George III.
Pitt And The French Revolution.
(1783-1801).
I have endeavored to analyze the far distant questions, which for
a long time agitated the English nation, and I now return to the
events more directly bearing on its internal life and policy. I
encounter at the outset, with profound satisfaction, that wise,
able, and powerful minister, who has ever remained the type of a
great statesman in a free country. His history is that of his
country, of her glory as well as of her misfortunes; he lived for
her, and died when he believed her vanquished, without carrying
into the tomb any presentiment of final victory and noble reward
of his indefatigable efforts.
William Pitt was scarcely twenty-four years of age, when he
refused to accept the power offered him by George III. He
determined, upon the formation of the coalition ministry of North
and Fox, that he would not ally himself with either party, but
would hold himself in reserve and act with that party which
appeared to him to be in the right. Before the end of the
session, Pitt found himself at the head of the opposition by his
own judgment, as well as by the spontaneous movement of public
opinion, openly and justly adverse to the alliance of the Whigs
and Tories,--the partisans and the adversaries of American
independence.
{338}
The affairs of India were upon a hazardous and uncertain footing;
the ministers of the coalition had nevertheless resolved to
radically change the administration of that country, by the
formation of a Council of seven persons, having authority to
appoint and to dismiss all agents, and to administer the
government at their will, regardless of the charters of the East
India Company and its established rights. It was in consequence
of a necessity that each day became more and more urgent, that
Mr. Fox employed his powerful arguments against the disorders and
abuses which reigned in the administration of India. "What is a
charter?" impudently asked Attorney-General Lee; "it is only a
piece of parchment, with a seal of wax hanging from one of the
corners." All English regard for acquired rights and precedents,
revolted at this cynical remark. "Necessity is the argument of
tyrants, and the law of slaves," said Pitt.
The members of the new Indian council were all intimate friends
of the coalition. "The bill upon the Indian question which Fox
has presented, will be decisive, one way or the other, for or
against the ministry," wrote Pitt to his friend the Duke of
Rutland. "I thoroughly believe that the measure is the boldest
and most unconstitutional that has ever been attempted; since it
throws, by a single blow, in spite of all charters and contracts,
an immense influence and patronage in the East into the hands of
Charles Fox,--in power or out of power. I believe that this bill
will meet with much opposition. The ministry have risked all on a
venture upon which they will probably be defeated."
All the efforts of the opposition in the House of Commons failed.
The Indian bill passed by a large majority. Burke, eager already
to pursue those crimes and abuses which he was one day to
overwhelm with the thunders of his eloquence, gave his support to
the bill. He delivered in the house a noble eulogy on that
friend, from whom he was one day to separate himself with so much
applause. Said he, "Fox is traduced and abused for his supposed
motives.
{339}
He will remember that obloquy is a necessary ingredient in the
composition of all true glory: he will remember that it was not
only in the Roman customs, but it is in the nature and
constitution of things, that calumny and abuse are essential
parts of triumph. He is now on a great eminence, where the eyes
of mankind are turned to him. He may live long, he may do much;
but here is the summit: he never can exceed what he does this
day. He has faults, but they are faults that, though they may in
a small degree tarnish the lustre, and sometimes impede the march
of his abilities, have nothing in them to extinguish the fire of
great virtues. In those faults there is no mixture of deceit, of
hypocrisy, of pride, of ferocity, of complexional despotism, or
want of feeling for the distresses of mankind. His are faults,
which might exist in a descendant of Henry IV. of France, as they
did exist, in that Father of his country."
The House of Lords was less inclined to reject the bill than Pitt
had believed. "As much as I abhor tyranny under any form," said
Lord Thurlow, "I oppose energetically this strange attempt to
destroy the equilibrium of our Constitution. I desire to see the
crown respected and powerful; but if the present bill should
pass, it will be no longer worthy of the support of a man of
honor." The ex-chancellor, boldly facing the Prince of Wales, who
at this time was Mr. Fox's personal friend and admirer, added:
"In fact, the king will take the crown from his own head, and
place it upon that of Mr. Fox."
George III. was more courageous than prudent, and more occupied
with the rights of the crown than with parliamentary privileges.
He charged Lord Temple to make it known in the house, that he
"regarded all those who voted for the Indian bill, not only as
unfriendly, but also as enemies." The mission had its effect; the
adjournment of the measure was voted.
{340}
The Commons, in their turn, offended by the royal intervention,
censured openly those who had provoked it. The struggle between
the two houses increased. On the night of the 18th of December,
1783, Mr. Fox and Lord North received orders to surrender their
seals of office. The following day, as Parliament sat agitated
and expectant, there entered the House of Commons a young member,
Mr. Pepper Arden, who at once offered a resolution proposing to
convoke the electors of the borough of Appleby, in order to elect
a new representative in place of the very Hon. William Pitt, who
had just accepted the post of First Lord of the Treasury and
Chancellor of the Exchequer. The move was so bold that at first
it excited only incredulity and pleasantry. The opposition
supposed that the young minister, finding himself in a minority
in the House of Commons, would call for a dissolution. "No one
will admit," said Fox, "that such a prerogative ought to be used,
solely to serve the purposes of an ambitious young man. As for
me, I declare in the face of this house, if the dissolution takes
place, and they do not give good and solid reasons for it, I will
pledge myself, if I have the honor to sit in the new Parliament,
to propose a serious inquiry into this affair, and to compel
those who have proposed it to render an account."
Pitt, however, was wiser and bolder than his adversaries
anticipated; he resolved to allow the country time to gain
confidence in his abilities; to the passions excited by the
contest, time to betray their motives and their consequences. He
had great difficulty in forming his cabinet. Lord Temple, who
accepted the office of Secretary of State, soon resigned, through
spite and personal caprice. The Dukes of Rutland and Richmond,
Lord Gower, Lord Thurlow and Dundas had nevertheless consented to
join the ministry.
{341}
The young chief resolutely faced the struggle. The houses were to
reassemble on the 12th of January, 1784. "Do not quit your house
nor dismiss a single servant before you see the result of the
12th," wrote Fox to Lord Northington. "Mr. Pitt is able to do
whatever he wishes during the recess," said the friends of Fox.
On the 30th of December, the new Premier wrote to his mother,
that he trusted she believed that it was not from choice that he
had so long kept silence; in general, he said, things were more
satisfactory than they appeared; and when one was uncertain
regarding a result, the conviction that one was not wrong, was
sometimes sufficient, especially when there was nothing better;
there was besides a certain satisfaction in hoping for something
more.
The first effort of the opposition tended to prevent the
dissolution. Fox boldly contested the right to dissolve, in the
midst of a session. Pitt sustained the attack, with a lofty and
courageous boldness; he had no intention, he said, to counsel the
king to dissolve, but he was not able to pledge himself never to
give an advice that might become necessary. Accused of having
used secret influences, he responded with disdain, that he had
not come there through back-stairs influences, but when sent for
by the king, had simply obeyed orders; he had used no secret
influences, and he trusted that his integrity would be sufficient
to preserve him from this danger: "I have neither meanness
enough," said he, fixing his eyes on the opposition, "to act
under the concealed influence of others, nor hypocrisy to
pretend, where the measures of an administration, in which I had
share, were blamed, that they were measures not of my advising;
and this is the only answer I shall ever deign to make on the
subject."
{342}
Pitt was beaten at the outset upon a parliamentary question, and
again when he presented the bill which he had substituted, for
the project planned by his adversaries for the government of
India. The council which he proposed was to have no share of the
patronage. "My intention is," said he, "to institute a council of
political control, in place of a council of political influence."
General Conway accused the cabinet of corrupt practices in the
country. Pitt interrupted him: "I have the right," said he, "to
summon the very honorable General to specify a case where the
agents of the ministers have overrun the country, practising
corruption. These are assertions that ought not to be made unless
one is able to prove them. As for my honor, I intend to remain
the only judge of that; I have at least the same advantage over
the honorable general that the young Scipio had over the veteran
Fabius: _Si mulla allia re, modestia certe et temperando
linguæ adolescens senem vicero._"
A certain dissatisfaction began already to manifest itself among
the opposing majority. The violence of Fox had surpassed all
bounds; in the opinion of the country, it counterbalanced the
recent violence of the king. The young minister gained ground; a
proof of his rare disinterestedness had impressed the minds of
the people most favorably. Sir Edward Walpole, youngest son of
the great minister, had just died. He held the clerkship of
Pells, a life sinecure, which was worth £3000 per year. Pitt had
no fortune; his friends urged him to appropriate this revenue.
The minister refused, and profited by this conjuncture to provide
for Col. Barré, who previously had from the Rockingham Ministry a
pension of ^3,200. Barré renounced his pension and became clerk
of the Pells. "I avow," said Lord Thurlow, some weeks later, in
the House of Lords, "I had the baseness to counsel Mr. Pitt to
appropriate this office, which had so honorably fallen to him,
and I believe that it will not be to my discredit, since so many
high in authority have done likewise."
