{GEORGE III. 1784–1786}
The Trial of Parties and Triumph of Pitt..... A General
Election..... Meeting of the New Parliament ..... Acts to
prevent Smuggling, etc...... The Budget of 1784..... Pitt’s
India Bill..... Bill for the Restoration of Forfeited
Estates in Scotland..... Prorogation of Parliament..... The
State of Ireland..... Meeting of Parliament..... The
Westminster Scrutiny..... Pitt’s Reform Bill..... Pitt’s
Financial Measures..... The Affairs of Ireland.....
Continental Affairs.
{A.D. 1784}
THE TRIAL OF PARTIES, AND TRIUMPH OF PITT.
On the reassembling of parliament, opposition hoped to show that no
power in the constitution could withstand the will of the commons. Fox
commenced the trial by moving the order of the day for the committee on
the state of the nation. This motion was carried, but it was only by a
majority of thirty-nine against ministers, and imputations were thrown
out that the support given them was obtained by unfair means. Still
Fox and his party consoled themselves with the idea that Pitt would
be hurled from his eminence in a few hours. The contest was therefore
continued. The house having resolved itself into a committee, Fox moved
a resolution, declaring “the payment of any public money for services
voted in the present session, after parliament should be prorogued or
dissolved, if such events should take place before an act should have
passed appropriating supplies to such services, to be a high crime and
misdemeanor.” This was carried without a division, and, following up his
attack, Fox moved and carried, in the same manner, another resolution,
deferring the second reading of the Mutiny Bill till the 23rd of
February. Fox now paused, and Lord Surrey stood forward, in order to
strike a more decisive blow. He moved, “That, in the opinion of the
committee it was peculiarly necessary that, in the present situation of
his majesty’s dominions, there should be an administration which has
the confidence of this house and the public.” This resolution was also
carried without a division; and Lord Surrey then moved, “That it was the
opinion of the committee that the late changes in his majesty’s councils
were immediately preceded by dangerous and universal reports that his
majesty’s sacred name had been unconstitutionally abused to affect
the deliberations of parliament, and that the appointments made were
accompanied by circumstances new and extraordinary, and such as did
not conciliate or engage the confidence of the house.” A warm debate
followed this motion, which continued till past six in the morning,
when Dundas moved an adjournment, which, on a division, was lost by a
majority of fifty-four—the numbers being one hundred and ninety-six to
one hundred and forty-two. Nothing further, however, was done on this
occasion, and the house at length adjourned at half-past seven in the
morning. It met again on the 14th, when Pitt moved for leave to bring in
a new bill, for the better government and management of the affairs of
the East India Company. In the previous debates Pitt had declared that
he had accepted office upon one single, plain, intelligible principle,
by which he desired to stand or fall with the people; namely, to save
the country from Fox’s India Bill, which threatened destruction to its
liberties. His own bill, which he explained at great length, was in its
turn severely criticised by Fox. No opposition, however, was made to
Pitt’s motion, and it was read a first time on the 16th, with very
little debate on its merits. After this, on the same night, the
committee on the state of the nation resumed its functions; and Lord
Charles Spencer moved a resolution, expressive of “the necessity of an
administration that should have the confidence both of the house and of
the country, which, as the present ministers have not, their continuance
in office is contrary to constitutional principles, and injurious to
the interests of the king and people.” Mr. Powys, though himself in
opposition, denounced this motion as premature, unprecedented, and
unjust; but it was carried by a majority of twenty-one, the numbers
being two hundred and six against one hundred and eighty-five. During
this debate Mr. Powys expressed a wish that there should be a coalition
between Fox and Pitt, and when the house met on the 20th, other members
joined in this wish. Fox, himself seemed to think that their union was
feasible, but Pitt repeated a declaration which had been made by his
opponent on a previous evening; namely, that a union not founded on
principle would be fallacious and dangerous. Pitt, indeed, was still
resolved to brave the storm; for, in answer to an assertion of Fox that
his majesty’s ministers held their places in defiance of the opinion of
parliament, he declared, “that nothing but a sense of his duty to the
public kept him in office, and that he could not quit it with so much
honour as attended his coming into it.” Fox now altered his mode of
attack. Conceiving that he should lose ground by making any more motions
of a personal nature, especially before the fate of Pitt’s India Bill
should be decided, he set himself to work to defeat that bill. A long
debate took place upon its second reading, which was on Friday, the
23rd, and on the motion for its commitment, it was rejected by two
hundred and twenty-two against two hundred and fourteen. Exulting in his
victory, Fox then moved for leave to bring in another bill, similar in
its principles to his former one, and this being given, he called on
Pitt to state explicitly whether he intended to prevent its progress
by a dissolution of parliament. For a long time Pitt sat silent as a
statue, nor would he have spoken at all had not General Conway rose,
and, with great warmth, called upon him to explain his conduct for his
own honour. But even then Pitt gave no answer to Fox’s question; only
rising to call General Conway to order, for asserting that the ministry,
“originated in darkness and secrecy, maintained themselves by artifice
and reserve, and existed by corruption;” and that they were “about to
dissolve parliament, and to send their agents round the country to bribe
the electors.” The same question was put to Pitt on a future day, and he
preserved the same haughty silence; whence, on the 26th, Mr. Eden moved
a resolution, declaring the firm reliance of the house on his majesty’s
promise, that they should not be interrupted either by a prorogation or
dissolution, from taking into consideration the regulation of the East
India Company, and for supporting the public credit. In reply, Pitt
observed, that he did not see how the royal word could be considered
pledged to the extent of the motion; but, he added, that as a
dissolution would be attended with great disadvantage, he would not
advise any such exercise of the royal prerogative. Opposition might
have been satisfied with this explicit declaration, but nevertheless Mr.
Eden’s motion was pressed and agreed to without a division. The house
then adjourned to the 29th, and in the meantime a meeting of some of the
leading men of both parties met at the St. Albans-tavern, in order, if
possible, to bring about a coalition. At this meeting am address was
agreed upon, and sent, by a deputation, to the Duke of Portland and Mr.
Pitt, entreating them to communicate with each other, and expressing a
hope that this would lead to a cordial co-operation. All the exertions
of the St. Albans-tavern meeting, however, were unavailing. The Duke of
Portland and Mr. Pitt communicated with each other, but as the former
made the resignation of the latter a _sine qua non_, no union could be
formed.
The house reassembled on the 29th, but on the motion of Fox, it was
again adjourned till the 2nd of February. This adjournment was moved in
order to give more time for the consideration of a union of parties;
but when the house met again they were still as far from a coalition as
ever. Under these circumstances Mr. Grosvenor, member for Chester, who
had presided at the St. Albans-tavern meeting, moved a resolution, to
the effect that the situation of public affairs required the exertions
of an united administration—an administration entitled to the
confidence of the people, and such as might tend to put an end to the
divisions and distractions of the country. In the debate which
this motion occasioned, Fox charged Pitt with preferring his own
understanding to the collected wisdom of the house, and of causing a
breach between the legislative and executive government. In reply,
after alluding to the fact that the people were in favour of the late
ministerial changes, Pitt expressed his determination not to quit
office, inasmuch as he saw that nothing but evil would come from his
resignation. At the same time he added, that he was but little attached
to office, and that, if he could see a strong and well-connected
government ready to succeed him, he would cheerfully retire. Mr.
Grosvenor’s motion was carried, and Mr. Coke then moved, “that it was
the opinion of the house that the continuance of the present ministers
in office is an obstacle to the formation of such an administration as
may enjoy the confidence of the house, and tend to pacify the country.”
This motion was also carried, and on the next day Mr. Coke, after
expressing his regret at seeing Pitt still in office, moved that these
two resolutions should be laid before his majesty by those members who
were of the privy-council, which motion was likewise affirmed. In order
to give time for knowing what effect this communication to his majesty
would produce, the committee on the state of the nation was postponed
till Monday, the 9th of February; and in the meantime the house was
informed by Lord Hinchingbrook, that he had laid the resolutions before
the king, and that his majesty had signified his intention of taking
them into consideration. But no communication was made from his majesty
on this subject before the 18th, and in the interval its members were
occupied in canvassing the proceedings of the upper house, and in
measures of revenue and finance.
