His inflammatory harangues were printed,
published, and scattered far and wide; and the people were told by him,
that if they were not content to run all hazards with him, they must
look out for another leader. After he had succeeded in getting up his
monster-petition he put them, indeed, to the test. In presenting it to
the house of commons, he said he expected to be backed by a host of
good Christians; and that he would not present it at all unless he was
attended by at least 20,000 men. Having made this declaration, Lord
George appointed St. George’s Fields as the place of meeting, and
pointed out the lines of march they were to pursue, in order to
concentrate in front of the houses of parliament. Their distinctive
badge was to be a blue cockade, and their cry, “No Popery!” The day
appointed for them to meet was on the 2nd of June, on which day Lord
George had previously informed the house that he meant to present a
petition, and to come down to the house with all those who had signed
it. Such a stouthearted champion could not be left in the field
alone; so accordingly on the day appointed some 60,000 petitioners and
associaters met according to his directions. They were divided into four
companies, one of them being entirely composed of Scotchmen; and after
a stirring harangue from Lord George, the several columns struck off
by different roads for Westminster. As they proceeded along they
were joined by all the knaves and cut-purses of London; and when they
assembled before the houses of parliament, and raised the long and loud
cry of “No Popery!” the members of the fraternity of thieves picked
every pocket into which they could insinuate their hands, and did all
they could to create a riot, which would turn to their own advantage.
Every avenue to the houses of parliament was blocked up, and as the
peers and members of the house of commons arrived, they were compelled
to join the cry of “No Popery!” or to submit to insult and ill
treatment. Some of the bishops had their gowns torn off their backs, or
were otherwise ill-treated; various temporal peers were treated with the
greatest indignity; while those members of the commons who were known to
have voted for the relief of the Papists, had to take their seats this
day minus their outer garments. All this time there was a deafening and
incessant roar of “Repeal the Bill!” “No Popery!” “Lord George Gordon!”
When Lord George had been in the house some time the mob became more
bold. On a sudden they began to thunder at the doors to break them open.
Some members threatened Lord George with instant death if the sanctity
of the house should be violated by the mob he had collected; and it
is said that Mr. Henry Herbert followed him closely with that
determination, and that General Murray, a relation to the mad lord, held
his sword ready to pass it through him on the first irruption of the
mob. None, however, made their appearance; and when something like
order was restored, Lord George moved for bringing up and immediately
considering the petition. This was seconded by Alderman Bull, and the
first proposition was granted as a matter of course, but the second was
met by an amendment to put off the consideration for four days. This
gave rise to a discussion, during which Lord George went out several
times into the lobby and harangued the multitude, encouraging them to
persevere, inasmuch as terror would be sure to induce the king and his
ministers to grant the prayer of their petition. On his return into the
house, after one of these harangues, Colonel Holroyd took hold of his
lordship, saying, that hitherto he had imputed his conduct to madness,
but that he found there was more malice than madness in it; and that
if he proceeded to the lobby again, he would immediately move for his
commitment to Newgate. At the same time Holroyd called upon him to
remove the blue cockade from his hat. Lord George timidly obeyed the
order, and did not venture to go down into the lobby again; contenting
himself with addressing the mob from the gallery stairs; denouncing in
his harangues from thence the more Popishly inclined members of the
house. Their yells and menaces continued, but undeterred by them the
house adopted the amendment, six members only voting with Lord George.
By this time Mr. Addington, an active Middlesex magistrate, arrived
in Palace-yard, with a party of horse and foot guards, and induced the
multitude to disperse. But mischief was afloat. In the course of his
harangues in the lobby, Lord George had suggested that there was no
remedy for them till they had pulled down all the Popish chapels. This
was remembered; and as the multitude returned to their homes, the chapel
of the Bavarian minister, in Warwick-street, Golden-square; and
the chapel of the Sardinian ambassador, in Duke-street,
Lincoln’s-inn-fields, were burnt to the ground. The military were
ordered out and some rioters were apprehended, while the rest went home
to rest. The next day, Saturday, passed off quietly; but a discussion.
took place in the lords, in which some sentiments were uttered by
the Duke of Richmond and the Earl of Shelburne, on the subject of the
concessions made to the Roman Catholics by a Protestant government,
which were well calculated to rekindle the fanatic fire out of doors.
These observations arose out of a motion made by Lord Bathurst, who had
been roughly handled by the mob on Friday, for an address praying that
his majesty would give immediate orders for prosecuting, in the most
effectual manner, the authors, abettors, and instruments of the outrages
committed both in the vicinity of the houses of parliament and upon the
houses and chapels of the foreign ministers. This motion was agreed
to, and the peers returned home in safety to their mansions. Late
that night, however, or early on Sunday morning, a mob assembled in
Moorfields, where they did much mischief to the Catholics living in
that neighbourhood: a Popish chapel and several houses were pulled down.
The military were called out, but as the mob knew that they did not
dare fire without the command of the civil power, they were by no
means disturbed by their presence. They still continued their work of
destruction, while thieves and pick-pockets looked about for plunder.
Nothing was done on the Monday for preventing mischief, except the
issuing of a proclamation by a privy-council, offering a reward of £500
for those persons who had been concerned in destroying the Sardinian and
Bavarian chapels; and the mob, grown bold by impunity, continued their
devastations. One party stripped the house of Sir George Saville, in
Leicester-fields, of its furniture, and made a bonfire of it before the
door; another party regaled Lord George Gordon with a bonfire made of
materials brought from Catholic chapels and houses in Moorfields, which
they burnt before his house in Welbec-street; a third party went
to Virginia-lane, Wapping; and a fourth to Nightingale-lane, East
Smithfield, where they severally destroyed the Catholic chapels, and
committed other outrages. That night London was in the hands of the
mob, and fires were seen on every hand; while property to a large
amount changed owners. On Tuesday, which was the day appointed for the
consideration of the petition, the mob again concentrated before the
houses of parliament. Westminster-hall and the avenues to the house
were lined with military, horse and foot; but even this precaution was
insufficient to protect the members who were bold enough to attend to
their parliamentary duty from insult and outrage. Lord Sandwich was
dragged from his carriage, which was broken to pieces, and would have
been killed if he had not been rescued by a magistrate, at the head of
a small party of light-horse. At this time most of the rabble had oaken
sticks in their hands, as well as blue cockades in their hats; and some
had even banners, on which were inscribed their watchword, “No Popery!”