{343}
Some independent members made advances to Pitt; they had
conceived vain projects of conciliation: they failed. A struggle
to the death had begun. "The question was," said Dr. Johnson,
"who should govern England: the sceptre of George III. or the
tongue of Charles Fox?" Two addresses, begging him to dismiss his
ministers, were successively sent to the king.
Fox was vanquished in advance, and by his own fault; he had
attacked that equilibrium of the Constitution, dear to all good
citizens, and to honest men who are not irrevocably bound in the
dangerous bonds of party spirit. He threatened to suspend the
supplies, and proposed to limit to two months the duration of the
mutiny act, usually voted for a year. In vain did he employ, in
order to defend his conduct, all the marvellous resources of his
eloquence. A great remonstrance to the king, that he had prepared
with care, passed by the majority of a single voice. The supply
and the mutiny bills were passed without difficulty. "The enemy
seems to be upon its back," wrote Pitt to the Duke of Rutland, on
the 10th of March, 1784; and to his mother on the 16th, he wrote,
"I regard our actual situation as a triumph in comparison with
what it was. My joy is doubled by the thought that it extends
even to you, and gives you satisfaction."
The moment to make an appeal to the country had finally come.
After three months of courageous and bold patience, Pitt
counselled the king to dissolve parliament. When the writs of
convocation were about to be issued, the great seal had
disappeared; it has never been known by whom or for what purpose
the theft was committed In twenty-four hours the loss was
repaired, as it had been after the flight of King James II., who
had thrown his great seal into the Thames.
{344}
On the 24th of March, 1784, the king presented himself at the
House of Lords, and said: "After having well considered the
present situation of affairs and the extraordinary circumstances
which have produced it, I have decided to put an end to this
session of Parliament. I feel that it is my duty towards the
Constitution and the country, to make an appeal to the good sense
of my people, as soon as possible, by convoking a new
Parliament."
Never were elections more enthusiastic, never was success more
complete than that of the cabinet. One hundred and sixty friends
of Fox lost their seats. His own election at Westminster was for
a long time uncertain. Neither his resolution nor his presence of
mind deserted him. "The bad news spreads on all sides," wrote he
to one of his friends; "but it seems to me that misfortunes, when
they crowd in upon us, should have the effect of increasing our
courage instead of intimidating it."
The electoral contest was prolonged at Westminster for forty
days. The Prince of Wales appeared on the hustings as a partisan
of Fox, and the first ladies of the Whig party, the beautiful
Duchess of Devonshire at their head, lavished their smiles upon
the electors, for their votes. The majority for the great orator
was left a matter of doubt; fraudulent practises had, it was
charged, been employed, and the High Sheriff Corbet refused to
make an official proclamation of the result, without a
Parliamentary investigation. Fox was nevertheless assured of a
seat. Sir Thomas Dundas had already named him for the borough of
Kirkwell, of which he had the disposal.
Before the dissolution, the king had strengthened in the House of
Lords the number of the partisans of Mr. Pitt, by three
elevations to the peerage; following the elections, he manifested
anew his firm resolution to support his minister by creating
seven new peers. Henceforth the sovereign and the country were in
accord; the opening of the session proved clearly the ascendancy
of the minister.
{345}
The great financial measures which Pitt had prepared were voted
by large majorities: they were new as well as daring. The imposts
upon tea and alcohol were lowered, in the hope of destroying
contraband trade. New imposts and a new loan, largely offered to
the public, re-established the equilibrium of the budget.
"However painful may be my task to-day," said the minister, "the
necessity of the country forbidding all hesitation, I confide in
the good sense and patriotism of the English people. As minister
of the finances, I have adopted this motto: To conceal nothing
from the public." The bill upon the administration in India
passed without great effort, as well as the measure of Dundas for
the restitution to the legitimate owners, of all the property
confiscated during the rebellion of 1745. The proposition of
Alderman Sawbridge for parliamentary reform was rejected. Pitt
remained faithful to his convictions: he voted on that occasion
with the minority, promising to renew the question himself during
the next session.
Parliament met on the 25th of January, 1785. Its first business
was to consider the alleged frauds in the election of Fox at
Westminster. The constitutional authority was insufficient, and
the two parties employed every resource of chicanery. The
illustrious adversaries freely made use of reproaches and
insults. Fox at this time was large and robust; his black hair
always in disorder, yet profusely powdered; cordial and frank
with his friends, greatly enjoying life, ever ready for all
material or intellectual pleasures, brilliantly and powerfully
eloquent, without care or preparation; attacking each adversary
in his turn, and solely occupying himself in demolishing him.
{346}
Pitt's health was delicate; he was tall and slim, a little lofty
in his manners as well as in his mind; confiding with his
intimate friends, but reserved and cold with most of his
partisans. He had from infancy studied the art of eloquence; not
that sweeping and impassioned eloquence that distinguished Lord
Chatham, and that the illustrious father sought to impart to his
young son, as when placing him before him on a table, he cried:
"Do you see the scoundrels who are there before you, and who wish
to hang you? Defend thyself, William, defend thyself!" The
eloquence of Pitt was naturally powerful. Lucid, forcible,
convincing, perfect in expression as well as in arrangement, it
left in the minds of his contemporaries the impression of an
incontestable superiority over the most brilliant orators of his
time, over Burke himself as well as over Sheridan.
Pitt was beaten upon the question of the election at Westminster.
Lord North and his friends gained an equal victory on the
question of parliamentary reform. Moderate and restrained in its
application, it attacked nevertheless the principle of close
boroughs, and intended to increase the representation of the
cities. Fox voted for the measure, although it did not meet his
entire approval. The day had not yet arrived when the force of
public opinion would compel the members of the House of Commons
to vote against their own rights and titles. Pitt felt this, and
did not pursue his project. After a brilliant and obstinate
discussion, and in consequence of the national and parliamentary
jealousies of Ireland, he was also compelled to withdraw the bill
regarding commercial intercourse between the two countries.
Fox declared himself the irreconcilable enemy of free exchange.
The Irish Parliament was unnecessarily alarmed regarding its
legislative independence. "I do not wish to barter English
commerce against the slavery of Ireland," said Mr. Grattan, "that
is not the price I wish to pay; that is not the merchandise I
wish to buy."
{347}
The defeat of his liberal measures in favor of Ireland, was a
great disappointment to Mr. Pitt: he had just carried, with great
success, his bill for the establishment of a sinking fund placed
under control of Parliament. At the end of the session of 1786,
which is memorable for the opening of the great and celebrated
trial of Warren Hastings, the minister was engaged in negotiating
a commercial treaty with France. Scarcely had Parliament
re-assembled, when the measure was violently attacked. "I do not
contend," said Fox, "that France is, and ought to remain, the
irreconcilable enemy of England, and that it is impossible to
experience a secret desire of living amicably with that kingdom.
It is possible, but scarcely probable. I not only doubt her good
intentions toward us, at this time, but I do not believe in them.
France is naturally the political enemy of Great Britain; in
concluding with us a commercial treaty, she wishes to tie our
hands, and so prevent us from forming an alliance with any other
power."
Pitt judged better and more accurately those international
questions which were destined so soon to disturb the peace of the
world. In advance, and protesting in the name of eternal justice
against the violent struggle that the unloosing of human passions
would compel him to sustain against revolutionary France, whether
anarchical or absolute, he declared, with indignation, that his
mind revolted against the idea that any nation could be the
unalterable foe of another; it had no foundation in experience or
history; it was a libel on the constitution of political society;
and situated as England was, opposite France, it was highly
important for the good of the two countries to put an end to that
constant enmity that has falsely been said to be the foundation
of the true sentiments of the two nations.
{348}
The treaty, he insisted, tended to improve the facilities for
prosecuting war and at the same time also retarded its approach.
The treaty was signed, notwithstanding the bitter reproaches of
Sir Philip Francis, who accused Pitt of destroying with his hands
the work of his illustrious father. "The glory of Lord Chatham is
founded on the resistance he made to the united power of the
House of Bourbon. The present minister has taken the opposite
road to fame, and France, the object of every hostile principle
in the policy Lord Chatham's, is the _gens amicissima_ of
his son."
To the difficulties which Mr. Pitt's financial measures
encountered, were added the internal embarrassments of the
country. The prince was passionately attached to the opposition.
He had sustained Fox in his contest against the royal
prerogative; with much more reason all his influence had been
exerted against the cabinet of Mr. Pitt. The prince,
nevertheless, needed the co-operation of the king as well as of
the minister. Besides the serious annoyances which his debts cost
him, he had aggravated his situation by his secret marriage
(December 21st, 1783), with Mrs. Fitzherbert, a young Catholic
widow, contrary to the law, which interdicted to princes any
union not having the royal assent. The religion of Mrs.