Up to this time the lords had taken no share in the struggle between the
king and his “faithful commons.” Pitt, however, had already commenced
his career of making peers, and these, with others, now began to exhibit
their zeal for his cause. Lord Howard of Effingham moved two resolutions
in direct opposition to, and levelled at, those which had recently been
passed by the commons. The first of these declared, that an attempt in
any one branch of the legislature to suspend the course of the law
was unconstitutional; and the second asserted, that the authority of
appointing the great officers of the executive government was solely
vested in the crown. Both these resolutions were carried by a majority
of nearly two to one; and the commons thought it necessary to pass a
counter-resolution, which asserted that the house had not assumed any
right to suspend the execution of law, or done any thing which could be
deemed unconstitutional.
On the 11th of February the subject of a union of parties was once more
discussed in the commons. Fox made a conciliatory and even complimentary
speech, but Pitt was still firm in his intentions. He observed, that
whatever might be his disposition to coalesce with Fox, there were
other persons of the same party with whom he would never act. As this
observation referred chiefly to Lord North, that nobleman rose, and
declared with great frankness, “that although averse from yielding to
the prejudices or caprice of any individual, he would not be an obstacle
to the formation of such a firm, extended, and united administration
as the present state of the country required.” After this the house
resolved itself into a committee of supply, and the ordnance estimates
were voted without a division. On the next day Lord John Cavendish
moved, that the house should resolve itself into a committee on
the Receipt Tax Act, and Pitt himself voted in the majority, thereby
declaring his approbation of the principles of the bill.
Before his majesty made any reply to the resolutions presented to him,
the St. Albans-tavern association prevailed upon Pitt to agree that
a message should be sent in the king’s name to the Duke of Portland,
expressing a desire that his grace should hold a conference with Mr.
Pitt for the purpose of forming an administration, “on a wide basis,
and on fair and equal terms.” This message was sent, but the Duke of
Portland still required Pitt to resign before he negociated; and this
attempt to form a coalition of parties proved, like the former, to be
of no avail. Open war, therefore, continued between the two parties, and
its violence increased when, on the 18th of February, after the order of
the day had been read for taking the supplies into consideration,
Pitt intimated, that his majesty had not thought proper to dismiss his
ministers, in compliance with the resolution of that house, and that
they had not resigned. Fox, in reply, expressed his astonishment at this
declaration, and declared that such language had not been heard in
the house since the revolution; and that the commons had never before
received such a reply from a prince of the House of Hanover. Enraged
thereby, Fox moved, that the report of the committee of supply should
not be received till the 20th, which motion was carried by a majority
of twelve only. The friends of Pitt saw in this small majority a ray
of hope that he would ultimately triumph, and the opposition seemed to
think so likewise, for some eagerly desired a compromise. Pitt, however,
declared, that he would enter into no compromise or stipulation for
passing the vote of supplies, and therefore he still stood upon his own
grounds. On the 20th Mr. Powys moved a resolution, humbly requesting
his majesty “to take such measures as might tend to give effect to the
wishes of his faithful commons.” This mild resolution did not please
Fox and his party, and an amendment was moved to insert the following
words—“by removing any obstacle to the formation of such an
administration as this house has declared to be requisite in the present
critical situation of affairs.” As this amendment aimed at the dismissal
of ministers, a long and stormy debate ensued, in the course of which
Pitt delivered one of the most eloquent speeches ever uttered within
the walls of the house of commons. But no eloquence could break down the
obstinacy of the house; for the motion, with the amendment, was carried
by a majority of twenty; and Fox, pursuing his triumph, moved and
carried an address., to be presented to his majesty on his throne by
the whole house, praying him to dismiss his ministers. The report of the
ordnance estimates was then brought up and agreed to without a division,
after which, between five and six in the morning, the house adjourned.
The address voted by the commons was presented on the 25th, when his
majesty in reply, stated that he had heard no valid charge against the
ministers of his appointment; that all proposals for a coalition, though
seconded by himself, had proved abortive; and that he could not see in
what way the public interest was likely to be promoted by the dismissal
of his cabinet. He added:—“Under these circumstances, I trust my
faithful commons will not wish that the essential offices of executive
government should be vacated until I see a prospect that such a plan of
union as I have called for, and they have pointed out, may be carried
into effect.” The efforts of the opposition now grew more violent. The
house met on the 27th to hear the report of the king’s answer; and on
that occasion Lord Beaumont moved, first, that the report should be
taken into consideration on the 1st of March, and then that the house
should adjourn to that day. To the first of these propositions Pitt made
no objection, but as the object of the second was to delay the supplies,
and this delay would cause serious evils, inasmuch as they related to
the navy, he strongly resisted such a hazardous measure. His arguments
told even upon the opposition, for though the motion was carried, it was
only by the small majority of seven; the numbers being one hundred and
seventy-five to one hundred and sixty-eight. But the struggle was not
yet over. On the 1st of March, Fox moved and carried another address to
the king, which directly asserted the right of the commons to advise his
majesty on the exercise of his prerogative, and by virtue of that
right, specifically requesting him to dismiss his ministers. The commons
carried this address to the king on the 4th of March, and were told
in reply that his majesty still entertained the same sentiments he had
formerly expressed. On the same evening it was agreed, upon the motion
of Fox, that this reply should be taken into consideration on Monday,
the 8th of March. In the meantime Pitt was once more defeated. On the
5th, Fox moved that the committee on the Mutiny Bill, which stood
for that day, should be adjourned till Monday, which was carried by a
majority of nine; the numbers being one hundred and seventy-one against
one hundred and sixty-two. But this was Fox’s last triumph in this
memorable struggle. On Monday the house was crowded to excess. Strangers
had even taken their seats in the gallery as early as ten o’clock in the
morning, in expectation of witnessing this last struggle in the trial
of the two great parties in the house of commons. Before the debates
commenced, however, Sir James Lowther, after complaining that he had not
been able to find room for a friend, and stating that he had reason to
believe there were strangers there not introduced by members, insisted
upon the standing order of the house for excluding all strangers being
carried into execution; and the gallery was forthwith cleared. When
this was done, Fox, after accusing his sturdy opponent with insolent
and unconstitutional conduct, declaring that a union of parties was now
impracticable, and lamenting the disgrace and ruin which this struggle
had brought upon the country, moved, as a last measure, another address
to the throne, which repeated at greater length the prayer for the
removal of ministers; expressing the surprise and affliction of the
house at receiving the answer to its former address, and vindicating
the loyalty of the commons, who were said to be incapable of desiring
to lessen the prerogative of the crown. Pitt sat silent, and the task
of defending the conduct of ministers fell upon Dundas, who did so with
great ability. The debate lasted till midnight, when the house became
impatient to divide. It was an anxious moment for both parties, and loud
and vociferous were the cheers on the ministerial benches, when it was
found that Fox had this time only a majority of _one_ in his favour;
the numbers being one hundred and ninety-one against one hundred
and ninety. The struggle was, indeed, now over; for the opposition
acknowledged the majority of one only as a defeat. Henceforth they tried
no more divisions: the Mutiny Bill and supplies were voted readily, and
the Appropriation Act was no more brought forward. Pitt’s triumph was
complete: and yet he deemed it prudent to strengthen his cause by a
new election; lest the opposition should again rally and retard his
measures. Reports to this effect were soon spread abroad, and the
subject was brought before parliament on the 22nd of March, by Sir
Grey Cooper, who declared that such a step would be both daring and
unwarrantable under present circumstances. The subject was renewed
on the next day, when the report of the committee of supply was to be
brought up, but though Pitt was eagerly questioned on the subject by
Lord North and other members of the house, he still preserved silence.
The house, however, did not have to wait long for the confirmation of
the report. On the 24th, the king went down to the house of lords, and
put an end to the session by prorogation; at the same time declaring
that he felt it to be a duty which he owed to the constitution and
the country, to recur to the sense of his people, by convoking a new
parliament. The sentence of dissolution was soon pronounced, for it
appeared in the next day’s _Gazette_.
A GENERAL ELECTION.