This was also chalked on the carriages of all the lords and members
as they went down to the house. An attempt was made to disperse the
rioters, and as the crowd gave way, one of the ringleaders called upon
them to repair to the magistrate’s house who took the lead in dispersing
them, and this was soon pulled down. By this time the members of
the commons had taken into consideration the petition which was the
forerunner of all these riots. Lord George Gordon, who, dreading
the effects of his madness, had issued handbills in the name of the
Protestant Association, to disavow the riots, was in the house, and some
talk occurred about expelling him, and committing him to the Tower. All
that was done, however, was to agree to a resolution, “That when the
present tumults were subsided, they would take into consideration the
petitions from many of his majesty’s Protestant subjects.” This had been
no sooner done than dreadful news arrived from the city, and the
house adjourned in haste and confusion. The mob had proceeded from
St. Martin’s-street, where the house of the magistrate which they had
demolished was situate, to Newgate, declaring that they would release
their brother rioters. The prison was accordingly fired, and more
than three hundred ruffians were liberated, and joined in the work of
desolation. The houses of Sir John Fielding and Lord Mansfield were
the next objects of their attack; and the furniture, the books, the
paintings, the papers, and everything that was valuable therein were
destroyed. And here the true character of the mob displayed itself. It
is manifest, indeed, that none of the real members of the Association
took part in these outrages, but that they were committed by men
who cared more for a pot of good ale and a glass of gin than for the
Protestant interest. Hence, their first object, when they had
entered the houses of Sir John Fielding and Lord Mansfield, was the
wine-cellars. They drank till they were raving mad! It was in this state
that they were found by a detachment of foot-guards in and opposite the
house of Lord Mansfield. The officer who commanded them was requested to
enter the house with his men; but he replied, that the justices of the
peace had all run away; and that consequently it was impossible for the
military to act. The spirit of mischief, therefore, was permitted to
work at its pleasure. The new prison at Clerkenwell next shared the
fate of Newgate, and all the felons and other prisoners there let loose
upon society; their first impulse being to join the mob, to increase the
havock, and to plunder, burn, drink, and destroy. During the night many
houses were plundered or destroyed; the madness of the mob increasing at
every new success, by the liquors which they procured from the cellars.
A magistrate was at length found who would act, but it was then too
late, as drink had rendered the mob insensible to danger. A recent
writer remarks:—“During the time that was lost in seeking for a
magistrate who would act, the fury of the mob was increased to such
a pitch by the liquor they had drank, that, when the soldiers at last
fired, even the sight of their companions falling dead beside them
produced little or no effect.... It was when they were in this
state—careless of what befel them, and almost unconscious of what they
were doing, that the authorities, hitherto so patient, for the first
time determined to use force against them.... The scene here altogether
appears to have been terrific in the extreme. The violence and ferocity
of the ruffians, armed with sledge-hammers and other instruments
of destruction, who burst into the houses—the savage shouts of the
surrounding multitude—the wholesale desolation—the row of bonfires
blazing in the street, heaped with the contents of the sacked mansion,
with splendid furniture, books, pictures, and manuscripts which were
irreparable—the drunken wretches staggering or reeling against each
other, or rolling on the ground—the peeling of the musketry, followed
the next instant by the screams of the wounded and the dying, and the
roar of vengeance from ten thousand throats—soon after this, the fires
lighted in every room, and finally, the flames rushing upwards from
windows and roof in one magnificent conflagration:—all these may
well be conceived to have formed a picture, or rather a succession of
pictures, which thus exhibited under the dark sky of midnight, would
seem hardly of this world.” This has reference to a scene which occurred
at the house of Lord Mansfield, where some of the mob were still
collected, when a magistrate was found willing to act. But no force was
yet sufficient to quell the riot. On the following day the scenes which
took place were still more dreadful. The mob were completely triumphant,
and all householders who did not hang bits of blue silk out by way
of flags, and omitted to chalk the words “No Popery” on the doors and
shutters of their houses, were exposed to their vengeance. Some even
who were not Papists were this day plundered and ill-treated; all
distinctions being set aside by some of the rioters, which is another
evidence of the character of the mob. Some fellows marched through
the town extorting money from every one they met, whether Papist or
Protestant; and one ruffian, mounted on a horse, would take nothing
but gold. Other parties were employed in pulling down the prisons, and
before night not a prison was left standing, except the Poultry Compter.
An attack was made on the Bank of England by others, but here they
were repulsed by a strong body of soldiers, who killed many and wounded
others. But the great centre of mischief was Holborn. Here a Mr.
Langdale was doubly exposed as a Papist and as a great distiller. His
premises were fired, and everything was destroyed, except the liquors
which were drunk by the rioters; many of whom literally killed
themselves with drinking, while others too drunk to move out of the
reach of danger perished in the flames which their own hands had
kindled. A writer of the period says:—“Powder and ball do not seem to
have been so fatal to them as their own inordinate appetites. Numbers,
it is said, and at various places, died of inebriation; especially at
the distilleries of the unfortunate Mr. Langdale. In the streets men
were seen lying upon bulks and stalls and at the doors of empty houses,
drunk to a state of insensibility and to a contempt of danger; boys and
women were in the same condition, and many of the latter with infants
in their arms.” Men, women, and children were at one time seen on their
knees drinking ardent spirits, as they flowed down the kennel of the
street in Holborn. Thus maddened, who can wonder at the excesses which
followed? Thirty-six fires were seen on this night blazing in different
quarters of the great metropolis, and nothing but the serenity of the
night saved it from destruction. The panic was universal. Persons were
seen on every hand removing their goods, as none could tell but that
they might be destroyed by the merciless mob; or if a wind should
suddenly spring up, by the devouring element. At the same time the
dreadful reports of soldiers’ muskets were heard, mingled with the
terrific cries of the infuriated and countless rabble. None could
sleep in their beds on that night: the streets swarmed with people,
and uproar, confusion, and terror reigned on every hand. Some of the
citizens, however, possessing more nerve than others, formed themselves
into associations and acted with the soldiers. And wherever the troops
appeared there was nothing like a determined resistance made by the
rabble. Thus, at Blackfriars-bridge, where the mob had set fire to the
toll-gates, they were driven away like a scared flock of sheep by
the soldiers, and some even threw themselves over the bridge into the
Thames, in order to escape from the fire of their muskets. The only
place in the morning where the mob was not dispersed was in the
neighbourhood of the Fleet-prison, which was still in flames; and when
the soldiers charged their muskets right into the crowd they fled in all
directions. In the course of Thursday various encounters took place, and
some lives were lost; but before night the rabble had melted away, and
tranquillity was restored. Men had wondered whence the rabble came, and
now they wondered whither they could be gone. The return of killed made
to Lord Amherst, commander-in-chief, amounted to two hundred and ten,
and of wounded to two hundred and forty-eight, but many had been removed
by their friends, so that the exact number could not be ascertained:
moreover, it could never be known how many perished from drinking ardent
and unrectified spirits, and in the flames, from which inebriety made
it impossible for them to escape.