Fitzherbert added another difficulty to the situation.
Fox had sincerely and honestly disapproved of the conduct of the
prince, and had also warned him that it would be impossible to
keep the secret. When his apprehensions were realized, and when
pamphlets as well parliamentary allusions, compelled the friends
of the prince to speak out. Fox accepted the disagreeable duty of
denying a fact of which he had grave doubts.
{349}
"I deny absolutely that there is any truth in this marriage,"
said he. "It not only would be illegal, but it has never taken
place. It is a monstrous calumny, a miserable calumny, a low,
malicious falsehood." Do you speak with authority, [he] was
asked? "Yes," responded Fox, "with direct authority." The
pecuniary affairs of the prince were regulated by the House of
Commons; his debts were paid, without discussion. Pitt had
obtained, with great difficulty, a message from the king,
recommending to the house the request of his son.
Everywhere the same firm and elevated principles, governmental as
well as liberal, inspired the conduct of Mr. Pitt. He had voted
against the abolition of the test act, demanded by the
Dissenters, because he believed the time was not propitious;
asserting, however, that he was favorable to the principles of
the measure. Pre-occupied by the disgraceful state of the English
prisons, he sent to New South Wales an expedition which laid the
foundation of the penal colony of Botany Bay. Finally, and above
all, he joined his friend, Wilberforce, in his noble efforts for
the abolition of the slave trade. Upon this question of humanity
and justice, Burke and Fox joined with their illustrious
adversary. "I have no scruple in declaring that the slave trade
ought to be, not regulated, but abolished," said Mr. Fox. "I have
thoroughly studied the question, and I had the intention of
presenting some remarks thereupon, but I rejoice to see the
matter in the hands of the honorable representative from the
county of York, rather than in my own. I sincerely believe it
will there have more weight, authority, and, chances of success."
Mr. Fox was right in rendering this homage to the pure and
disinterested virtue of Wilberforce. In the midst of the
brilliant excitements of his life, Fox had neither the leisure
nor the ardor of conviction, necessary to undertake and
accomplish the charitable and holy work to which Wilberforce and
his Christian friends had consecrated their lives.
{350}
External troubles for a moment threatened the uncertain peace;
the grave dissatisfaction existing between the stadtholder
William V., cousin of King George III., and the Dutch patricians,
had come to an open rupture, and the Princess of Orange was
publicly insulted. Her brother Frederick William II. of Prussia,
marched troops upon the territory of the republic. The feeble
government of Louis XVI. limited itself to a manifesto in favor
of the States-General. England prepared to sustain the
stadtholder, but the Prussian soldiers proved sufficient to
intimidate the patriots in Holland. The Prince of Orange made a
triumphant entry to the Hague; an offensive and defensive
alliance was concluded by England with Holland and Prussia. The
Czar and the Sultan had taken up arms. The King of Sweden,
Gustavus III., invaded Russia. The internal embarrassments and
troubles of France prevented her from interfering in any
quarrels. England was strong and powerful; she had firmly
established her alliances in Europe, and at home the power of
Pitt seemed founded upon the strongest basis. Mr. Fox,
discouraged, and awaiting better chances of success, departed for
Italy. A sad and unexpected event suddenly overturned all hopes
and all expectations. After a brief but severe illness, King
George III. totally lost his reason.
Already, in his youth, a feeble attack of mental trouble had
excited grave fears, and necessitated a project of a regency; the
king himself comprehended the import of the symptoms that he
felt. On the 3d of November, 1788, during a ride on horseback, he
encountered his son the Duke of York, and said to him, sadly:
"Would to God that I might die, for I am going to be mad!"
{351}
Physicians attributed the malady of the king to an excess of work
and royal pre-occupations; his habits had always been regular,
his life had been almost patriarchial in its simplicity; his
health, nevertheless, was profoundly shattered. Consternation
reigned at Windsor. "That which is most to be feared," wrote Pitt
to Dr. Tomline, his intimate friend, the Bishop of Lincoln, "is
the effect upon his reason. If this lasts long it will lead to a
crisis the most difficult and delicate that one can imagine, when
it shall be necessary to provide for continuing the government.
Some weeks will pass, nevertheless, before it becomes necessary
to come to a decision, but the interval will be full of
uneasiness." The direction of the royal house had already fallen
into the hands of the Prince of Wales. The physicians could give
no opinion upon the duration of the king's malady.
Parliament assembled on the 20th of November. Pitt, solely
occupied with the interests of the country, desired to restrain
the regency by legislative authority. Chancellor Thurlow,
however, was intriguing secretly with the Prince of Wales and the
opposition, to retain his position, recently promised by Fox to
Lord Loughborough, who had suggested to the Prince the bold
project of seizing the regency. Fox's return from Italy was
anxiously awaited. When he arrived at London, on the 24th of
November, the houses were prorogued to the 14th of December.
Proudly silent upon the perfidious maneuvres of his colleague,
Pitt addressed no reproaches to Lord Thurlow, but he confided the
direction of the House of Lords to the venerable Lord Camden. Fox
energetically opposed the suggestions of Lord Loughborough,
regretting that he was constrained to break his word. "I have
swallowed the pill," wrote he to Sheridan; "it was very bitter,
and I have written to Lord Loughborough, who will not naturally
respond by consenting. What remains to be done? Is it the prince
in person, or you, or I, who shall speak to the chancellor? I do
not remember ever in all my life of having felt so ill at ease
regarding a political affair."
{352}
The king had been taken to Kew, very much against his will. The
chancellor and Mr. Pitt went there to see him. Miss Burney, the
author, and one of the ladies of honor of the queen, reports
that: "the chancellor came into the king's presence, with the
same trepidation that he inspired in others; and when he quitted
the king he was so overcome by the state of his royal master and
patron, that tears ran down his cheeks, and he had great
difficulty in supporting himself. Mr. Pitt was more calm, but
expressed his grief with so much respect and affection that the
universal admiration here felt towards him was increased."
When the houses re-assembled, Mr. Pitt presented the report of
the physicians; a new doctor, Mr. Willis, gave more hope of a
speedy cure than his associates; parliamentary maneuvres extended
even to the faculty, and the parties disputed with the doctors.
Mr. Fox proposed, from the first, to place the reins of power,
without contest, in the hands of the Prince of Wales. Without
regard to the supreme authority of parliament in such a matter,
he sustained the theory of hereditary right, with an energy so
far removed from his ordinary habit, that Mr. Pitt jocosely
remarked: "Now I'll _unwhig_ this gentleman for the rest of
his days."
"Imagine the lack of judgment Fox has shown by putting himself
and his friends in such an embarrassing position," wrote
Wilberforce; "he perceived that what he had said had offended so
many people that he was obliged to seize the first favorable
occasion to explain and extenuate his words.
{353}
After this retraction, Sheriden terminated the day by a worse
blunder than I have ever seen committed by a man of any
intelligence. Since I have been in Parliament the battles have
been warm enough, but I do not remember of ever having heard such
a tumult as he raised by threatening us with the danger of
exciting the Prince of Wales, and urging him to vindicate his
rights: these are exactly the expressions used. You comprehend
what an advantage all this gives us; above all, when there is
joined thereto our great hope of the king's recovery."
The favorable progress in the malady of the King, decided the
chancellor to renounce his treachery. When the Duke of York
declared in the House of Lords that his eldest brother claimed no
rights, but desired to place his authority entirely in the hands
of Parliament, Lord Thurlow, quitting the wool-sack, followed
him, protesting his inviolable attachment and fidelity to the
sovereign who had governed England for twenty-seven years with
the most religious respect for its Constitution. He was moved by
his own words, troubled perhaps, by the recollection of his
secret perfidy, and finally concluded: "If ever I forget my king,
may God forget me!" A murmur of disgust followed: the intrigues
of the chancellor were well known. Pitt rushed precipitately from
the hall, his heart bursting with contempt. "Oh the wretch! the
wretch!" repeated he loudly.
The resolutions proposed by Pitt recognized the exclusive right
of Parliament to confer the regency. In an ardent and eloquent
address, Fox sustained the pretensions of the Prince of Wales,
declaring that Pitt would never have thought of limiting his
power if he had not felt that he did not merit the prince's
confidence, and that he would never be minister.
{354}
"With regard to my feeling myself unworthy of the confidence of
the Prince," said Pitt, "all that I am able to say is that there
is only one way for me, or any other, to merit it; that is to do
what I have done by seeking constantly in the public service to
do my duty towards the king, his father, and towards the entire
country. If by seeking to merit thus the confidence of the
prince, he finds that I have lost it, in fact; however painful
and disagreeable this circumstance may be for me, I should regret
it; but I say boldly that it would be impossible to repent of
it."