Pitt had good reasons to believe that a general election would result
greatly in his favour. There can be no doubt, indeed, that if he had
adopted such a measure at the first, that he would have been spared
the trouble of contending with the opposition. At the same time if
parliament had been dissolved on an earlier day, it is probable that he
might not have had such bright prospects for the future. Every day his
conduct seemed to gain him friends among the people; while on the other
hand the popularity of his rival rapidly decreased. There were two grand
causes which led to the decay of the popularity of Fox; namely, his
coalition with Lord North and his party; and his India Bill, which
arrayed against him not only the influence of the East India Company,
but also of almost all the good citizens of London. The city of London
had, indeed, showed much sympathy with the youthful premier, Pitt, in
this memorable struggle. At the latter end of February, they voted him
the freedom of the city, which they presented to him in great state at
the house of Lord Chatham, in Berkeley-square, whence he was conducted
by the committee to a grand dinner at the Grocers’-hall. What sentiments
were entertained towards him may be gathered from the speech which
Wilkes, the chamberlain of the city, made on this occasion. After
lavishing much praise on Pitt, he thus alluded to the parliamentary
contest, which was then at its height:—“I know, sir, how high you stand
in the confidence of the public: much is to be done, but you have youth,
capacity, and firmness; it is the characteristic of a true patriot never
to despair. Your noble father, sir, annihilated party; and, I hope you
will, in the end, bear down and conquer the hydra of faction, which now
rears its hundred heads against you. I remember his saying, that for
the good of the people he dared to look the proudest connexions of this
country in the face: I trust that the same spirit animates his son: and
as he has the same support of the crown, and of the people, I am firmly
persuaded that the same success will follow.” But the sentiments which
the people of England entertained towards Pitt and his rival were more
fully manifested, during, and by, the results of the election. The Pitt
candidates were returned on every hand by triumphant majorities, and not
less than one hundred and sixty of the old members of opposition lost
their seats, and were sent back to private life with the ludicrous
appellation of “Fox’s Martyrs.” But it must not be supposed that this
result was entirely owing to the popularity of the young premier. The
press, that mighty engine for good or evil, had been set to work to
undermine the power of the coalition, and lampoons and satires on Fox
and North had been printed daily and scattered throughout the country.
Moreover, as Pitt had from the first contemplated a dissolution of
parliament, every influence which a government could command had been
employed in his favour. Finally, the youth of Pitt, and the bold stand
he had made against his opponents, had a powerful tendency to gain him
the support of the nation. Though inexperienced, men saw in him the
future champion of parliamentary reform; and the powerful antagonist of
that aristocratic confederacy, against which his father had exerted his
talents. The star of Pitt was, in truth, in the ascendant; while that of
his rival set in gloom. Fox was returned to parliament, but it was
with some difficulty that he obtained a seat. He was a candidate for
Westminster, and had a majority on the poll over Sir Cecil Wray, but the
high-bailiff, by a scandalous partiality, refused to make a return in
his favour. Fox brought an action against the bailiff in the court of
king’s bench, and obtained considerable damages; and in the meantime,
he secured a seat for the borough of Kirkwall, in Orkney, by which he
exposed himself to the ridicule of his enemies as a person banished to
the “Ultima Thule.”
{GEORGE III. 1784–1786}
MEETING OF THE NEW PARLIAMENT.
The meeting of the new parliament took place on the 18th of May. In his
speech, the king expressed great satisfaction at meeting the house at
this time, after having recurred, in so important a moment, to the sense
of his people; and recommended to their most serious consideration
the framing of suitable provisions for the good government of our
possessions in the East Indies. The addresses in both houses contained
strong expressions of gratitude to the king for having dissolved the
late parliament; and amendments to omit these expressions, on the ground
of unanimity, were negatived by large majorities. The attention of
the house was first directed to the conduct of the high-bailiff of
Westminister, in refusing to make the return in favour of Fox; and he
was directed to attend at the bar of the house to defend his conduct. In
his defence, he said, that having ground to suspect the validity of
many votes, taken in the course of a poll of six weeks’ duration, he
had granted a scrutiny, and that he could not make the return till this
scrutiny terminated. Counsel was heard on both sides as to the legality
of his conduct; and after long pleadings, it was moved and carried,
that “the high-bailiff do proceed in the scrutiny with all possible
dispatch,” thereby justifying the unwarrantable step he had taken. The
principle of party spirit prevailed over a sense of justice, for the
scrutiny of an election is nothing more than a revision of the poll
itself, and if such revision cannot be completed before the period at
which the writ is returnable, he is bound by his office and oath to make
the return agreeably to the poll as actually taken. So the counsel on
the side of Fox argued; but the justice of the house was set aside by
the spirit of party, if not revenge.
ACTS TO PREVENT SMUGGLING, ETC.
At this time there was a deficiency of three millions a year in the
revenue of the country. This was principally owing to a failure in the
estimated produce of taxes imposed by Lord North during the war with
America. There were, however, other causes at work to produce this
deficiency, and not the least among them was the universal practice of
smuggling. This practice was, indeed, at the close of the American war,
carried on to an almost incredible extent; government being too much
employed to keep a strict watch over the trade of the country. It is
calculated that forty thousand persons were thus engaged; and Pitt
deemed it expedient to bring in a bill for the prevention of smuggling
in general, and then to propose regulations applicable to those articles
which formed its principle support. By the bill for the prevention of
smuggling, the right of seizing certain vessels with their cargoes,
under particular circumstances, was greatly extended; the building of
such vessels was prohibited; the owners of armed vessels were obliged to
procure licences; the rules respecting clearance were enlarged; and the
act of resisting his majesty’s ships and officers was made a capital
felony. In order to aid this bill, Pitt brought forward two others: one
directed against contraband trade in tea, and the other against that in
spirits. That with reference to tea was of great importance, for it was
at this time considered a staple commodity of the smuggler. In fact,
more than seven million pounds of that article were smuggled into the
country annually; while only about five millions were sold by the East
India Company. To prevent this evil, Pitt proposed to reduce the duty
upon tea from fifty to twelve and a half per cent., which was not
more than equal to the expense of smuggling. The same principle was
maintained in the bill directed against the contraband trade in spirits.
Great frauds had been committed on the distilleries at home; and Pitt
proposed a bill by which the duties payable on British spirits were
regulated and enforced; while those on foreign duties were considerably
reduced. As these reductions, and especially on the article of tea,
would occasion a great loss to the revenue, Pitt proposed to increase
the tax on windows in proportion. All these resolutions were passed,
after much debate in the commons, by large majorities; and they met with
little or no opposition in the house of lords.
THE BUDGET OF 1784.
On the 30th of June, Pitt produced what is called the budget, which
included the subject of taxation. In his speech he discussed the ways
and means for defraying the expenses of the services of the present
year; the loan; the funding a portion of the unfunded debt; and new
taxes. A loan of six millions was found requisite for the current
services of the year, besides the ordinary sources of income; and this
he proposed to throw open to public competition; the biddings being sent
in, sealed up, and afterwards opened in the presence of the governor
and deputy governor of the Bank of England. At this time the navy
and victualling bills, with the ordnance debentures, which formed a
considerable part of the unfunded debt, amounted to about fourteen
millions; nearly the half of which he proposed to fund at five per cent,
stock, and to make irredeemable for thirty years, or until twenty-five
millions of the existing funds should be extinguished. Beyond this,
there was in the market about seven millions in bills and debentures,
which bore an interest of four per cent. These bills, with the new fund
and the new loan, required an interest of nearly one million pounds
sterling; and Pitt undertook to find taxes which should produce that
sum. He proposed duties on hats, ribands, coals, gauzes, horses, linens
and calicoes, candles, bricks and tiles, paper, and hackney-coaches;
and he also proposed licences to dealers in exciseable articles, and
certificates to kill game. In commenting upon these taxes, the young
premier observed:—“It would be idle to suppose that all the taxes in
this long catalogue were unexceptionable; but the necessities of the
public leave us no option to deal otherwise than openly and fairly. The
wants of government are many; the finances of the country have been much
reduced; and it is proper to look our real situation manfully in the
face.” Pitt could speak and act the more boldly because the necessities
of the government were not of his own creation; and his manliness,
together with the ability he displayed in his financial detail, gained
for him the applause even of his most determined opponents. Fox said,
with reference to his management of the unfunded debt, that “too much
praise could not be given him.” The only tax, indeed, which met with
decided opposition, was that on coals, which was justly represented
as oppressive to the poor, and injurious to our manufactures. This
he relinquished, as he did also that on hops, which was to have been
included in the exciseable articles, introducing in their stead, taxes
on gold and silver plate, lead exported, race-horses, licences to sell
ale, and postage of letters. Pitt also introduced regulations regarding
the privilege of franking, which were calculated to increase the revenue
of the post-office. On the whole, the introduction of this budget,
though the nation was already exhausted by taxes, had the effect of
greatly increasing the youthful premier’s popularity.