MEASURES ADOPTED BY PARLIAMENT, ARISING OUT OF THE LONDON RIOTS.
The house of commons met on Friday, the 9th of June, but as Westminster
was thronged with troops, and the capital had the appearance of being
under martial-law, the members adjourned till the 19th. On that day his
majesty met both houses, and exhibited a general view of the measures
which had been employed during the suspension of regular government. In
his speech he stated that he had directed copies of the proclamations
which had been issued to be laid before parliament; and he concluded
by declaring that it was his first duty and chief glory to maintain and
preserve the established religion. The common danger seems to have had
the effect of procuring a greater unanimity in both houses than had
been exhibited for many years before. Addresses were carried without
opposition; though some members blamed ministers for negligence and
delay, and for not employing the troops sooner. A question was moved in
the lords respecting the legality of military interference; which point
was accurately examined and constitutionally settled by Lord Mansfield.
His lordship said that the late riots amounted to overt acts of
high-treason, and were besides accompanied with felonies, as the burning
of houses, property, &c., all of which was sufficient legal ground
for the king’s proclamation calling out the military. Under such
circumstances he said, the military must act with and under the civil
power, and that if the soldiers exceeded the powers with which they were
invested, they must be tried and punished, not by martial law, but
by the laws of the realm. This being the law, he added, it was an
ill-founded apprehension that the metropolis was under martial-law, or
that the military had more power since the riots than before. The noble
lord made one allusion to his own serious losses, which greatly affected
all the peers present. He had been obliged, he said, to form his
opinions without the aid of books; adding, “indeed I have now no books
to consult.” On the following day the house of commons having resolved
itself into a committee upon the petitions for repealing Sir George
Saville’s tolerating act, which had been made an occasion of so
much mischief, adopted five resolutions, on the motion of Mr. Burke,
expressing satisfaction in the law as it now-existed, together with an
abhorrence of the late tumults, and of the misrepresentations which led
to them. Many members, however, thought it necessary to do something to
quiet the minds of the petitioners and remove the dread of Popery; and
a bill was brought in to deprive Roman Catholics of the right of keeping
schools in which there were any Protestant scholars. This bill passed in
the commons, but it was rejected by the lords, as carried by the fear
of popular outrage, and therefore derogatory to the dignity and
independence of parliament. All signs of popular rage had now, however,
disappeared; and government had evidently derived an accession of
strength out of doors as well as within the walls of parliament. The
minds of the public had become impressed with the danger arising from
popular assemblies for political purposes; and the associations of
reform were therefore deserted by members who had hitherto supported
them. Men found that it was easy to raise the storm of human passion by
exciting language; but that it was the most difficult thing in the world
to allay it when once lashed into fury.
[Illustration: 147.jpg PORTRAIT OF LORD RODNEY]
PARLIAMENT PROROGUED.
Parliament was prorogued on the 8th of July. In his speech the king
dwelt at some length on the recent riots, and thanked parliament
for their magnanimity and perseverance for prosecuting the “just and
necessary war,” in which the country was engaged. Their exertions, he
said, had been attended with success by sea and land, and he trusted
that the late important and prosperous turn of affairs in North America
would lead to the return of loyalty in the colonists to his person, and
to their re-union with their mother-country. The events of the war
by this time had given some ground of hope, but in the end it proved
illusory.
TRIAL OF LORD GEORGE GORDON AND THE RIOTERS.
Immediately after the riots had subsided, Lord George Gordon was
apprehended upon a warrant from the secretary of state, and after
a brief examination before several lords of the privy council, was
committed to the Tower on a charge of high-treason. While he was immured
within the walls of his prison, during the month of July, the vengeance
of the law fell upon those of the rioters which had been captured
in then lawless depredations. No less than fifty-nine were capitally
convicted, and twenty were executed: the rest were transported for life.
Lord George was not tried till the month of January, 1781, when he
was acquitted; his counsel showing that he was insane, and the jury
conceiving that his case did not amount to high-treason. He afterwards
gave undoubted proof of his insanity by turning Jew! Finally, he died
in Newgate, where he was imprisoned for various libels on foreign
potentates.
ADMIRAL RODNEY’S SUCCESS AGAINST THE SPANIARDS.
The opening of this year added to the naval renown of England. As the
Spanish persevered in their siege of Gibraltar, and as their treaty
with the Barbary States stopped the supplies of provisions, the garrison
began to feel the effects of famine, and it was necessary to send them
supplies from England. Admiral Rodney, who had recently been appointed
to the chief command in the West Indies, was therefore ordered to
relieve Gibraltar on his way thither. He had only been a few days at sea
when he fell in with a rich Spanish convoy, going from St. Sebastian to
Cadiz, and consisting of fifteen merchantmen, four frigates, and three
armed vessels; one being a fine new ship of sixty-four guns. These were
all captured, and while he took those with him which were laden with
wheat, flour, and other provisions, the rest were sent to England.
It was expected by the Bourbon cabinets that Rodney would leave his
transports in a certain latitude, to make their own way to Gibraltar,
and accordingly they ordered Admiral Don Juan de Langara to proceed,
with eleven men of war and two frigates, to intercept the supply.
Rodney, however, accompanied the transports, and on the 16th of January
he encountered the Spanish admiral near Cape St. Vincent. The Don, when
he discovered the superior force of the English, endeavoured to make his
escape, but Rodney got between him and the shore, and compelled him to
engage. The action commenced in the midst of a rough gale, at four in
the afternoon, and in the first hour of the engagement a Spanish ship
of the line blew up, and all on board perished. At six in the evening
another struck her colours, and by two the next morning the Phoenix of
eighty guns, the Spanish admiral’s own ship, and three of seventy guns
each were taken and secured. Two more, of seventy guns each, struck
their colours, but were driven on shore by the violence of the tempest
and lost. The rest of the squadron escaped in a shattered condition to
Cadiz. Rodney now proceeded triumphantly to the relief of Gibraltar, and
after lying there for some weeks, he proceeded with a part of his fleet
to the West Indies, while the remainder, under the command of Admiral
Digby, returned to the Channel. On his way home, Digby captured a French
ship of the line, and two or three vessels laden with military stores.