The Regency Bill contained grave restrictions to the power of the
Prince of Wales. The queen had charge of the person of the king,
and the prince had no authority to dispose of the royal property.
He was not permitted to grant the reversion of any office, nor
any pension or place without the consent of his majesty. The
prince was passionately irritated, and responded to the
communication of the minister, by a letter, that Burke had
dictated, as firm and clever as it was eloquent. Mr. Pitt
remained firm. The public were aware of the animosity that
existed between the minister, still powerful, the foolish king,
and that parliamentary and princely opposition which appeared
upon the point of seizing the power. The friends of Pitt,
realizing the sad condition of his financial affairs, preoccupied
themselves to relieve the same. A meeting of bankers and
merchants offered to Mr. Pitt a gift of £100,000, raised by
subscription, in the city London, within twenty-four hours. He
refused, without hesitation. The situation was prolonged. The
minister sought occasion for delay; for each day the king's
health improved. The five propositions of the Regency Bill had
been voted by the House of Commons, and the third reading was
announced in the House of Lords. Dr. Willis informed Mr. Pitt and
the chancellor that the convalescence of the king might be
announced.
{355}
On the 17th of February 1789, the minister wrote to his mother:
"You have seen that for several days the news from Kew improves;
the public bulletin this morning says the king continues to
improve in his convalescence. The particular news is that
according to all appearances he looks perfectly well, and that if
he continues to act sanely, they will at once declare him cured.
It remains for us to wait and see how he will support the state
in which he will find public affairs. But considering these
circumstances, the Bill will probably be adjourned, in the House
of Commons, until Monday; and if our hopes are then realized, the
project of the regency will probably be modified so as to apply
to an extremely short interval, or perhaps be entirely set aside.
This news will afford you sufficient pleasure to pardon the
brevity of my letter."
Four days later, the king renewed with Mr. Pitt that
correspondence, somewhat formal, but nevertheless, cordial and
kindly, which reflects so much honor on both the sovereign and
the minister.
On the 23rd of February, 1789, George III. wrote to Mr. Pitt:
"It is with infinite satisfaction that I renew my
correspondence with Mr. Pitt, by acquainting him with my having
seen the Prince of Wales and my second son. Care was taken that
the conversation should be general and cordial. They seemed
perfectly satisfied. I chose the meeting should be in the
queen's apartment, that all parties might have that caution,
which, at the present hour, could but be judicious. I desire
Mr. Pitt will confer with the Lord Chancellor, that any steps
which may be necessary for raising the annual supplies, or any
measures that the interests of the nation may require, should
not be unnecessarily delayed; for I feel the warmest gratitude
for the support and anxiety shown by the nation at large during
my tedious illness, which I should ill requite if I did not
wish to prevent any further delay in those public measures
which it may be necessary to bring forward this year; though I
must decline entering into a pressure of business, and, indeed,
for the rest of my life, shall expect others to fulfil the
duties of their employments, and only keep that superintending
eye which can be effected without labor or fatigue.
{356}
"I am anxious to see Mr. Pitt any hour that may suit him
to-morrow morning, as his constant attachment to my interest
and that of the public, which are inseparable, must ever place
him in the most advantageous light.
G. R."
The power now fell into the eager hands of the Prince of Wales
and his friends. The people were as demonstrative in their joy as
they had been in their anxiety for the king. The popularity and
authority of Pitt were at their height: he was master of the
entire country, as well as of the House of Commons; the elections
of 1790 clearly proved this.
Only prudent and far-seeing statesmen turned their attention to
the internal state of France. The mass of the English nation had
not, as yet, felt that electric influence that our country has
always exercised over her neighbors, for the happiness or
misfortune of Europe. Already the diverging tendencies manifested
themselves among minds which had up to this time felt powerfully
the same impressions and followed the same direction. After the
taking of the Bastile, Fox wrote with transport: "How much the
greatest event it is that ever happened in the world, and how
much the best!" Burke, on the contrary, wrote to one of his
friends: "You hope that I hold the French worthy of liberty;
assuredly, I believe that all men who desire it, merit it. It is
not the recompense of our virtues nor the result of our labor. It
is our heritage. We have a right to it from our birth; but when
liberty is separated from justice, neither one nor the other
appear to be safe."
{357}
Some weeks later, at the opening of Parliament, Burke allowed
himself to be carried away by his prejudices to a gloomy and
severe review of the beginning of the French Revolution. "Since
the house has been prorogued," said he, "there has been much work
done in France. The French have shown themselves the ablest
architects of ruin that have appeared in the world: in one short
summer they have completely pulled down their monarchy, their
church, their nobility, their law, their army and their revenue.
They have done their business for us as rivals in a way in which
twenty Ramillies and Blenheims could never have done. Were we
absolute conquerors, with France prostrate at our feet, we should
blush to impose on them terms so destructive to their national
consequence as the durance they have imposed on themselves."
Pitt did not join in the joyous enthusiasm of Fox, regarding the
first and tumultuous efforts of the National Assembly and the
French people; still less did he abandon himself to the gloomy
forebodings of Burke. "The convulsions which now agitate France,"
said he, "will lead one day or another to general harmony and
regular order; and although this situation will render France
more formidable, it will perhaps render her less dangerous as a
neighbor. I desire the re-establishment of tranquillity in that
country, although it seems to me as yet far removed. When her
system shall be re-established, and that system proclaims
liberty, well defined, the liberty proceeding from order and good
government, France will become one of the most brilliant powers
of the world. I am unable to regard with distrust, those
tendencies in neighboring states that so closely resemble the
sentiments which characterize the English people."
{358}
The excesses and disorders of revolutionary passions, which were
soon to threaten Europe with a vast conflagration, turned Mr.
Pitt from his benevolent views. He was reproached, when
subsequently he was compelled to struggle against the revolution,
both at home and abroad, for not being inclined to the violences
of Burke. It was his glory always to choose that difficult path,
alone worthy of men called by God to govern their fellow
creatures, that path which remains equally distant from either
extreme, and which resists the excesses of liberty as well as the
arbitrary tendencies of absolutism. In England, Mr. Pitt
repressed both the revolutionary passions and the tendencies to
despotism; upon the Continent, in his efforts against the
contagious violence of France, he branded as infamous the frenzy
of the Reign of Terror, and he protected the threatened European
governments, as he subsequently defended the national liberties,
against the encroachments and ambitions of absolute power.
The disagreement existing between the two chiefs of the
opposition first publicly manifested itself upon the
presentation, by Mr. Pitt, of a bill regarding the internal
administration of Canada. The state of France occupied all minds;
allusions to France entered into all discussions. Some
expressions used by Fox had wounded Burke: he resolved to
publicly define his position. Fox was informed of this intention;
he went to the house of Burke, praying him to delay, at least,
before commencing hostilities. Burke, for the last time, entered
the House of Commons arm in arm with Fox. The entire opposition
were uneasy and excited; they attempted to prevent the discussion
by recalling the orators to the affairs of Canada.
{359}
Burke would not permit himself to be turned aside: he immediately
attacked Mr. Fox for the fatal counsels he had given to England;
and suppressing the title of friend that he was accustomed to
give "that very honorable member," he said: "Certainly, it is
indiscreet at any period, but especially at my time of life, to
provoke enemies or give my friends occasion to desert me; yet if
my firm and steady adherence to the British Constitution place me
in such a dilemma, I am ready to risk all, and with my last words
to exclaim--'Fly from the French Constitution!'" Fox here
whispered that there was "no loss of friendship." "Yes," solemnly
exclaimed Burke, "I regret to say there is. I know the value of
my line of conduct. I have indeed made a great sacrifice. I have
done my duty, though I have lost my friend. There is something in
the accursed French Revolution, which envenoms everything it
touches."
Burke seated himself. When Fox rose to respond, he remained, for
some moments, standing, unable to speak. The tears ran down his
cheeks. The whole house was moved like himself. When he found
words to reply, it was with touching tenderness, that he spoke of
"the very honorable member, but lately his most intimate friend."
He declared that he had ever felt the highest veneration for the
judgment of his honorable friend, by whom he had been instructed
more than by all other men and books together; by whom he had
been taught to love our Constitution; from whom he had acquired
nearly all his political knowledge, certainly all that he most
valued; and that the separation would be most grievous to him to
the end of his life. He was nevertheless firm in his belief that
"the new Constitution of France, considered altogether, was the
most stupendous and glorious edifice of liberty which had been
erected on the foundation of human integrity in any time or
country." The ancient despotism had disappeared, and the new
system had for its object the happiness of the people. Upon this
ground he would continue to stand.