PITT’S INDIA BILL.
In the midst of this popularity, Pitt brought forward his celebrated
India Bill. This may be considered under three separate heads. 1. A new
establishment at home, with powers extending over the affairs of the
East India Company. 2. Regulations to be applied to India. 3. The
erection of a court in England for the trial of offences committed in
India.
The first of these heads consisted of a board of control, which was to
be composed of six commissioners, holding the rank of privy-counsellors,
and comprising the chancellor of the exchequer and one secretary of
state; and four others holding offices of such emolument as precluded
the necessity of a salary. The members of this board were to be
appointed by the king, and removable at his pleasure; and they were
authorised to check, superintend, and control the civil and military
government, as well as the revenues of the company. It was their duty
also to inspect and countersign all the despatches transmitted by the
court of directors to the different presidencies. The directors were
enjoined to pay all due obedience to the orders of this board, touching
the civil and military government and revenues; but in case such orders
should at any time in the opinion of the directors, relate to matters
not connected with these points, they were left at liberty to appeal to
his majesty in council, whose decision was to be final. In all cases
of secrecy, and particularly such as related to peace or war with the
native powers of India, the commissioners were to have the power of
sending their orders to the local government of India, through a secret
committee of the court of directors, which committee could in this
case only be considered as the vehicle of instruction to the local
authorities of India.
The regulations applicable to India related to the government. Pitt
proposed that the government in each of the three stations should
consist of a president and counsellors; that the president of Bengal
should be governor-general; that the commander-in-chief should be one
of the council, and next to the governor-general; and that the
commander-in-chief at Madras and Bombay should take similar rank at each
of those stations. The government of Bengal was to have control over
the other presidencies, and the appointment of governors,
commanders-in-chief, and other members of the council, was to be vested
in the directors; they, together with the king, having the power of
recalling the governor-general, as well as every other person employed
by the company. All promotions, whether civil or military, were to be
made according to seniority, and in progressive succession, unless for
some urgent case to be transmitted to the directors; and each government
was empowered to apprehend all persons guilty of carrying on an illicit
correspondence, and either bring them to trial in India or send them to
England. In order to prevent ambitious projects, the supreme government
was not permitted to enter into an offensive treaty, or to make war,
without the command of the directors, against any power which had not
commenced, or given full proof of its intention to commence hostilities.
Provisions were also inserted in this bill relative to the settlement
of disputes with the Nabob of Arcot, and the redress of complaints of
injustice and oppression, exercised against the Zemindars, or great
hereditary landholders of India, who had either been dispossessed of
their lands, or subjected to exorbitant demands, by the officers of the
East India Company. This part of Pitt’s bill also regulated the ages
at which writers and cadets should be appointed, as well as the number
proper to be sent out; prohibited the acceptance of presents; and
required that all servants of the company should, after the 1st of
January, 1787, deliver an oath within two months after their arrival in
England, respecting what part of their property was, and what was not,
acquired in India.
In the third part of Pitt’s bill, he proposed that a high tribunal
should be created for the trial of Indian delinquents, which tribunal
was to consist of three judges, one from each court; of four peers, and
six members of the House of Commons, who were authorised to act without
appeal; to award, in case of conviction, fine or imprisonment; and to
declare the party convicted incapable of again serving the company. No
person, holding any office under the crown during pleasure, or who had
ever been in the Indian service could become a member of this court.
Such were the three grand features of Pitt’s India Bill. As might have
been expected, his opponents were sedulous in pointing out its defects.
Burke, who had no mean share in the composition of Fox’s India Bill, the
great outcry against which had been that it went to increase, in a most
dangerous degree, the influence of the minister, said, that Pitt’s bill,
in reality, vested in the crown an influence paramount to any that had
been proposed by the bill of his opponent. On this subject, also, Fox
remarked:—“By whom is this board of superintendants to be appointed? Is
it not by his majesty? And is not this giving power to the sovereign
for the ends of influence, and for the extension of that system of
corruption which has been so justly reprobated? The last parliament, to
their immortal honour, voted the increasing influence of the crown to
be inconsistent with public liberty. The right honourable gentleman, in
consequence of that vote, finds the influence probably unequal to the
great objects of his administration. He is therefore willing to take the
present opportunity of making his court where he knows our late doctrine
will never be acceptable; and the plain language of the whole matter now
is, that the patronage of India must be appended to the executive power
of this country, which otherwise will not be able to cany on schemes
hostile to the constitution, in opposition to the house of commons.”
Fox objected to the bill on other grounds. He remarked, that the
bill established a weak and inefficient government, by dividing
its powers—to the one board belonged the privilege of ordering and
contriving measures; to the other, that of carrying them into execution.
Theories, he said, which did not connect men with measures, were not
theories for this world: they were chimeras with which a recluse might
divert his fancy, but they were not principles en which a statesman
would found his system. He maintained, that by the negative vested in
the commissioners, the chartered rights of the company, on which stress
had been laid, were insidiously undermined and virtually annihilated.
Founded on such heterogeneous principles, how, he asked, could such a
government be other than the constant victim of internal distraction?
As for the appeal allowed from the decisions of the board of control
to the privy-council, that was only the appeal from the aggressor
transformed into the character of a judge, and was therefore in the
highest degree nugatory and ridiculous. Against the clauses of the
bill respecting the Zemindars, Fox entered his strong protest. In his
opinion they ought to be rated by a fixed rule of past periods, and
not of a vague and indefinite future inquiry. He stigmatized the
new tribunal as a screen for delinquents, and as a palpable and
unconstitutional violation of the sacred right of a trial by jury. As
no man was to be tried but on the accusation of the company or the
attorney-general, he contended, that the delinquent had only to
conciliate government in order to his remaining in perfect security. He
would venture, he said, to pronounce this part of the general system of
deception and delusion, a “bed of justice,” where justice would for ever
sleep. With regard to the East India charter, Fox insisted that it
was as much violated by this bill as by his own; but on this important
point, at least, the difference was palpable and striking; for while
Fox’s bill took away commerce from the company, the other left it
solely in their hands. By Pitt’s bill, indeed, the management of their
commercial concerns was guaranteed to them, and they were only divested
of that political power which they had abused, and of that civil
authority which for a series of years they had shown themselves to be
incompetent to exercise, Many other objections were started, and during
the progress of the bill through the house, several amendments were
moved and adopted, but its main features were preserved, and the bill
finally passed both houses with triumphant majorities. In the whole,
twenty-one new clauses were added to the bill, which were distinguished
by the letters of the alphabet; and Sheridan humourously suggested that
three other clauses should be affixed, in order, as he observed, “to
complete the horn-book of the present ministry;” The minority in the
lords, in a protest, branded the bill as a measure ineffectual in its
provisions, unconstitutional in its partial abolition of the trial by
jury, and unjust in its inquisitorial spirit. But though Pitt’s scheme
was not perfect, yet in many points of view it was preferable to that
of Fox; and even its errors were magnified by the prejudice of party
spirit.
BILL FOR THE RESTORATION OF FORFEITED ESTATES IN SCOTLAND.