These successes raised the spirit of the nation, and the name of Rodney
especially filled every breast with hope and confidence. The very
ministers began to look upon him as the main stay of their power; well
knowing that his success would silence the clamours which had so long
been raised against them on the ground of incompetency.
{GEORGE III. 1780–1781}
ARMED NEUTRALITY.
The high hopes entertained by the people of England were soon doomed
to be modified by the prospect of new enemies, some of whom were more
powerful than those already arrayed against their country. At this
time a strong combination was formed against England by several powers
constituting what is called in history “The Armed Neutrality.” The
Spanish cabinet claimed the merit of this system; but it would rather
appear to have originated with the court of Petersburg, which had been
regarded by the ministers as their best ally in this momentous crisis.
In consequence of the large shipments of ammunition, and other materials
of war, made to the colonies of America by neutral states, England had,
from the commencement of the war, exercised the right of stopping and
searching all neutral vessels wherever they could be found. England also
had acted upon another established principle; namely, that a neutral
flag could not cover or protect the cargoes and property of a state
with which she was at war, and her cruizers had therefore stopped many
vessels having French and American property on board. This, however,
involved her in many quarrels with neutral powers, and Russia,
Prussia, Denmark, Holland, Sweden, etc. entered into a league, pledging
themselves to maintain the principle, “that free ships make free goods,
with the exception of arms and munitions of war.” About this time, also,
the native powers of India entered into a formidable coalition, under
French influence, for driving the British from their territories.
England had, therefore, almost the whole world arrayed in arms against
her, or entertaining hostile intentions towards her, while within her
own bosom she was destined to suffer from faction. Never, indeed, was
there a period in her history when she so much needed the unanimity and
undivided strength of her brave family.
RODNEY ENGAGES THE FRENCH FLEET.
Admiral Rodney arrived at St. Lucie, in the West Indies, on the 27th of
March. Here he joined Admiral Hyde Parker, and his fleet then consisted
of twenty-two sail of the line and six frigates. Parker had been menaced
for several days by the French Admiral de Guichen, who had only quitted
that water a few hours before Rodney’s arrival. Admiral de Guichen
retired to Fort Royal Bay, Martinique, and on the 2nd of April Rodney
appeared off that fort, and offered him battle. Finding that the
challenge would not be accepted, Rodney, after two days, returned to
St, Lucie, leaving some fast-sailing vessels to watch the motions of
the French. On the night of the 15th de Guichen put to sea, and Rodney,
warned of the fact, went in search of him with twenty sail of the line.
The two fleets came in contact on the 17th, and Rodney threw out his
signal for every ship to bear down and attack the rear of the French
as closely as they could, in order to break their line, and fight their
detached ships. The spirit of political party, however, reigned in the
fleet, and his signal was not obeyed as it ought to have been, several
ships continuing at a cautious distance from the enemy. In the meantime,
Rodney in the Sandwich came to close quarters with the French, and
having beaten de Guichen’s own ship fairly out of the line, and
compelled two others to bear away, he succeeded in separating his
enemy’s fleet into two unequal parts. He was, however, only aided by
five or six captains, and the French were allowed time to haul off after
their admiral and reform their line; after which de Guichen stood away
with the whole fleet under a press of sail, in order to make his escape.
The great distance between the British van and rear, and the crippled
state of his own ship, prevented Rodney from following; and he was
thus stopped short in the career of victory. One of the delinquent
captains—Bateman, of the Yarmouth—whose disobedience was more
notorious than the rest, was put under arrest, tried by a court-martial,
and dismissed the service. This example had the effect of restoring
discipline, and Rodney again sought the enemy. On the 20th he again got
sight of the French admiral, whose object was to make Fort Royal Bay in
Martinique, in order to repair his ships. Rodney cut him off from this
port, and de Guichen took shelter under Guadaloupe; when the British
fleet returned to St. Lucie to refit and to land the wounded. The
hostile fleets again came in sight of each other on the 10th of May,
between St. Lucie and Martinique. But it was in vain that Rodney sought
to bring the French admiral to an engagement; and the latter having
at length got into the long-desired harbour of Fort Royal, the British
fleet ran into Barbadoes. At this time the Spanish fleet was expected
to join the French; and though Rodney soon sailed from Barbadoes in
order to prevent the junction, the cautious Spanish admiral, Don Joseph
Solano, contrived to elude his vigilance, and to unite his fleet,
consisting of twelve sail of the line, several frigates, and a swarm of
transports, with that of de Guichen. Before their united force Rodney
was obliged to retire; and he retreated with the sad conviction that the
enemy was strong-enough to capture every British island in those seas.
The storm, however, which seemed to threaten these islands blew
over without pouring its fury upon one of them. The Spaniards had so
over-crowded their transports with men, that a terrible sickness broke
out among them, destroying first its scores, and then its hundreds
daily. The pestilence extended its ravages to the French fleet; and
in order to check it, it was agreed to land the troops and part of
the seamen at Martinique. Its ravages were arrested; but while at
Martinique, hostilities broke out between the French and the Spaniards,
and the two commanders could not agree as to the line of operations to
be pursued. Their combined fleets set sail again on the 5th of July, and
directed their course to St. Domingo, where they separated; de Guichen
returning to Europe with the homeward-bound convoy from the French sugar
islands, and Solano proceeding to the Havanah, to assist in the military
operations which the Spaniards were carrying on in Florida. All these
circumstances saved Jamaica and the other islands in the West Indies;
and conscious that they were safe, after detaching a part of his force
to Jamaica, Rodney set sail for New York.
EXPEDITION AGAINST SOUTH CAROLINA.
While Rodney was bravely supporting the honour of the British flag on
the ocean, the British arms were equally successful on the continent.