{360}
Some hasty words of Burke confirmed the rupture. Fox did not
continue the discussion; but a friendship of twenty-five years,
cemented by their united efforts in behalf of American liberty,
sank beneath the waves of the French Revolution, to the grief and
amazement of the representatives of the English nation. Separated
from his former friends, Burke formed no new ties: sometimes
passionate and exalted, always loyal and sincere, he had
sacrificed all to his conscience. With the progress of events in
France, a certain number of Whigs embraced the opinions that
Burke had proclaimed at the outset; when the phalanx formed
behind him, he continued to march with a firm step at the head of
the resistance. "We have made many enemies here, and no friends,
by the part we have taken," wrote Burke, regarding himself and
his son, to the agent of the French emigrants; "in order to serve
you we have associated with those with whom we have no natural
affiliations. We have left our business, we have broken our
engagements. For one mortification that you have suffered, we
have endured twenty. But the cause of humanity demands it."
The disturbances in Europe began to have some effect in England,
and even in Parliament; a momentary disagreement with Spain was
terminated in a satisfactory manner, but the persistent
hostilities between Russia and the Porte appeared to necessitate
an increase of the naval forces. Mr. Pitt presented a bill to
this effect, which was coldly received by the house. He withdrew
it in time to avoid a defeat, not however without a decrease of
his renown at home and abroad.
{361}
Notwithstanding the growing apprehensions of the friends of
France, and the anxiety that the situation of King Louis XVI.
inspired, Pitt resolutely maintained the neutrality of England.
When the declaration of Pilnitz, signed by the Emperor of Austria
and the King of Prussia, appealed to all the sovereigns of Europe
to aid the King of France, by arms, if necessary, England
remained deaf to the appeal. Pitt refused to lend to the emigre
princes the funds necessary for their military operations.
In the address from the throne, on the 31st of January, 1792,
George III. expressed the firm hope of seeing peace maintained;
he even counselled a diminution of the land and naval forces.
With an assurance more bold than prudent, Pitt announced in his
Budget, a progressive reduction of the taxes. He said, that
though he was aware of the many contingencies which, by
disturbing the public tranquillity, might prevent such a design,
yet there never was a time, in the history of this country, when,
from the situation of Europe, fifteen years of peace might more
reasonably be expected, than at the present moment. Still
occupied exclusively with internal questions, Pitt sustained,
energetically, the bill for the abolition of the slave trade,
proposed anew by Wilberforce and his friends; he regulated the
legislation regarding the press, henceforth relegated to the
jurisdiction of a jury; finally, he presented a bill regarding
loans.
Since the illness of the king, and the treachery he had
meditated, Lord Thurlow had remained secretly hostile to Pitt. On
the 15th of May, 1792, he vehemently and unexpectedly attacked
the financial bill, declaring that it was absurd to pretend to
dictate to future parliaments and to proscribe to future
ministers a line of action.
{362}
"None," said his lordship, "but a novice, a sycophant, a mere
reptile of a minister, would allow this act to prevent him doing
what, in his own judgment, circumstances might require at the
time; and a change in the situation of the country might render
that which is proper at one time, inapplicable at another: in
short, the scheme is nugatory and impracticable; the inaptness of
the project is only equalled by the vanity of the attempt." Pitt
finally lost all patience: he declared to the king that it was
impossible for him to continue to sit in the same cabinet with
Lord Thurlow. George III. did not hesitate; the chancellor was
ordered to deliver up the great seal to his majesty. Some months
later Lord Loughborough, who had become ardently favorable to the
minister, since the fall of Thurlow, was made chancellor
(January, 1793).
Mr. Pitt was appointed Warden of the Cinque Ports, a rich
sinecure long held by Lord North, and now, upon the death of that
nobleman, conferred upon the minister by the king. "I will not
receive any recommendations for this office," wrote the king,
"having resolved to confer it only upon Mr. Pitt;" and when he
sent his letter to Mr. Dundas, charged to forward it to Pitt,
then absent, George III. added: "Mr. Dundas is to forward my
letter to the West, and to accompany it with a few lines,
expressing that I will not admit of this favor being denied. I
desire Lord Chatham may also write, and that Mr. Dundas will take
the first opportunity of acquainting Lord Grenville of the step I
have taken." The office was worth £3,000 per year. For the first
time Pitt consented to accept the favor which was thus imposed
upon him by his sovereign.
Pitt was now seriously occupied with the state of Europe. The
King of Sweden, Gustavus III., had been assassinated at a masked
ball; the Emperor Leopold was dead; his son, the Emperor Francis,
in concert with the King of Prussia, declared war against France.
The position of Louis XVI. became each day more precarious.
{363}
Tossed about without hope, at one time contemplating impossible
resistance, at another, useless concessions, he had, on the 20th
of June, 1792, endured the insults and outrages of the Parisian
populace. The allied troops, under the Duke of Brunswick, had
already entered French territory. The princes of the House of
Bourbon, at the head of the emigré's, prepared themselves to
sustain the operations of the foreigners; an ill-timed manifesto
excited still further the passions of the French. On the 10th of
August, 1792, the palace of the Tuilleries was attacked, and the
Swiss guards massacred. The king, suspended from his royal
functions, was confined in the Temple, with his family; the
convention was convoked, and the prisoners in the dungeons of
Paris were murdered.
Amidst the chaos which reigned in Paris, La Fayette, who
commanded a French army upon the frontier, could not resolve to
defend a state of things each day more contrary to his
presumptuous expectations; he secretly quitted his command,
intending to fly to America. He was arrested by the allies and
put in prison at Olmutz. General Dumouriez fought the allied army
at Jemappes, on the 6th of November, 1792. Kellerman had defeated
them at Valmy on the 20th of September; the allied troops
evacuated French territory, and the French army entered Belgium.
Savoy was already in the hands of the French troops, and General
Custine advanced into Germany. By its decree of the 19th of
November, the Convention declared, in the name of the French
nation, that they would grant succor and fraternity to every
people who desire to obtain liberty.
{364}
Before this supreme disregard of ancient rights and international
conventions, Mr. Pitt, still favorable to preserving neutrality,
was nevertheless alarmed at the threatened fate of Holland. He
wrote to his colleague, the Marquis of Stafford, that the strange
and unfortunate events which have succeeded each other so rapidly
upon the continent, give us ample material for serious
reflection. That which is most urgent is the situation of
Holland. However painful it may be to see this country engaged,
it seemed impossible to him, to hesitate upon the question of
sustaining our ally in case of necessity; and the explicit
declaration of our sentiments is the best way to avoid this
situation at present. Perhaps some opening would present itself
which would allow us to contribute to the termination of the war
between the different powers of Europe, by leaving France to
arrange her internal affairs as well as she could; which was, he
thought, the best plan. The trial of Louis XVI. had already
commenced.
Pitt yet clung to the hope of an impossible peace; already Lord
Gower, the English Ambassador at Paris, had been recalled;
Chauvelin and his clever secretary Talleyrand, were in London,
but not as yet in any official capacity. Chauvelin was about to
present his credentials in the name of the French Republic, when
the condemnation and death of Louis XVI. abruptly terminated the
relations which still existed between revolutionary France and
monarchical countries.
On the day following (January 21st, 1793), almost all England
went into mourning, and Chauvelin received his passports. An
order of recall had already been sent him from Paris. On the 1st
of February the Convention declared war against Holland. The
terrible burden of the defence of Europe against the advance of
the arms and doctrines of the French Revolution was to fall
principally upon England, and the sagacious minister who directed
her policy. The reverses which his country was to experience, and
the obstacles which she was to overcome, saddened the latter part
of the life of Mr. Pitt, and partly obscured his glory.
{365}
The principles which he advocated were nevertheless true and
eternal, and the services that he rendered to preserve the peace
and equilibrium of Europe were incomparable. He succumbed beneath
the weight of a struggle, the obstinacy of which was not foreseen
by Lord Chatham during his triumphs in 1760; by his courageous
persistence he prepared the way for the victories of Wellington.
His name, but recently reviled by so many tongues upon the
continent, and even in his own country, has remained the foremost
among those who have sustained the cause of independence and of
the liberty of nations in Europe. He has alone had the signal
honor to maintain England within the bounds of constitutional
order during the midst of revolutionary tempests, and the still
greater glory of leaving her free.
It was not without much effort and severe internal struggles,
that the English government succeeded in preserving order and
repressing the dangerous tendencies which manifested themselves
upon divers occasions. During many years past, societies
favorable to the principles of the French revolution, destined to
spread its doctrines and create sympathies for its enthusiasts,
had been formed. Two foreigners. Dr. Joseph Priestley, the chief
of the English Unitarians, and Thomas Paine, the celebrated
author of "The Rights of Man," had been elected members of the
National Convention. The latter had taken his seat there. The
license of the revolutionary press surpassed all bounds; the
declarations and anarchical appeals engendered conspiracies as
culpable as powerless. Mr. Pitt used severe measures to repress
these. He was urged on by the chancellor, Lord Loughborough,
himself a recent and zealous convert. The charges and trials
against the press were numerous, and were more violent in
Scotland than in England, where the revolutionary maneuvres were
less bold.