The last measure which came before parliament during the present session
was a bill introduced by Mr. Dundas, for the restoration of estates in
Scotland to the heirs of those who had forfeited them in the rebellions
of 1715 and 1745. In making this proposition, Mr. Dundas declared that
it was, in his opinion, worthy of the justice and generosity of the
house. There was not one of the families comprehended in the scope of
it, he said, in which some person had not atoned for the crimes and
errors of his ancestors, by sacrificing his blood in the cause of his
country; and he declared that the sovereign had not, for a long series
of years past, a more loyal set of subjects than the Highlanders and
their chieftains. He did not, however, propose that the estates should
be freed from the claims existing against them at the time of their
forfeiture, as this, he argued, would be establishing a premium for
rebellion. Such sums, amounting to about £80,000, he suggested, should
be appropriated to public purposes; £50,000 of which he recommended
should be employed in the completion of the grand canal reaching from
the Frith of Forth to that of Clyde. This liberal measure was received
in a manner that did honour to the feelings of the house; the leaders
of both parties joining in eulogising it. The bill passed the commons
without any opposition; but when sent to the lords it met with a
most determined resistance from the restored chancellor Thurlow, who
expatiated on the ancient maxim that treason was of so deep a dye that
nothing but the total eradication of the person, name, and family out
of the community was adequate to its punishment. On a division, however,
Thurlow was left in a great minority, and the bill passed, much to the
satisfaction of the public.
PROROGATION OF PARLIAMENT.
Parliament was prorogued on the 20th of August, the king expressing his
warmest thanks to both houses for their zealous and diligent attention
to the public service. His majesty dismissed his parliament with the
satisfactory conviction that he had established a ministry to his own
mind, and that he had nothing more to fear from the coalition which had
so long disturbed his peace. At the close of the session, indeed, the
popularity of Pitt was at its height, and his power was established—a
power which remained unbroken for seventeen long and eventful years.
{GEORGE III. 1784–1786}
THE STATE OF IRELAND.
At this period Ireland was in a very disturbed state. During the year
1783, an assembly of delegates, from the volunteer corps, assembled in
the provinces of Antrim, Ulster, Leinster, and Munster, for the purpose
of consulting on measures proper to be adopted to effect a reform in
parliament, and a national convention was appointed to be held at Dublin
on the 10th of November. Such was the posture of affairs when the Irish
parliament, which had been recently elected, met on the 14th of October.
The first measure of this parliament was to vote thanks to the different
volunteer corps for their public services; after which, a resolution,
proposed by Lord Mountmorres, “that, in the present state of the
kingdom, it was expedient that there should be a session of parliament
held every year,” received the sanction of both houses.
The national convention assembled on the day appointed; and the Earl of
Charlemont, generalissimo of the volunteer corps throughout the kingdom,
was elected president. At this meeting the Bishop of Deny moved that a
committee should be appointed to digest a plan of reform. This motion
was adopted; and in a short time the committee thus reported their
opinion:—‘“That every protestant freeholder or leaseholder, possessing
a freehold or leasehold for a certain term of years, of forty shillings
value, resident in any city or borough, should be entitled to vote in
the election of member for the same that decayed boroughs should be
enabled to return representatives by an extension of franchise to the
neighbouring parishes; that the suffrages of the electors should be
taken by the sheriff or his deputies on the same day, at the respective
places of election; that pensioners of the crown, receiving their
pensions during pleasure, should be incapacitated from sitting in
parliament; that every member of parliament accepting a pension for
life, or any place under the crown, should vacate his seat; that each
member should subscribe an oath that he had, neither directly nor
indirectly, given any pecuniary or other consideration, with a view
of obtaining the suffrage of any elector; and that the duration of
parliament should not exceed the term of three years.” This report
was received with applause, and resolutions to the effect were passed
unanimously.
On the next day Mr. Flood moved, in the Irish house of commons, for
leave to bring in a bill for the more equal representation of the people
in parliament; a motion which was rejected by a large majority, as the
proposal was made at the point of the bayonet. After this an address
to the king was voted in both houses, expressive of the sense of the
blessings they enjoyed under his auspices, and assuring him that they
were determined to support inviolate the present constitution with their
lives and their fortunes.
The conduct of the Irish parliament was reported to the national
convention by Mr. Flood on the 1st of December, when a resolution was
simply passed to the effect, that they would individually carry on
such investigations as might be necessary to complete the plan of
parliamentary reform. The convention seems to have thought that they
were going too far, and that it would be better somewhat to retrace
their steps, for on the next day an address was voted to the king,
on the motion of Mr. Flood, in the name of the delegates of all the
volunteers of Ireland, expressive of their loyalty and duty; claiming
the merits of their past exertions, and imploring his majesty,
that their humble wish to have certain manifest perversions of
the parliamentary representation of that kingdom remedied by the
legislature, in some reasonable degree, might not be attributed to any
spirit of innovation, but to a sober and laudable desire to uphold the
constitution, to confirm the satisfaction of their fellow-subjects, and
to perpetuate the union of both kingdoms. On the 13th of March, in the
following year, Mr. Flood renewed his motion for parliamentary reform,
which was again rejected; and then the object was relinquished in
despair.
The people of Ireland, however, were not yet quiet. They had many
grievances which required redress; and it can form no matter of wonder
that they lifted up the voice of complaint. Their next call was for
protecting duties, to foster the infant manufactures of that country,
and to compel the inhabitants to consume the produce of native ingenuity
and industry. This subject was brought before the Irish house of commons
on the 31st of March, by Mr. Gardiner, who implored the house to copy
the conduct of England, France, and other countries in this respect; and
moved for a high duty on woollens imported into the kingdom. This motion
was rejected by a large majority; and the disappointment of the people
was now kindled into rage. So critical was the state of Dublin at this
period, that it was deemed necessary to countermand the embarkation
of several regiments destined for the East Indies, and to furnish the
garrison in that city with an extraordinary supply of powder and ball.
Before the session was closed, the people were somewhat appeased by
an address which was voted to the king, and which represented the
distressed state of the kingdom, and prayed for the establishment of a
more advantageous system of commerce between Ireland and Great Britain;
but there were still restless spirits in that unhappy country, and these
sought again to disturb the public mind. On the 7th of June, a meeting
of the aggregate body of the citizens of Dublin was convened by the
sheriffs, and in which resolutions were passed declaratory of the
right of the people of Ireland to a frequent election and an equal
representation. In an address to the people of Ireland, this meeting
proposed the election of five delegates from each county, city, and
considerable town, to meet in Dublin on the 25th of October, in national
congress. Resolutions similar to those passed by this meeting were
agreed to at a general meeting of the freeholders of the county of
Dublin, which was held on the 9th of August; and a petition was also
voted by these freeholders, praying a dissolution of parliament. These
measures met with decided opposition from the government of Ireland. The
20th of September having been fixed upon as the day for electing five
delegates to represent the city of Dublin in national congress; before
that day arrived, Mr. Fitzgibbon, the attorney-general, wrote a letter
to the sheriffs, threatening them with a prosecution if they should
take any part in the election. This menace alarmed the sheriffs, and
prevented their interference; but the delegates were chosen, and a
resolution was passed, declaring the conduct of the attorney-general to
be a violation of Magna Charta. The attorney-general filed informations
against the high-sheriffs of various counties for convening and
presiding at similar meetings; but the national congress met, and passed
several resolutions, importing that the appointment of that assembly,
and the steps that had been taken, were in conformity with the
constitution of Ireland; after which this congress adjourned to the
25th of January. On the same day that the Irish congress met, the second
session of the parliament of Ireland commenced, when Mr. Orde, secretary
to the lord-lieutenant, laid before the house a series of commercial
regulations, which had been digested during the recess into a regular
system. Two plans were formed; one of which was a system of mutual
prohibition, and the other a system of mutual admission. Mr. Orde moved
eleven propositions in conformity to the latter, which were all ratified
by a decisive majority, after much violent discussion.
MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.
{A.D. 1785}
Parliament reassembled on the 25th of January. In his speech, the king
alluded to the success which had attended the financial measures of
the last session, as an encouragement for parliament to renew the
consideration of such salutary objects; and he recommended the two
houses to apply their utmost attention to the adjustment of such points
in the commercial intercourse between this country and Ireland, as were
not yet finally arranged. In both houses the addresses were carried
without a division.
THE WESTMINSTER SCRUTINY.