During the last days of December, Sir Henry Clinton, leaving New York
under the care of General Knyphausen, sailed away from Sandy Hook for
Charlestown in South Carolina. The ships in which he sailed, however,
were driven from their course by a long and terrible storm, so that it
was not till the 11th of February that he was enabled to disembark on
John’s Island, about thirty miles from Charlestown. Other delays took
place; and it was the 29th of March when Clinton’s army crossed Ashby
River and landed on Charlestown-neck. Ground was broken in front of the
American lines on the 11th of April; but as these lines were formidable,
it was evident that some time must elapse before the town could be
taken. Thus the Americans had built a chain of redoubts, lines, and
batteries right across the peninusular, from Ashby River to Cooper
River, on which were mounted eighty cannons and mortars; they had dug a
deep canal in front of this line, which was filled with water, and had
thrown two rows of abattis, and made a double picketed ditch; in the
centre of their works they had erected a kind of citadel, which was
bomb-proof; they had erected numerous batteries on the waterside, to
prevent the approach of ships; and they had raised a bar or sand-bank,
that rendered the approach of our largest ships of war impracticable,
and of the smaller craft difficult and dangerous. Within the bar,
however, there was a place called Five Fathom Hole, with a sufficient
depth of water to float second-rate ships; and here nine American ships
were moored, under the American commodore Whipple. Behind the bar and
Whipple’s squadron there was Fort Moultrie, upon Sullivan’s Island,
which was now much stronger than when, in a previous year, it repulsed
Clinton, and cut up Sir Peter Parker’s squadron. Such were the
formidable obstacles which Clinton had to surmount before he could hope
to capture Charlestown; and, moreover, within the town was the American
General Lincoln, at the head of about 7000 men. It was necessary
first to take possession of Five Fathom Hole; and accordingly Admiral
Arbuthnot, who had escorted Clinton to Charlestown, made the attempt.
The American commodore retired before Arbuthnot to Sullivan Island, and
then the English were permitted to pass the bar at their leisure. This
was effected with great labour, and on the 9th of April Arbuthnot was
in full possession of the harbour. Soon after Clinton finished his first
parallel, and began to erect his batteries; and then Arbuthnot sailed,
passed Fort Moultrie under a heavy fire, and anchoring just without
range of the shot from the town batteries, summoned Lincoln to
surrender. The American general having replied that he would defend the
place to the last extremity, the English batteries were opened, and they
soon made a visible impression. In the meantime Clinton detached Colonel
Tarleton against Lincoln’s cavalry, which were placed outside the lines
in order to keep the country open beyond Cooper Hiver. Tarleton was
successful: the cavalry were surprised at a place called Biggin’s
Bridge, and completely routed, leaving behind them all their stores,
camp-equipage, and baggage, with some two or three hundred horses. By
this victory a passage was opened across the head of Cooper River, and
a detachment was sent under the command of Earl Cornwallis to scour
the country beyond that river. All supplies were thus cut off from
Charlestown, as well as all hope of retreat for Lincoln and his
garrison. A council of war was called, and Lincoln offered to surrender
upon certain conditions; but as Clinton considered them too favourable,
they were rejected. The British now continued their approaches; a second
parallel was completed by the 20th of April, and a third by the 6th
of May. On this latter day the garrison of Fort Moultrie, on Sullivan
Island, surrendered to Captain Hudson of the navy; and on the same day
the broken remains of Lincoln’s cavalry, which had been recollected,
were again routed by Tarleton. Clinton’s third parallel was erected
close to the canal; and this canal was drained by means of another
excavation. Consternation and despair seized upon the inhabitants of
the town, but still Lincoln and the garrison resolved to hold out.
Hostilities were recommenced with additional fury, and an incessant fire
was kept up for two days, in the midst of which the besiegers advanced
to the very ditch, and drove the Americans from several of their guns.
At length, at the prayer of the terrified inhabitants, Lincoln resolved
to accept the terms which Clinton had offered before the last assault.
A flag of truce was sent out by him, and Clinton instantly signed the
capitulation. Between 6000 and 7000 men, consisting of regular troops,
militia, and sailors became prisoners of war; and four hundred pieces
of ordnance, and a large quantity of naval stores fell into the hands of
the victors. The garrison were allowed some of the honours of war:
they were to march out and deposit their arms between the canal and
the lines; but the drums were not to beat a British march, nor were the
colours to be reversed. The militia were to return home upon parole,
and the citizens were to be considered prisoners on parole; but their
property was to be respected so long as they kept their word. As for
the officers of both army and navy they were to retain their swords,
pistols, servants, and baggage, the latter of which was not to be
searched. The town was taken possession of by the British on the 12th of
May; and General Clinton set on foot several expeditions, calculated to
extinguish every idea of resistance in the interior of the province. At
the same time he issued proclamations for the purpose of conciliating
the inhabitants. These measures seemed to produce the desired effect.
The only body of troops that still held out was defeated by Colonel
Tarleton, and the people in every part of South Carolina seemed to
submit to King George. In this happy state of affairs, Clinton, on the
5th of June, embarked for New York, leaving Lord Cornwallis behind him
with 4000 men, to maintain the acquisition, and to penetrate into
North Carolina, so soon as the intense heat of the season and other
circumstances should admit of such an enterprise.
BATTLE OF CAMDEN, ETC.
The loyalty of the people of South Carolina was like a morning cloud; it
soon passed away. It was not long before they began to manifest a change
of disposition. Those who had accepted protection, because they
could not help themselves, manifested their antipathy to the British
government; while those who were in heart favourable to the cause of
King George, were indignant at seeing the disloyal part of the community
enjoying immunities and advantages, which they would employ against the
English on the first opportunity. The disaffected were encouraged by the
hope of speedy aid from Virginia and by congress, who were resolved to
make the most strenuous efforts to recover South Carolina. At length,
therefore, treachery began openly to show itself. One Lisle, who had
taken the oath of allegiance, and obtained rank and command, went over
to the republicans with a battalion of militia, well equipped with arms
and ammunition. A similar instance of treachery also occurred in another
part of the province, where a colonel of militia, who was entrusted with
the escort of some sick and wounded soldiers, carried them into North
Carolina, and gave them up to Baron de Kalb, a German, who was at the
head of some regular troops, and of 3000 militia. Kalb was appointed
to drive the royalists out of the country in North Carolina, and to
encourage the disaffected in South Carolina. He was soon joined by
General Gates, whom congress sent to take the supreme command of
the American forces. On his arrival, Gates having 6000 men under his
command, prepared at once to drive the British from their line of posts
across the state of South Carolina, and carry the war up to the very
walls of Charlestown. Intelligence of these preparations induced Lord
Cornwallis to repair to Camden, though his effective force did not
exceed 2000 men. After some skirmishing, and two attacks on detached
positions, conducted by Colonel Sumter, and both unsuccessful, Gates
moved forward to Camden, in the full assurance of victory. Having
received intelligence of this, Lord Cornwallis, instead of retreating or
waiting to receive Gates, set out in the dead of the night to meet him.
The advanced parties met in the woods at two o’clock in the morning, and
a Maryland regiment was defeated; but after this temporary conflict
both armies betook themselves to rest, and waited for the morning light.