{366}
The trials of Muir, and of Palmer, in 1793, and that of Hamilton
Rowan in Ireland, in 1794, preceded that of Walker at Manchester,
in April, 1794, and of Thomas Hardy, of Daniel Adams, and of John
Horne-Tooke at London, in the month of May of the same year. The
accused were at the head of the two principal revolutionary
societies: "The Society for Constitutional Information" and "The
London Corresponding Society." Mr. Pitt proposed to Parliament
the suspension of the habeas corpus; in spite of the vigorous
opposition of Fox and Sheridan, the bill was passed by a large
majority. Public opinion was powerfully aroused against the
excesses and crimes which deluged France with blood. The
exaggerated fright which the intrigues of the English
revolutionists caused, increased the agitation, and in
consequence the rigors of the government were approved by public
opinion. In Parliament the Whigs were divided. The Duke of
Portland and his friends openly sustained the minister.
General Dumouriez had vainly endeavored to resist the power of
the Convention. He had formed culpable relations with the enemies
of France. Obliged to quit his army, he had taken refuge in
England at the moment when his friends the Girondins were
overthrown and destroyed by the Jacobins, in Paris. The Committee
of Public Safety reigned in France, and the Reign of Terror
extended its sombre veil throughout that unhappy country. The
allied forces took possession of Belgium; the French garrison at
Mayence had just surrendered, after a brave resistance; the
Austrians had seized Valenciennes and Condé, not in the name of
the young captive king, but as personal conquests of the Emperor
Francis. The national enthusiasm of France, violently excited by
these reverses, sent to the frontiers troops barely disciplined,
generals of various origin, servants of the ancient régime or new
geniuses which rose suddenly from the ranks, but all equally
animated by an ardent patriotism.
{367}
The Duke of York was repulsed before Dunkirk by General Hoche, as
the Prince of Orange at Hondschoote. The Prince of Coburg, whose
name is always found united with that of Pitt, in revolutionary
execrations, found himself constrained to raise the siege of
Maubeuge, and to recross the Sambre. In the interior, civil war
desolated Vendée; it ravished the city of Lyons. Toulon, held in
the name of Louis XVII., had called to its aid the English fleet
under Admiral Howe. The siege was eagerly pushed by the
republican troops. The artillery was commanded by a young
Corsican officer, who was soon to become General Bonaparte, and
ten years later the Emperor Napoleon. On the 18th of December,
1793, the redoubts were taken, and the allied forces were
compelled to put to sea. The English and Spanish vessels were
crowded with provincial royalists who fled the vengeance of their
compatriots. Toulon was delivered to fire and sword.
The National Convention voted, at the instigation of Barère, a
decree ordaining that henceforth no quarter should be given to
either English or Hanoverian soldiers. The Duke of York
immediately published an order of the day--dignified and noble:
"His Royal Highness foresees the indignation which will naturally
be aroused in the minds of the brave troops whom he addresses. He
desires to remind them that mercy to the vanquished is the
brightest gem in the soldier's character; and to exhort them not
to suffer their resentment to lead them to any precipitate act of
cruelty, which may sully the reputation they have acquired in the
world. The English and Hanoverian armies are not willing to
believe that the French nation, even in its present blindness,
can so far forget its military instincts as to pay the least
attention to a decree as injurious to the troops, as disgraceful
to those who voted it."
{368}
The French army justified this noble confidence. "Kill our
prisoners!" said a sergeant, "no, no, not that! Send them all to
the Convention, that the representatives may shoot them if they
wish; the savages might also eat them, if they chose." Everywhere
in Flanders the success of the French arms was brilliant;
Brussels was retaken. Nevertheless Corsica revolted and was
annexed to Great Britain.
Admiral Howe, on the 1st of June, 1794, gained a great victory
over the French fleet off the harbor of Brest. The bloody fall of
Robespierre and his friends, raised, for a moment, pacific hopes
in Europe; but the "war spirit" of France was not yet appeased.
General Jourdan drove back the Austrians beyond the Rhine.
Pichegru threatened Holland. Mr. Pitt advised placing the entire
military force of that country under a single commander; this
position was offered to the Duke of Brunswick, who refused it.
Upon the entreaties of Mr. Pitt, and much to his regret, George
III. recalled the young and inexperienced Duke of York. Before
the end of January, 1795, Holland was entirely in the hands of
the French, who proclaimed the Republic. The stadtholder had fled
to England.
The disquietude and agitation were great. Upon the question of
war, Wilberforce and his friends had separated themselves from
the Cabinet. The general distress in Europe was extreme. The
public cry in London, as in Paris, was for Bread, Bread, Bread!
Riots took place in many localities; the windows of Mr. Pitt, in
Downing street, were broken, and the revolutionary intrigues
redoubled their ardor. The Society for Constitutional Information
raised its head, and claimed universal suffrage and annual
parliaments. Mr. Pitt was troubled; his gloomy forebodings, at
times, knew no bounds. "If I resign," said he, one day to Lord
Mornington, "in less than six months I will not have a head upon
my shoulders."
{369}
A congress assembled at Basle; the French Republic treated there
with Tuscany, Prussia, and Sweden. England secretly prepared a
descent upon the coast of Brittany, to second the royalist
uprisings of the French noblemen and peasants designated by the
name of _Chouans_. M. de Puisaye, who had negotiated this
measure with Mr. Pitt, had charge of the Emigré's. The English
fleet was successful at first. Lord Bridport captured two vessels
from Admiral Villaret-Joyeuse. The French refugees disembarked in
the Bay of Quiberon; but the command was divided, and the orders
contradictory. Disorder caused inaction. The arrival of the Count
d'Artois was anxiously awaited, but he did not appear. General
Hoche successfully attacked the little body of Emigré's. The
roughness of the sea rendered the succor of the English
ineffectual. The massacre was horrible. A certain number of
noblemen capitulated; the conditions of the surrender were not
respected; the prisoners were executed. The last military hope of
the royalists disappeared in this bloody and unfortunate
enterprise. The war of the Vendéeans and that of the Choans
terminated at the same time.
The Constitution of the third year of the republic had just been
proclaimed in France, and the Directory had been constituted. An
attempt of the ancient Jacobins had been crushed, on the 13th
Vendémaire (October 5th, 1795), by the prompt and energetic
intervention of General Bonaparte.
{370}
Mr. Pitt now began to show a desire for peace. The opening of
Parliament (October 29th, 1795), was signalized by unusual
violence. Seditious cries were heard in the streets during the
passage of the king; a window of the royal carriage was broken by
a stone. Severe measures, like the Treason and Sedition Bills,
were soon presented to the houses: all insults to the royal
person, and all seditious assemblages, became liable to the
gravest penalties. Notwithstanding the eloquent and persistent
opposition of Mr. Fox and his friends in the House of Commons,
and of Lord Lansdowne in the House of Lords, the two bills passed
by a large majority. In the presence of the national and popular
dangers, the minister remained master of parliament: his measures
for the relief of public misery were received with the same
eagerness, as his bold and courageous efforts for the protection
of the public morals and the public peace.
While these great and important events were transpiring, at home
and abroad, the Prince of Wales broke with Mrs. Fitzherbert, to
the great joy of the king and queen, who had always refused to
admit the legitimacy of the marriage. On the 8th of April, 1795,
he espoused the Princess Caroline of Brunswick; a sad and
dolorous union, the fatal consequences of which were not slow in
developing themselves. On the 7th of January, 1796, the Princess
Charlotte was born; some weeks later the prince left his wife,
who then established herself, with her child, in a house at
Blackheath. George III., justly wounded at the conduct of his
son, promptly sustained the cause of the princess. The
misunderstanding which had so long existed in the royal family
was still further increased by this unfortunate incident.
Some indirect overtures for peace were made by Mr. Wickham, the
English minister in Switzerland, to M. Barthélemy, who
represented France at Basle. The disposition which had dictated
them, excited the anger as well as the fears of the avowed
enemies of the French Revolution. Burke, old and disheartened,
published his last work: "Letters on a Regicide Peace." "The
simple desire to treat," said he, "displays an internal weakness.
For a people who have been great and proud, such a change of
national sentiment is more terrible than any revolution."
{371}
Burke directed his last philippic against the powerful and
pacific Pitt, as well as against Fox and the friends of the
French Revolution. He had, nevertheless, conceived for Mr. Pitt a
sincere admiration and a just gratitude. Since 1794, a pension of
£1200 had been assigned upon the Civil List for the use of Mr.