The first business which engaged the attention of the house, was the
state of the Westminster scrutiny, which had now continued for eight
months, at a great expense, and only two parishes out of seven had been
gone through. It was calculated that as one of the parishes scrutinized
was a small one, it would take three years to scrutinise the whole.
Under these circumstances, the electors petitioned the house on the
subject, and the high-bailiff and his counsel were in consequence
examined at the bar of the house, touching the practicability of
proceeding with greater dispatch. The high-bailiff frankly confessed
that it would not take less than two years to finish the scrutiny; and
Mr. Welbore Ellis, now in opposition, moved that he should obey the
writ, and make a return of the precept; that is, that he should declare
those elected who stood highest on the poll. This was negatived by
one hundred and seventy-four against one hundred and thirty-five; and
another motion, of a similar tendency, moved by Colonel Fitzpatrick, at
a subsequent date, was likewise rejected, though only by a majority of
nine, the numbers being one hundred and forty-five against one hundred
and thirty-six. This small majority was ominous, inasmuch as it
indicated that there was a change in public opinion upon the subject;
and encouraged by it, on the 3rd of March, Alderman Sawbridge brought
forward the motion for the third time. Pitt, whose proceedings on
this subject reflect no credit on his feelings, moved the question of
adjournment upon this repeated motion, and had the mortification of
being left in a minority of thirty-eight; the numbers being for the
adjournment one hundred and twenty-four, and against it, one hundred and
sixty-two. After this the main question was put and carried without a
division; and on the next day Lord Hood and Mr. Fox were declared duly
returned. Yet the house, while it condemned the scrutiny as inexpedient,
still maintained its legality; for when, on the 9th of March, Mr.
Francis moved a resolution for expunging that of the 8th of June
preceding, by which it was authorised, he was left in a minority of one
hundred and thirty-seven against one hundred and forty-two. It is said
that Mr. Pitt engaged in this discreditable affair from the conviction,
that, within a reasonable time, a decided majority of legal votes would
be substantiated in favour of Sir Cecil Wray; but it would rather appear
that it was from the enmity which he bore to his rival, Fox. This,
indeed, is borne out by the debates on the subject, for the speeches of
Pitt teem with bitter invective against his opponent; which, perhaps,
may have been a leading cause in the change of sentiments that took
place among the young premier’s friends. There is in the nature of
man, enlightened by education, an utter abhorrence to the spirit of
persecution; and it must be confessed that Pitt exhibited much of that
spirit in this affair of the Westminster scrutiny. And that Fox was
looked upon in the light of a martyr is evident from the words of Pitt
himself. In one of his speeches, having accused his rival of filling his
speech with everything that was personal, inflammatory, and invidious,
he remarked:—“I am not surprised if he should pretend to be the butt
of ministerial persecution; and if, by striving to excite the public
compassion, he should seek to reinstate himself in that popularity which
he once enjoyed, but which he so unhappily has forfeited. For it is the
best and most ordinary resource of these political apostates to
court, to offer themselves to persecution for the sake of the popular
predilection and pity which usually fall upon persecuted men; it becomes
worth their while to suffer, for a time, political martyrdom, for the
sake of the canonization that awaits the suffering martyr; and I make no
doubt the right honourable gentleman has so much penetration, and at the
same time so much passive virtue about him, that he would be glad not
only to seem a poor, injured, persecuted man, but he would gladly seek
an opportunity of even really suffering a little persecution, if it be
possible to find such an opportunity.” In this extract is at once seen
the animus by which Pitt was actuated in this contest; and the light in
which the house and the public were disposed to look upon the object of
his unseeming vindictiveness. A generous conqueror never persecutes, or
exults over a fallen enemy.
PITT’S REFORM BILL.
These petty and unworthy proceedings were followed by a subject more
worthy the attention of the statesman. Pitt had twice failed in his
attempts to reform the house of commons, but, notwithstanding, he
still determined to persevere, having pledged himself “as a man and a
minister,” to promote this great cause. He renewed the subject on the
18th of April, when he brought forward a plan of reform: the specific
proposition of which was to transfer the right of election from
thirty-six rotten boroughs to the counties and great unrepresented
towns; giving a compensation in money to the owners and holders of the
rotten boroughs so disfranchised; the bill also proposed to extend the
right of voting in county elections to copyholders. It has been doubted
whether Pitt, at this time, had any sincere desire for parliamentary
reform, although he had pledged himself to exert his influence to the
utmost for securing the measure. There does not seem, however, to be any
good reason for this doubt; for it is a well-known fact that he brought
it forward, if not in direct opposition to the wishes of the king, yet
at least without his expressed approbation. Knowing the aversion which
his majesty felt to disturb this part of the constitution, he laid the
heads of his plan before his royal master, from whom he received this
honest and candid reply;—“Mr. Pitt must recollect that though I have
ever thought it unfortunate that he had early engaged in this measure,
yet I have always said, that as he was clear of its propriety, he ought
to lay his thoughts before the house; that out of personal regard to
him, I would avoid giving an opinion to any one, on the opening of the
door of parliamentary reform, except to him: therefore I am certain Mr.
Pitt cannot suspect me of influencing any person on this occasion. If
others choose, for base ends, to impute such a conduct to me, I must
bear it, as former false suggestions.” Yet, notwithstanding the king was
so cold upon the subject, Pitt brought it forward with great energy in
the house. At the same time, his speech seemed to indicate that he was
not sanguine of success, although he felt assured that the minds of men
were more enlightened upon the subject than at any former period. He
remarked:—“The number of gentlemen who are hostile to reform, are
a phalanx which ought to give alarm to any individual upon rising to
suggest such a measure. Those who, with a sort of superstitious awe,
reverence the constitution so much as to be fearful of touching even
its defects; have always reprobated every attempt to purify the
representation. They acknowledge its inequality and corruption, but in
their enthusaism for the grand fabric, they would not suffer a reformer,
with unhallowed hands, to repair the injuries which it has suffered from
time. Others, who, perceiving the deficiencies that have arisen from
circumstances, are solicitous for their amendment, yet resist the
attempt; under the argument that, when once we have presumed to touch
the constitution in one point, the awe which had heretofore kept us back
from the daring enterprise of innovation might abate, and there was no
foreseeing to what alarming lengths we might progressively go under the
mask of reformation.” In support of his bill, Pitt argued that the plan
which he proposed was coincident with the spirit of those changes which
had taken place in the exercise of the elective franchise from the
earliest ages, and not in the least allied to the spirit of innovation;
that so far back as the reign of Edward the First the franchise of
election had been constantly fluctuating; that as one borough decayed
and another flourished, the first was abolished and the second was
invested with the right; that even the representation of counties had
not been uniform; and that James the First in his proclamation for
calling his first parliament, directed that the sheriffs should not
call upon such boroughs as were ruined and decayed, to send members to
parliament. But no arguments could prevail; and Pitt, having made no use
of his ministerial influence to bring over converts to his scheme, was
doomed to suffer a signal defeat; the bill was thrown out by two hundred
and forty-eight against one hundred and seventy-four; and the premier
never ventured to bring the subject before the house again. Nay, in
a few years he even became a determined opponent of all change or
amendment in the representation. It is from this cause, chiefly, that
he is suspected of insincerity at this period: but his bosom friend,
Wilberforce, at least deemed him sincere upon the subject, for he writes
with reference to it in his diary, that Pitt had a “noble patriotic
heart;” a sentiment to which a previous private conversation gave rise.
It is in the closet, when man unbosoms himself to a friend, that his
real intentions are best discovered. No conclusion can, indeed, be drawn
upon the matter of Pitt’s sincerity from his subsequent opposition to
parliamentary reform, for many causes may have operated upon his mind
to lead him to change his line of conduct. He may have opposed it out of
deference to his majesty, or he may, after some years’ experience, have
seen that the machine, as then constituted, worked better under his
auspices than he had anticipated. Man is a creature of change: to-morrow
he may hold opinions from conviction, the very reverse of those which he
holds to-day.
PITT’S FINANCIAL MEASURES.