When the morning dawned, Cornwallis discovered that the ground which
he occupied was exceedingly favourable for an action; his flanks being
secured by two swamps, which narrowed the ground in his front by which
Gates must advance. He formed in two lines: the first consisting of
two divisions under Lord Rawdon and Colonel Webster, and the second
consisting of the seventy-first regiment, and some squadrons of horse
under his Own command. The arrangement of the enemy was similar; but
Gates made some disposition on the left, as if intending to change
his position, and Lord Cornwallis seizing the critical moment, ordered
Webster to advance and charge the enemy on their left. This division was
chiefly composed of Virginia militia, and as Webster advanced they threw
down their loaded muskets and fled from the field. Their example was
soon followed by the North Carolina division, which formed the centre
of Gates’s army. Gates now brought up his second line, or reserve, and
endeavoured to rally his militia. It was all in vain; the reserve corps
were utterly routed, and the militiamen ran for their lives into the
woods. Gates, aware that all was lost, fled with a few friends to
Charlotte, about eighty miles off; and in this battle he lost nearly
nine hundred slain, among whom was Baron de Kalb, and about 1000 were
taken prisoners, he also lost all his baggage and camp-equipage, many
stands of colours, seven pieces of cannon, and one hundred and fifty
waggons, containing a large quantity of military stores and provisions.
The English lost about three hundred and fifty men in killed and
wounded, nearly all belonging to the regiment under Webster, and the
Irish volunteers under Lord Rawdon, who had borne the chief weight of
the action. This victory was followed by another. At this time Colonel
Sumter was on the other side of the Wateree, with the intention of
striking into the heart of South Carolina, and Tarleton, with some
cavalry and mounted infantry, was dispatched against him. Sumter, warned
of Gates’s disaster, had already began a retreat towards North Carolina,
when he was overtaken by Tarleton near the Catawba Fords, where his
corps were almost annihilated. He lost one hundred and fifty men killed,
three hundred prisoners, and an immense quantity of arms and military
stores: two hundred and fifty British prisoners were also recaptured.
Thus victorious, Lord Cornwallis again sent emissaries into North
Carolina, to assure the royalists there, that he would march into their
country as soon as he received necessary supplies from Charlestown. In
the meantime, as lenity had not disarmed the hostility of the disloyal,
he gave some examples of severity. He sequestered the estates of all
those who had broken their parole or their oath, and who had left the
province; denounced death against those who, after receiving British
protection, should desert; and executed some of the South Carolina
militia, whom he had taken in arms near Camden, with British protection
in their pockets. Cornwallis then marched into North Carolina, and he
took possession of Charlottetown; but hearing of the defeat of a body
of loyal militia, under Major Ferguson, who were attacked at King’s
Mountain by 1000 backwoodsmen, he retreated to South Carolina, and
deferred the prosecution of his enterprise till reinforcements should
arrive from New York. He took up a position between Camden and the
district of Ninety-Six, where he waited for the arrival of General
Leslie, who had been detached by Sir Henry Clinton to penetrate into
Virginia, in order to co-operate with Cornwallis. Leslie was afterwards
ordered round by sea to Charlestown; and while Cornwallis was waiting
for him, Tarleton with his flying column drove back an enterprising
partizan, named Marion, and again defeated his old adversary, Sumter.
Meanwhile congress, though greatly dejected by these reverses,
had appointed General Greene to supersede Gates, Greene arrived at
Charlottetown on the 2nd of December; but he found himself in no
condition to advance into South Carolina; and as Cornwallis had not yet
been reinforced, no further events transpired in the south during this
campaign.
AFFAIRS AT NEW YORK.
On the side of New York, during this year, a variety of petty
enterprises were undertaken. While Sir Henry Clinton was absent,
Knyphausen was at first occupied in making preparations for the defence
of that city? for, by the extreme severity of the winter, New York
was deprived of that natural defence which arises from its insular
situation. The Hudson, called the North River, was so completely covered
with thick ice that a large army, with heavy artillery and baggage,
might have crossed it with ease, and by that means have approached the
very walls of the city. Knyphausen expected that Washington would
avail himself of this circumstance to attack with his whole force,
and therefore he adopted judicious measures for the city’s protection.
Washington, however, was not in a condition to attempt anything so bold
and important. His army had been weakened by draughts made upon it for
the service of the south; he had scarcely any provisions or clothing for
his men in the camp; and not only discontent but open mutiny had begun
to manifest itself. Hence Knyphausen was secure from danger, though,
in the month of January, Washington detached Lord Stirling to Staten
Island, to act on the offensive. Stirling crossed over the ice from the
Jersey shore, surprised a small post, and took some prisoners; but he
was obliged to quit the island, and in his retreat lost some of his
own men, who served to exchange for the prisoners he had taken. This
expedition was followed by another on the part of the British, to drive
the Americans from a post at Young’s House, in the neighbourhood of
the White Plains, which was attended with greater success. The post
was stormed and carried; forty of the enemy were killed, and about one
hundred taken prisoners. Nothing further was attempted by Knyphausen
during the continuance of the frost; but in the month of June,
encouraged by the weakness and distress which still prevailed in
Washington’s camp, he detached a considerable force, under Brigadiers
Mathew and Stirling, to make an attempt to re-establish the ancient
government in New Jersey. Mathew and Stirling marched up the country
towards Springfield, but they were disappointed in their expectation of
the people joining them, and were obliged to retreat to Elizabethtown.
A few days after this Sir Henry Clinton arrived from Charlestown, and
though he did not approve of the movement which Knyphausen had ordered,
as the soldiers were at Elizabethtown, and as Washington had come down
to the hills near Springfield to protect the Jerseys, he resolved to
attempt to bring him to action. Mistaking some of the movements made by
the British, Washington marched towards Pompton to defend West Point,
and in his absence Sir Henry Clinton defeated General Greene, who was
left at Springfield for its protection, and reduced the town to ashes.