Burke and his family. In 1795, after his irremedial misfortune in
the loss of his son, the solicitude of the king and his minister
added a new pension of £2500 to the just tribute of the national
estimate of a worthy man and great orator. Burke then wrote to
Mr. Pitt that he had provided for the repose of a life that was
now nearly extinguished. He (Burke) had only to wish him all the
blessings that he might expect at the flower of his age, and in
the great position that he occupied, a position full of severe
labor, but having great glory as the reward of his efforts; he
had the prospect of a long and laborious career; all was
difficult and formidable, but he was called to this position, and
his talents would render him successful. He (Burke) hoped that by
the grace of God he would never doubt those talents, nor his
cause, nor his country. There was one thing that he prayed for,
that the minister--England's last hope--would not fall into that
great error from which there was no relief. He hoped that the
Divine Mercy would convince both him and the nation that this
war, in principle, and in all its bearings, was unlike any other
war; and he also hoped that Pitt would not believe that what was
called peace with these brigands of France, would be able, in the
name of any policy whatever, to reconcile itself with the
internal repose, the external peace, the power or the influence
of this kingdom; this, to him, was as evident as the sun at
mid-day; and this conviction had cost him, during the last five
years, in the midst of many other profound griefs, many hours of
anxiety, both night and day.
{372}
Influenced by the events which had taken place upon the
continent, Mr. Pitt had gradually been led to the adoption of
those very ideas, and that line of policy that Mr. Burke so much
deprecated. The confederation of the great powers was broken up
in 1795, by the Congress of Basle. On the 9th of February, 1795,
the grand Duke of Tuscany signed articles of peace at Paris.
Prussia consented to leave the French in undisturbed possession
of their conquest upon the left bank of the Rhine. Sweden and
Northern Germany acceded to the same conditions; the treaty of
peace, concluded at Basle, with Spain (July 22nd, 1795), became,
on the 19th of August, 1796, a compact of alliance. The King
Charles III., exclusively controlled by the Queen, Louisa of
Parma, and her favorite Manuel Godoy, Prince de la Paix, declared
war with England on the 6th of October. The Bourbons of Naples
joined Spain. The maritime attempts of England against distant
French colonies were successful. The Antilles fell into the hands
of Sir Ralph Abercromby and Col. John Moore. These victories gave
a new life to the hopes of a happy issue to the pacific
negotiations which Lord Malmsbury was about to undertake. At the
opening of Parliament, on the 6th of October, 1796, the address
from the throne announced the departure of the ambassador to
Paris.
{373}
Negotiations were begun. At the same time, the Directory made
great preparations for an invasion of England. Twenty times like
enterprises had been projected and attempted; twenty times they
miscarried or failed. Nevertheless, they still had the power of
arousing and alarming the English people. When Pitt proposed his
plans of defence, Fox had, as usual, recourse to an insulting
incredulity. "I do not believe," said he, "that the French have
the least intention of making a descent upon us. Their government
is too much under the control of the people, and the situation of
the country, to hope for any success from such an enterprise.
Supposing they make this desperate attempt, I have no fears for
the result; but, in the interval, what are we to do? What is for
the moment the duty of this house? To cultivate among the people
the spirit of liberty, to render to them that which their fathers
have acquired at the price of their blood; to render the
ministers seriously responsible; not to intrust ourselves to the
servants of the crown, but to maintain a vigilant jealousy over
the exercise of their power. Then you will have no need to
increase your military forces at home, for in that case, even an
invasion would not be formidable."
To these persistent hatreds and partisan animosities, public
opinion proclaimed a determined and serious opposition. "I do not
wish to accuse these gentlemen of desiring an invasion," said Mr.
Wilberforce, "but I cannot help believing that they would rejoice
to see their country suffer just enough to lead them into power."
When Pitt opened his great loan to public subscription, the sum
required, amounting to £18,000,000, was taken within fifteen
hours. When that figure was reached, the list was closed. Before
it was opened to the general public, the Dukes of Bedford and
Bridgewater subscribed, at sight, for £100,100. The method of
subscription was new, and the conditions of the loan were not
especially advantageous. The patriotic zeal of the nation
responded to the confident appeal of the government. We have
since seen a still greater example. The minister, Mr. Pitt, had
the courage to attempt it; he had at the same time the courage to
propose new taxes.
{374}
The devotion of Parliament was equal to any sacrifice.
Considerable subsidies were also voted for the Emperor of
Austria, notwithstanding the dissatisfaction that Mr. Pitt had
caused, by giving assistance to that monarch, in the interval of
the session, without the authority of the houses. Lord Malmesbury
was dissatisfied and uneasy; the Directory insisted upon the
annexation of the Low Countries to France; the refusal of England
was peremptory. On the 19th of December, 1796, Delacroix, the
Minister of Foreign Affairs, requested the English Ambassador to
quit Paris within forty-eight hours, with all his suite. The
French government admitted of no proposition which tended to
modify the limits of her territory, as they had been fixed by the
decrees of the Convention. "If the English minister truly desires
peace," added Delacroix, "France is ready to conclude it upon
this basis: an exchange of couriers is all that is necessary."
It was impossible for the king and his government to hesitate:
the documents relative to the negotiations were immediately
communicated to Parliament. "In fact," said Mr. Pitt to the House
of Commons, "the question is, not how much you will give for
peace, but how much disgrace you will suffer at the outset; how
much degradation you will submit to as a preliminary. Shall we
then persevere in a war, with a spirit and energy worthy of the
British name and character; or shall we, by sending couriers to
Paris, prostrate ourselves at the feet of a stubborn,
supercilious government?"
[Image]
Surrender To Nelson At Cape St. Vincent.
{375}
The war, more than ever burdensome and perilous, continued. The
Empress Catherine II. had just died of an attack of apoplexy; her
son, the Emperor Paul, feeble and impetuous, with a mind
uneven--tending to insanity, was ill disposed towards England.
The brilliant successes of General Bonaparte in Italy, had worn
out the energy of the Austrians; the French had invaded the
hereditary states of the Emperor, heroically defended by the
Archduke Charles. The preliminaries of peace, signed at Leoben,
on the 18th of April, 1797, were ratified at Campo Formio on the
17th of October, 1797. Henceforth, in this great struggle,
England found herself alone; she was confronted by the passionate
ardor and success of the young French Republic, as well as the
incomparable genius of her military chief.
The attempt of General Hoche upon Ireland, was a complete
failure; a severe storm scattered the fleet, destroyed some of
the vessels, and prevented any landing. On the 14th of February,
1797, near Cape St. Vincent, Sir John Jervis gained a signal
victory over the Spanish squadron, commanded by Don Joseph de
Cordova. Commodore Nelson and Captain Collingwood bore the brunt
of the conflict. "_Westminster Abbey or Victory_," cried
Nelson, as he boarded a Spanish ship of twenty-four guns. "He was
standing upon the bridge," wrote Collingwood, "receiving the
submission and the swords of the officers of the two ships that
he had captured. One of his sailors, named William Fearney, tied
the swords together as tranquilly as if they had been fagots, in
spite of the fact that they were within the range of the cannon
of the enemy's twenty-four ships of the line."
For a moment the maritime power of England seemed threatened by a
greater danger, from the failure of supplies, owing to financial
crises at home, than from any attacks of the enemy. The state of
the finances became each day more grave; orders were given to the
Bank of England to make no payment of more than twenty shillings,
in cash.
{376}
The substitution of paper money, for a limited time, was voted by
Parliament. Merchants and men of business courageously faced the
necessity; others, ordinarily accustomed to brave all dangers,
but for some time discontented and irritated, threatened the
country, at this time, with a fatal blow. In the middle of April,
1797, a military insurrection broke out on board the ships of
Lord Bridport, who commanded the channel fleet. The precautions
of the conspirators were so well taken, that the officers were
deposed, sent on shore, or guarded as hostages, without a drop of
blood being spilled. The sailors demanded an increase of pay,
equivalent to that which the army and militia had received. They
complained of the unjust distribution of prizes, and of the
harshness of certain officers.
The first demand had exaggerated nothing; it was not insolent,
either in fact or in form. Admirals Gardner, Colpoys and Pole,
were appointed to confer with delegates from the mutineers. They
refused to act without the sanction of Parliament. Admiral
Gardner, giving way to passion, seized, by the collar one of the
negotiators, and swore that he would hang them all.
Some days later the fire which was smouldering under the ashes,
broke forth anew; the officers were again deposed. As Admiral
Colpoys, who had remained with two ships at Portsmouth, had
refused to receive the delegates, the mutiny became more violent;
The _Marlborough_ and The _London_ got under way for
St. Helena, without orders. The intervention of the aged Lord
Howe, always popular among the sailors, was necessary to finally
suppress the revolt; and even then it was at the price of
concessions so important that the contagion soon spread to other
squadrons. A proclamation of the king, yielding in substance to
the demands of the sailors, was read on board of all the ships.
They returned to their duty, and the fleet at once set sail for
St. Helena.