Early in this session, Pitt brought in three several bills for
the better auditing and examining the public accounts, and for the
regulation and reform of the public offices, all which bills passed with
great applause; though not without some stern opposition. In connexion
with this subject he mentioned, that, from an inquiry which had been
instituted into the accounts of different persons from whom the sum of
£40,000,000 was due to the exchequer, £257,000 was ready to be paid:
he also mentioned that further sums would be recovered still, as the
examination of accounts proceeded. On the 11th of April, Pitt likewise
made a communication which was at once satisfactory to the house, and
creditable to his financial abilities. In moving for an account of the
net produce of the taxes in the quarters ending January 5th and April
5th, for the two last years, he said, that the bills passed last session
for the prevention of smuggling, and the regulations adopted for the
collection and management of the different branches of revenue, had
worked so well that, together with the extension of trade and commerce,
they had already produced such an increase in the produce of the taxes
as to justify a hope that the income of the country, would, in the next
year, not only equal the expenditure, but afford a surplus, which might
be applied to the gradual liquidation of the debt. Yet with such a
prospect Pitt found himself compelled to call for more taxes from the
house. He opened the budget on the 9th of May, and in doing so he said
that the supplies which had been voted amounted to £9,737,868; and that
the ways and means fell short of that sum by about £1,000,000, which
deficiency must be made good by new taxes. Accordingly, several new
taxes were proposed; among which was a tax upon female servants,
calculated to produce £140,000, and an additional tax upon servants,
calculated to produce, in addition to the former one, about £35,000.
Pitt also proposed a tax on retail shops, calculated at £120,000 per
annum; a tax which proved particularly obnoxious, as was also that on
servants. Most of the taxes which Pitt proposed, indeed, encountered
much opposition; but the bills enacting them were carried after several
divisions, with, however, some modifications, in order to obviate some
of the principal objections. The modifications introduced were likely to
render them less productive than Pitt originally expected; and to supply
this deficiency, taxes on attorneys and on warrants were imposed; the
game duty was increased, and coach-makers were obliged to take out a
license. One great cause which led to these new imposts proceeded from
the remaining part of the floating arrear of debt, consisting of navy
bills and ordnance debentures, at five per cent, stock, the interest of
which amounted to about £400,000 per annum. Pitt was led to the adoption
of this measure because it was found that these bills and debentures had
a great effect in depressing the public securities.
THE AFFAIRS OF IRELAND.
From the time that Pitt first became prime minister, the state of
Ireland had occupied his anxious attention. In 1784 the Duke of Rutland
had been appointed lord-lieutenant of that country, and no important
step was taken by him in his government without Pitt’s advice and
direction. Under the guidance of the youthful premier, the duke had
been enabled to check the formidable spirit of turbulence and innovation
which had recently exhibited itself, and the Irish people were
apparently satisfied with his government. It was manifest, however, that
there was still an under-current of disaffection, and that nothing but a
complete change in the commercial relations of the country could afford
effectual relief to the people, and render them permanently tranquil.
Under these circumstances, therefore, Pitt spent a considerable time in
deliberation with influential and intelligent persons respecting a new
plan of commercial intercourse between the two kingdoms; and notice of
his intention was given to the large trading or manufacturing towns,
and a committee of privy-counsellors was appointed to receive their
information or suggestions relative to such an object. The resolutions
which Mr. Orde moved in the Irish parliament, as noticed in a previous
page, were the result of these conferences, and these resolutions being
transmitted to the king, accompanied with an address, Pitt brought them
before the British parliament. In doing so, he observed, that from the
revolution up to a recent period, the system of commerce established
between the two countries, had been to make Ireland subservient to
the interests and opulence of England. Ireland, he said, had not been
suffered to profit either by the bounties of nature or the skill of her
own inhabitants. Some relaxation of this system, he admitted, had taken
place at an early period of the present century; more had been done in
the reign of George the Second; and within a few years, Ireland had been
permitted to export her produce and manufactures, and to have a share
of the colonial trade. At this moment, however, he remarked, the
intercourse between England and Ireland remained on the old footing,
except on trivial points; no material alteration having been made in the
exportation of British manufactures to Ireland, or the importation
of Irish manufactures into Great Britain. To this he attributed the
dissatisfaction which existed in Ireland; suggestions having been
made for subjecting our produce and manufactures to what were termed
“protecting duties,” for the purpose of preventing their introduction
into the country. He continued, that having abandoned the old system of
commercial domination, and having wisely and justly put the Irish people
into a position of profiting by the gifts of nature and the productions
of skill, no one could wish or expect that the commerce between the two
kingdoms should remain in its original condition. There were, indeed, he
argued, but two possible systems for countries situated in relation to
each other, like England and Ireland: one of these was to render the
smaller completely subordinate and subservient to the greater; and the
other was to allow to each a just participation of advantages. This
system of equality, however, in which there was to be a community of
benefits, he said, demanded likewise a community of burdens. Hitherto
there had been gratuitous surrenders of advantages, without looking to
the slightest compensation; in which respect his system differed from
those of his predecessors, his being founded on a plan of reciprocal
benefits. Pitt then proceeded to explain his system, as contained in the
resolutions transmitted from Ireland, and which consisted of these three
general heads; first, he proposed that all foreign articles imported
directly into Great Britain, should hereafter be importable under
suitable provisions through the medium of Ireland; secondly, that the
produce or manufacture of either country should be importable into the
other, under a proper regulation of countervailing duties, drawbacks,
and bounties; and thirdly, that Ireland, in return for these bounties,
should contribute to the expense of maintaining the colonies, and
protecting the commerce of the empire; her contribution being of such a
nature as to keep pace with the gain derived from the new system. Having
thus stated the nature of his plan, Pitt moved a preliminary resolution
“for finally adjusting the commercial intercourse between the two
kingdoms; admitting Ireland to a participation in the commercial
advantages of England, and securing in return a permanent aid from that
country, in the protection of the commercial interests of the empire.”
The consideration of this subject was deferred for a week, in order
to give time for the reception of accounts and estimates; and it was
intimated that a further delay would be acceded to if there should be a
sufficient reason for its proposal.
At first, the vastness of this plan seemed to keep the public mind in a
state of suspense. For nearly a month, indeed, after its introduction,
no indications of serious or determined opposition were discernible,
although Fox, when the subject was first started, pointed out many
objections to its provisions. Endeavours, however, were soon made by
the opponents of Pitt’s administration to convince the public that the
mercantile and manufacturing interests of England were intended to be
sacrificed to those of Ireland; and at length great apprehensions and
jealousies were created in the commercial world. Petition after petition
was presented against it; every one being led into the belief that
Pitt’s bill would ruin his own particular branch of trade. So great was
the outcry raised against it, that the house resolved to examine the
merchants and manufacturers at their own bar; and two months
were occupied in hearing evidence on the subject. In the end, the
anti-liberal feeling which prevailed compelled Pitt to subjoin a variety
of restrictive clauses, binding Ireland to adopt whatever navigation
laws might be hereafter enacted by the British parliament; prohibiting
the importation of any West Indian commodities, not the produce of our
own colonies, into Ireland, or thence into Great Britain; and forbidding
Ireland to trade to any country beyond the Cape of Good Hope and the
Straits of Magellen, so long as the charter of the East India Company
should be in existence. The bill, with even these restrictions, did
not pass without great opposition and warm discussions; some members
maintaining that Pitt was giving too little, and others too much to the
sister kingdom. It was carried up to the lords on the 30th of May, and
various amendments were there made, which were subsequently adopted by
the commons; and on the 29th of July an address was presented to the
king by both houses, acquainting his majesty with the steps which had
been taken in this affair: adding, that “it remained for the parliament
of Ireland to judge of the conditions, according to their wisdom and
discretion, as well as of all other parts of the settlement proposed to
be established by mutual consent.” Parliament now adjourned to a
distant period; and on the 30th of September it was prorogued by royal
proclamation.
In Ireland, Pitt’s bill was doomed to meet with a more powerful
opposition than it had met with in England. This opposition arose from
the restrictive clauses which the minister had been compelled, by the
clamour of the merchants and manufacturers, to introduce. Thus the
provision respecting the navigation laws was considered an infringement
on the legislative independence of Ireland; while the appropriation of
the surplus hereditary revenue, and the prohibition of trade to the East
Indies, were represented as reducing the country to a state of slavery.