Washington, however, could not be brought to action, and Clinton,
expecting the arrival of the French armament, returned in haste to New
York. In the meantime, Lafayette, who had returned to France to quicken
the exertions of his countrymen, presented himself in the American camp,
with a promise from his sovereign of speedy assistance. Encouraged by
this promise, congress, who had recently neglected Washington’s army,
probably from the feelings of despair, made an extraordinary effort to
give his troops some appearance of respectability before the arrival of
their French allies. These allies arrived in July at Rhode Island, and
they amounted to 6000 veteran troops. They were commanded by the Count
de Rochambeau, an experienced officer, who had fought in the battle of
Minden; but in order to obviate all quarrels about rank and precedence,
Washington received a commission from the French monarch, appointing
him lieutenant-general in the French armies, and investing him with
the chief command in America. No precaution, however, could prevent the
French and Americans from quarrelling with each other. The Americans
complained that the French had come too late in the season to do any
good, and the French complained, that on their arrival the American army
were not ready to co-operate. Washington suggested an immediate attack
upon New York; but this could not be attempted without a decided
superiority at sea, and before any thing could be done, the arrival of
Admiral Graves at Sanely Hook gave the superiority to the British. This
determined Sir Henry Clinton to act upon the offensive. The French fleet
which had brought the troops from France lay at Newport, and Sir Henry
proposed to Admiral Arbuthnot a plan for attacking this fleet, while the
troops proceeded up to the Sound to co-operate by land. Hoping to meet
the enemy at sea, Arbuthnot deferred his co-operation till the enemy
had strongly fortified their position, and then it was too late.
Clinton proceeded with 8000 men to Huntingdon Bay, on Long Island; but
Washington, having received reinforcements, crossed the North River, and
rapidly advancing towards Kingsbridge, put a stop to their enterprise.
TREASON OF ARNOLD, AND FATE OF MAJOR ANDRE.
It had been expected by the French and American commanders that they
would soon be joined by de Guichen, with a land-force and twenty ships
of the line from the West Indies. Had their expectations been realized,
it was resolved to attack New York in every direction, with irresistible
fury. About this time however, intelligence arrived of de Guichen’s
departure for Europe, and of the consequent naval superiority of the
British. Thus frustrated in their designs, Washington and Rochambeau
held a meeting midway between their respective camps, to concert new
measures. While Washington was absent upon this service, General Arnold,
who commanded a considerable body of troops at West Point, on the New
River, and who had recently entered into a secret correspondence with
Sir Henry Clinton for delivering up that important post to the British,
requested that a confidential person might be sent to him, in order
to adjust the business, and to carry it into effect without delay. The
officer charged with this commission was Major André, a young man
of spirit and undaunted courage, and in whom General Clinton reposed
unlimited confidence. Major Andre had a secret interview with Arnold,
and matters were arranged by them for the defection, but as he was
returning in disguise he was taken by three men of the New York
militia, and on examination the papers found upon him discovered all the
particulars of the conspiracy. By some means or other—but how is not
sufficiently clear—Arnold received intelligence of Andre’s capture in
time to make his escape to New York, where, on his arrival, he received
the commission of a brigadier-general in the British service. Major
André had hitherto passed himself off as one John Anderson, but when
he found that Arnold was safe, he announced his name and rank; and
with more anxiety for his military honour than for his life, he wrote
a letter to Washington, to secure himself from the imputation of
having assumed the character of a spy for treacherous purposes or
self-interest. His letter concluded with expressions of confidence
in the generosity of Washington’s mind; but he soon found that his
confidence was misplaced; that Washington was an implacable judge. A
board of general officers was appointed to inquire into his case, and
notwithstanding the solicitations and menaces of Sir Henry Clinton, who
anxiously sought to save him, he was condemned to die an ignominious
death. He died on a gibbet on the 2nd of October! His death is one of
the blackest stains on the character of Washington; for his obduracy
alone prevented the mitigation of the punishment. In vain was it
represented to him that Sir Henry Clinton, and his predecessor Sir
William Howe, had never put to death any person for a breach of the
rules of war: in vain was it shown that Captain Robinson of the American
army, who had been taken as a spy by the British, had recently been
exchanged as a prisoner of war; and in vain did Arnold, through whose
plots he had been captured, plead by letter for his life—Washington was
obdurate still, and left his victim to perish by the hands of the common
hangman! And yet this obdurate commander-in-chief of the Americans
professed to commiserate his victim’s fate; and applauded the fortitude
with which he met his death: but so did others of the American generals,
and yet all the while kept twisting the rope that was to hang him! The
same may be said of Lafayette. He also praised his courage, frankness,
and delicacy, and “lamented his fate,” and yet did nothing to avert
his doom. How much more nobly did Sir Henry Clinton act on this trying
occasion. Although he had yet many Americans in his power, and although
he had held out a threat that if André should perish, they should perish
likewise, yet no reprisals were made; not one in his power was condemned
by a military tribunal for their flagrant, and in some instances
repeated breaches of the rules of war. Yet Washington seems to have
considered that he had only acted in the character of a just judge.
He could imagine that Arnold was undergoing “the torments of a mental
hell,” for the part he had acted in this transaction, but he felt no
compunction for his own unjust and uncalled-for severity—he could see
the mote in Arnold’s eye, but could not discover the beam which was in
his own. As regards Arnold he was probably correct. After the death
of André that renegade issued addresses to the Americans, but he was
scorned and unheeded; and he was employed during the remainder of
the war, but he was shunned by the British officers, and although the
British soldiers on guard were bound to salute his uniform and respect
his rank, yet they whispered as he passed along, “There goes the traitor
Arnold!” The death of André is the last recorded act in this campaign.
All the belligerents went early into winter-quarters; and with the
exception of a few foraging expeditions, Clinton’s army remained at New
York and its dependencies during winter doing nothing; while Washington
continued to occupy his old station on the high lands above the Hudson,
and the French troops under Rochambeau, staid at Rhode Island, all
being equally inactive. About the same time that the troops went into
winter-quarters. Admiral Rodney left the American shores, and returned
to his old station in the West Indies.
{GEORGE III. 1780–1781}
MARITIME LOSSES SUSTAINED BY THE BRITISH.
In the European seas British commerce suffered some blows during this
year, which spread a gloom over the whole nation. Admiral Geary, who on
the death of Sir Charles Hardy in May, had been appointed to the command
of the fleet in the Channel, captured, in the beginning of July,
twelve French merchantmen from Port-au-Prince; but while he proceeded
southward, in hopes of falling in with a detached squadron of French and
Spanish ships, of which he had received intelligence, and was cruizing
off Cape Finisterre, a rich convoy for the East and West Indies,
attended by the Ramillies and two frigates, were intercepted by the
combined fleets of the enemy, and nearly fifty merchant ships were
captured and carried into Cadiz. Many of these ships were laden with
naval and military stores for the different settlements to which they
were destined; and the loss of these, together with that of 3000 men
taken prisoners on board, so increased public dissatisfaction at the
mode of employing the Channel-fleet, that Geary soon afterwards resigned
the command. But this was not the only disaster which the English met
with on the seas during this year. About the same time, fourteen
ships of the outward-bound Quebec fleet were captured by some American
privateers off the banks of Newfoundland. These concurrent losses,
in their nearer or more remote consequences, affected all classes of
society.