All the alterations and additions were, indeed, denounced by the Irish
people; and numerous petitions were presented against the bill. The
strong feeling which existed against it was exhibited in the Irish
parliament, when, on the 12th of August, Mr. Orde, the secretary of the
lord-lieutenant, moved for leave to bring in a corresponding bill. This
motion was carried; but it was only by am majority of nineteen,
which was equivalent to a defeat; and a few days afterwards, when the
secretary moved the first reading and printing of the bill, he declared
that he should proceed no further with it during the present session.
The failure of this plan was a severe mortification to Pitt, who
had laboured for nearly twelve months in perfecting it as far as
its complicated nature would allow; but he looked forward with great
confidence to a change of sentiment, which he anticipated would take
place at no very distant period. Had Ireland accepted it, she might have
avoided many of those evils which she was subsequently called upon to
endure; for it would have prepared the way for the great measure of the
union, which, when it took place, was attended with much corruption and
violence. But it was the tendency which the bill had to effect or bring
about this consummation, that chiefly gave rise to the long and loud
outcry against it. Grattan denominated it “an incipient and creeping
union,” in which light it was looked upon, and hence abhorred, by the
Irish people. On its abandonment great joy was exhibited in Ireland;
public illuminations were held in all the populous towns, as though
the people had obtained some great victory. Thus this bill, which was
originally intended to communicate solid and lasting advantages to both
countries, had the effect of rousing commercial jealousies, awakening
national prejudices, and of greatly disturbing the public tranquillity;
a singular fate, and one which shows the folly and the madness of the
bad passions of human nature.
{GEORGE III. 1784–1786}
CONTINENTAL AFFAIRS.
At this time Holland was suffering greatly from the effects of the
American war. Its finances were embarrassed; its colonies were, for
the most part, in the hands of the French; and the country was torn to
pieces by intestine divisions. Encouraged by these circumstances, their
neighbours and rivals, the Belgians, sought to make Ostend the centre
of a great trade, and a place of export and import to and from the East
Indies. Seeing their helpless condition, indeed, the Emperor Joseph
threatened the very existence of the United Provinces as an independent
nation. Ever since the conclusion of the war of succession, the
fortresses of the Austrian Netherlands had been deposited in the
hands of the Dutch, and garrisoned by them, for the double purpose of
defending the Netherlands and Holland, and of forming a bulwark against
the inroads of the French. These were secured to them by the barrier
treaty; but as early as the year 1781, the Emperor Joseph had determined
to do away with this treaty, and to take possession of these fortresses;
alleging that the Dutch misapplied the money which he was bound to pay
for their support; that they had shamefully surrendered some in the war
of 1741, and were allowing the rest to fall into decay; and that they
left thin and defective garrisons in them. Accordingly, when the Dutch
had committed a sort of political suicide, by sacrificing their old
alliance with England, and uniting their forces with those of the House
of Bourbon in defence of the Americans, the Emperor Joseph, who was the
only real guardian of the barrier treaty, demanded precise accounts
of the revenues of the barrier, and of the sums expended on the
fortifications. This demand was accompanied with threats; and the
States-general, yielding to necessity, withdrew the Dutch garrisons from
the barrier; and Joseph began to dismantle the fortresses and sell the
materials. He had scarcely begun this work, when the States-general
felt great apprehensions for the frontiers of their own provinces; and
measures were adopted for putting their own fortresses along the Scheldt
into a state of defence. At the same time, the people of Holland were
furiously excited by these events; and the Orange party pointed to the
open barrier and the rising port of Ostend, as proofs of the mischiefs
brought by the French party upon the country in renouncing the alliance
with Great Britain. Neither the return of peace with England nor the
mediation of Frederic the Great of Prussia could allay the animosities
existing between the two parties; and encouraged by them, the Emperor
Joseph advanced sundry new claims, and assumed a tone of haughty
dictation towards the States-general. Thus he claimed possession
and sovereignty to the city and country of Maestricht, and the free
navigation of the Scheldt; the latter of which claims was made in
order to re-elevate Antwerp to her ancient commercial importance. The
States-general, alarmed at his menacing attitude, during the year 1784,
sent two plenipotentiaries to Brussels, in order to treat with the
emperor’s agents for an amicable arrangement; but the very night after
their arrival some Austrian troops entered the territories of the Dutch
republic, and took possession of Fort Lillo; while others crossed the
frontiers at another point, and pulled down the Dutch flag from the
custom-house. The Dutch were alarmed and enraged at these aggressions;
and troops were ordered to Maestricht and to the different garrisons of
the Scheldt, in order to protect them from the enemy. Fresh disputes,
however, arose between the states and the stadtholder concerning the
rights, or the limits of their respective powers, so that the movement
of these troops was greatly retarded. The only refuge which the Dutch
had seemed to be in the French; and they implored the mediation of Louis
XVI. between them and the emperor, who was his wife’s brother. Louis
made a favourable reply to this request, but in the mean time the breach
had become wider. Finding that the navigation of the Scheldt was not
readily conceded, the emperor Joseph was resolved to bring the question
to issue. A vessel, manned by Flemings, was dispatched by him down that
river, with orders to pass the Dutch fort at New Lillo, and not to lower
its flag or submit to the search of the guard-ship stationed there,
except by compulsion. This vessel was allowed to pass, but a similar
experiment was afterwards made, and the Dutch this time fired a gun
over her, and sent officers on board to make the search. The emperor now
insisted upon his right to the sovereignty of the whole of the Scheldt,
from Antwerp to the sea, and he further claimed a free navigation and
uninterrupted commerce to and in both the East and West Indies. At the
same time, Joseph prepared two armed vessels to assert the right claimed
in the Scheldt, and to provoke an open act of hostility. These vessels
were to proceed, one from Antwerp to the sea, and the other from the sea
to Antwerp, and the vessel that descended was attacked by a Dutch armed
cutter, and fell into the hands of the Dutch. War now seemed inevitable.
On hearing of this event, the emperor recalled his ambassador from the
Hague, broke up the negociations at Brussels, and marched an army of
60,000 men from the Austrian dominions to the Netherlands This army did
not arrive at its place of destination however, till it was winter, and
as the Dutch had broken down a dyke, in order to prevent its advance,
instead of beginning hostilities on their arrival, the Austrians went
into winter-quarters. During the winter, little or nothing was done,
either in war or negociation, and when the spring arrived, it became
known that the emperor was negociating for the exchange of the
sovereignty of the Low Countries for the electorate of Bavaria. In this
scheme he was favoured by his great ally, the Czarina Catherine, but
Frederic the Great of Prussia immediately formed a confederation among
the princes of Germany, including the King of England, as elector of
Hanover, to oppose, and defeat it. For some time the emperor seemed
resolved to persevere in his designs, and to brave this hostile league;
but he soon formed other projects, and finding that he could not rely
on the assistance of the Czarina of Russia, and that the Bavarians were
hostile to his rule, he forewent his intention. In the meantime, the
Dutch had concluded a commercial league and close alliance with France,
and, soon after, the French ministers went actively to work as mediators
between them and the emperor. Négociations were carried on during the
summer, and in September, after the deputies of the States-General
had apologised for the insult offered to the emperor’s flag, when he
attempted to force the navigation of the Scheldt, preliminary articles
were signed at Paris. A definitive treaty was signed in November, by
which the emperor’s sovereignty over that river, from Antwerp to the
limits of Saftingen in Flanders was recognized; but from that point to
the sea, it was guaranteed to the States. The free navigation of
Antwerp was thus frustrated. The emperor also renounced his claims
to Maestricht, but the States agreed to surrender the forts Lillo and
Liefkenshoek, and to make compensation in money to his imperial majesty
for giving up Maestricht, and to his Netherland subjects for the
damages they had sustained by the defensive inundations. Several mutual
concessions were also made of villages and districts, so as to give each
party a better frontier, and it was agreed that neither of them should
possess forts or batteries within cannon shot of the limits of each
other’s territories. Two days after this treaty was signed, the compact
between the French and Dutch was concluded, and it was ratified on
Christmas day. Thus this quarrel, which threatened at one time to lead
to another European war, was happily settled; but Holland was still rent
to pieces by faction.