WAR WITH HOLLAND.
It has been seen that Holland was one of those states which entered into
the league called “The Armed Neutrality.” From the very commencement
of the American war, the Dutch had secretely favoured the cause of the
colonists; or at least had sought a commercial advantage in supplying
some of their wants at the expense of the commerce and interests of
England. Then again, after the interference of France and Spain in the
quarrel, the ports of Holland were open equally to all the enemies of
Great Britain; the advantages of a contraband trade making the Dutch
regardless of the faith of treaties, and of every other consideration.
Remonstrances were made on this subject by the British ambassador at the
Hague, but without effect. The States General were determined to follow
their own line of policy, and the breach thus made between the two
countries gradually widened as the war with America progressed. It was
easy to foresee, indeed, that sooner or later Holland would be joined
to the long list of our open enemies. An event which occurred early
in September of this year, led to such a consummation. At that time
a congress packet was taken by the Vestal frigate off the banks of
Newfoundland, as it was steering its course towards Holland. On board
this packet was Henry Laurens, the late president of congress; who, as
soon as he perceived that he should be captured, threw a box containing
papers overboard. The lead which was attached to this box was not
sufficiently heavy to sink it immediately, and a British sailor leaped
into the sea and caught it as it was sinking. The papers which it
contained were found to contain a treaty of amity and commerce between
the republic of Holland and the States of America, some articles of
which had been provisionally agreed to and signed two years before
at Aix-la-Chapelle, by William Lee, agent for congress, and John de
Neufville, a merchant of Amsterdam, acting under powers delegated to him
by Van Berkel, the grand pensionary of that city. Laurens, the bearer
of these papers, was brought to England, and committed to the Tower on
a charge of high-treason; and our government transmitted the papers to
their ambassador at the Hague, and instructed him to present a memorial
to the States General, requiring them to disavow the proceedings of Van
Berkel and his accomplices, and to punish them for their offence. No
answer was returned to this memorial on the 12th of December, and Sir
Joseph Yorke sent in another, expressing, in diplomatic language, his
astonishment at the silence of the States General. The truth was, that
although the Statholder neither approved of the treaty with the United
States nor of war with England, the great trading interest of Amsterdam
and the whole French party in Holland were eager for the completion of
the treaty, and fondly imagined that Great Britain, through the number
and power of her enemies and the Armed Neutrality, must succumb. Hence
the memorial of the British ambassador was still treated with silent
contempt, and there was no alternative left for our government but to
declare war against Holland. Sir Joseph Yorke was recalled, and a royal
manifesto was issued, declaring that Great Britain had issued letters of
reprisals against the Dutch, and justifying her conduct in taking this
hostile step. This manifesto was issued, on the 20th of December, and
it would appear that the States General were alarmed at this firmness of
the British government, for they did not put forth their answer to the
manifesto of his Britannic majesty till the March following. The States
General were, in truth, ill prepared for war with England, and they had
soon reason to repent that they had even provoked it: it brought them
only loss and degradation.
GENERAL ELECTION.
Parliament was unexpectedly dissolved, on the 1st of September, by royal
proclamation. The elections proved to be much in favour of the court,
for in several places the most popular members of the opposition side of
the house lost their seats. In the whole, one hundred and thirteen new
members were elected. Burke was returned, but in consequence of his
support to the Irish Trade Acts, to the Roman Catholic Relief Bill, and
to other measures of a liberal nature, he lost his seat for Bristol, and
was compelled to be contented with the more humble one of the borough of
Malton. Mr. Fox, after a hard struggle, was returned for Westminster.
MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.
The new parliament met on the 31st of October. The first debate was
occasioned by the election of a speaker. Sir Fletcher Norton had given
offence to ministers during the last session, and Lord George Germaine,
urging the precarious state of Sir Fletcher’s health, moved that Mr.
Cornwall should fill the chair. Sir Fletcher and his friends replied,
that his health was now re-established, and that Lord George Germaine’s
condolence was a mockery of the house; and Dunning moved that he should
be continued speaker. The house was divided on his re-election, but
opposition were left in a minority of one hundred and thirty-four to
two hundred and three: Mr. Cornwall was therefore elected speaker. His
majesty delivered his opening speech on the following day. In it he
declared his satisfaction in having an opportunity, by the recent
election, of receiving the most certain information of the disposition
and wishes of his people; and again complained of the unprovoked
aggression of France and Spain, who were exerting all their power to
support the rebellion of his colonies, to destroy the commerce of Great
Britain, and to give a final blow to her power. He added, that the
bravery of his fleets and armies had enabled him to withstand their
hostility; and that he hoped the late successes in Georgia and Carolina
would have important consequences in bringing the war to a happy
conclusion. The opposition denied that the successes obtained in America
were likely to be decisive, and an amendment was moved in the house of
commons by Mr. Thomas Grenvilie, consisting in the omission of several
complimentary paragraphs, but it was negatived by two hundred and twelve
against one hundred and thirty. In the upper house there was but
little debate, and the original address was carried by an equally large
majority. The same success attended ministers with reference to the
army and navy estimates, which were carried by such large majorities as
served to remind Lord North of the earlier years of his administration,
and to efface the recollection of the narrow divisions and minorities
of the last session. In the course of the debates on the estimates, Fox
pledged himself to move, after the Christmas holidays, for the dismissal
of the Earl of Sandwich, and afterwards to bring him to condign
punishment. He should found these motions, he said, on two different
causes: first, for Sandwich’s having advised his majesty to promote Sir
Hugh Palliser to the government of Greenwich Hospital; and, secondly,
for his having shamefully neglected the navy. This led to a display of
fierce party spirit, which was subsequently renewed from a remark made
by Mr. Thomas Townshend; namely, that he thought it was highly necessary
that the house should inquire why, in this season of public danger, the
nation was deprived of the services and abilities of such men as Admiral
Keppel, Lord Howe, Sir Robert Harland, Pigot, Campbell, and Barrington.
This remark was made on the 4th of December, and in the course of the
debate which ensued, Mr. Fox having again censured the promotion of Sir
Hugh Palliser, Lord North defended the unpopular admiral in one of his
most ready and effective speeches. Two days after this the two houses of
parliament adjourned to the 23rd of January.