{377}
At Sheerness, under the inspiration of Richard Parker, an
enlisted volunteer, intelligent, educated, ambitious, and
corrupt, the insurgent sailors concentrated their forces and
withdrew prudently from the coast; they sailed for the Nore. They
soon attacked the vessels which had remained faithful to the
king, among others the _San Fiorenzo_, a noble frigate,
which was intended to take the Princess Royal and her husband the
Duke of Wurtemburg to Germany.
A greater part of the fleet of Lord Duncan joined the mutiny,
thus abandoning the blockade of Holland. Two ships only remained
faithful to the admiral. He continued his signals, as if the main
part of his fleet was still in view; but his patriotism was
profoundly wounded. "It has often been my pride to look with you
into the Texel, and see a foe which dreaded coming out to meet
us; my pride is now humbled indeed," said he.
The government also trembled for the army, now a prey to a
fermentation that was augmented by seditious placards.
Indications of a revolt manifested themselves at Woolwich.
The mutinous ships raised the red flag--that terrible pirates'
signal; they blockaded the mouth of the Thames. The first Lord of
the Admiralty, Lord Spencer, failed in his attempts at
conciliation. Parliament passed two bills, inflicting the most
severe penalties against any attempt to excite a mutiny, and
interdicting all communication with the rebellious fleet.
England, in fact, exiled the sailors who had revolted against
her. This was a most serious blow to the mutineers. The sailors,
still faithful to their duty, made an appeal to their comrades.
The delegates, however, were hard and tyrannical.
{378}
On the 4th of June, the king's birthday, all but one of the
revolted ships hoisted the royal flag, and that one was the
_Sandwich_, on board of which was Richard Parker; he himself
sent to London new propositions. Lord Northesk, one of the
imprisoned captains, charged with this message, was received by
the king in person. Henceforward the monarch refused all
negotiations with his rebellious subjects, and exacted from them
submission without conditions. One by one, the crews cut their
cables, and took refuge under the batteries of Sheerness; the
ships of Lord Duncan sailed out to join them; only the delegates,
who held the _Sandwich_, still resisted. Their crew deserted
them, and Admiral Buchner sent a detachment to arrest Parker and
his accomplices. Some weeks later Parker was hung at the yard arm
of the Admiral's vessel, while the English sailors, repentant and
confused, swore they would make their faults forgotten by new
efforts of valor.
During this serious crisis, Mr. Fox and Lord Grey declared their
intention of taking no further part in parliamentary discussions,
as they could neither influence nor approve the policy of the
government. Burke had died on the 9th of July, 1797. As the
illustrious rivals of Pitt were withdrawn from the field, the
leadership of the opposition fell into younger hands; Sir Francis
Burdett and Mr. Tierney were among the first. Mr. Erskine, more
celebrated at the bar than in the house, also became prominent.
New negotiations with France were begun: "I believe it is my
duty," said Mr. Pitt, "both as English Minister and as a
Christian, to do all that I can to put an end to this bloody and
ruinous war." Lord Malmesbury was sent to Lisle to treat with the
French plenipotentiaries. The _coup d'état_ of the 18th
Fructidor (September 4th, 1799), placed all power in the hands of
Barras and the Jacobins, who were hostile to all pacific
concessions.
{379}
Lord Malmesbury was dismissed. Some secret and venal propositions
of Barras miscarried. The war continued, but England was
uniformly successful at sea. On the 11th of October, a battle
took place at Camperdown, in view of the Texel, between Admiral
Duncan and the Dutch Admiral De Winter. The action was desperate,
but a brilliant victory remained to the English. The Dutch
Admiral was made prisoner. The evening after the battle he played
whist in the cabin of Admiral Duncan: he lost. "It is too much,"
said Winter, throwing down his cards, "to be beaten twice the
same day, and by the same adversary."
On his return from St. Paul's, where a service of public
thanksgiving had been held, Mr. Pitt was hooted at by the
populace; and on his return to his home in the evening, he was
escorted by a squadron of the Horse Guards.
The affairs of Ireland had for a long time been the subject of
serious consideration on the part of Mr. Pitt. He had used every
possible means of conciliation; seeking to satisfy the Catholics
by the founding of the College of Maynooth, for the education of
the clergy, and at the same time loyally faithful to the liberal
principles which had constantly inspired his conduct, in regard
to that portion of the United Kingdom; but Ireland was the point
of attack of all the French and revolutionary invasions. The
Irish and democratic sentiments prevailed over their religious
principles. Secret societies, everywhere existing, only awaited
orders and assistance from France. The struggles which took place
in the Irish Parliament were transformed into conspiracies. Lord
Edward Fitzgerald, fifth son of the Duke of Leinster, put himself
at the head of the United Irishmen. Acts of violence broke out in
all sections. The Orangemen, as the Irish Protestants were
called, were animated by passions no less violent. The habeas
corpus was suspended.
{380}
Lord Camden, the Lord Lieutenant, ordered that all arms in the
hands of private persons should be immediately delivered up. In
reply to an address of Lord Moira, in the English Parliament,
Lord Clare, the Irish Chancellor, said that a revolutionary
government was completely organized, in opposition to the legal
power. "What," said he, "has been the result of all our
concessions during the past twenty years? The formation of
seditious associations, a system of violence, and midnight
robbery. Orders given by the Jacobin clubs of Dublin and Belfast
to raise regiments of national guards with French uniforms and
French tactics; the league of the United Irishmen; the
resolution, frankly avowed, of accepting no overtures from
Parliament; and the desire, scarcely dissimulated, of separation
from England."
A dangerous outbreak was imminent; many of the leaders were
arrested. Arthur O'Connor, with the Irish priest Coigley, on
their way to Paris to hasten the promised supplies, were of the
number. Lord Edward Fitzgerald was captured. He resisted, and was
so seriously wounded that he died shortly afterwards.
The most severe measures against the conspirators followed the
arrest of their chiefs. Stores of arms were found in many places,
and it was necessary to take them by force; this naturally led to
cruel reprisals. With the exception of Connaught, all Ireland was
roused, and shortly became the theatre of the most frightful
scenes of disorder, cruelty and desolation. The county of
Wexford, above all, was delivered over to pillage and flames.
Lord Cornwallis was appointed Lord Lieutenant, much against his
will. "It is my idea of torture," wrote he to one of his friends.
He nevertheless accepted the position.
{381}
Sagacious to employ, in turn, severity and clemency, he was
actively seconded by the Chancellor, Lord Clare, and young Lord
Castlereagh. The rebellion was crushed. A French invasion, under
the order of General Humbert, gained a momentary success, in
consequence of the weakness, or treachery, of the Irish militia;
it was soon repulsed, and the ships of the Republic were captured
by Commodore Warren. The famous Irish leader, Wolfe Tone, the
instigator of all the intrigues in France, was taken with arms in
his hands; and while in prison, committed suicide. Byrne,
Coigley, and many others were tried, convicted, and sentenced to
capital punishment; a certain number, however, were subsequently
pardoned. The alien bill, authorizing the government to interdict
English soil to foreigners, and the suspension of the habeas
corpus act, were accorded by Parliament without difficulty.
Pitt now prepared an important measure, that he had been
considering for many years. The growing disorders in Ireland
convinced him of the necessity of a legislative and parliamentary
union between the two countries. On the 31st of January, 1799, he
proposed his bill; already badly received by the Irish
Parliament. The royal prerogative for the creation of Irish peers
was not limited, as it became in the definitive bill.
By a clever rotation of elections in the boroughs, none of them
completely lost their franchise. The number of the Irish
representatives in the House of Commons was fixed at one hundred.
The speech of the prime minister was one of the most eloquent
ever made. Three times only, in the course of his life, did he
consent to revise his addresses; the speech on the union with
Ireland, was one that had that honor. In it he declared that
England was engaged in a struggle the most important and solemn
that had ever been seen in the history of the world; in a
struggle where Great Britain alone ought to resist resolutely and
with success, the common enemy of civilized society.
{382}
They saw, he said, the point upon which the enemy believed them
assailable; and should not prudence compel them to fortify that
vulnerable point, engaged, as they were, in the struggle of
liberty against despotism, of property against rapine and
pillage, of religion and order against impiety and anarchy? And,
on the other hand, if a country should be unable to defend itself
against the greatest of all dangers which might threaten its
peace and security, without the assistance of another nation, and
that nation should be a neighbor and an ally, if she spoke the
same language, if her laws, her customs, and her habits were the
same in principle; if the commerce of that nation was more
extended, and its means of acquiring and spreading abroad riches
were more numerous; if that nation possessed a government, whose
stability and admirable constitution excited more than ever the
admiration of Europe, while the country in question possessed
only an incomplete and imperfect imitation of that constitution;
what, in such a case, would be the conduct demanded by all
motives of equity, interest, and honor? "I ask you," said he, in
conclusion, "if this is not a faithful exposition of the motives
which ought to lead Ireland to desire union? I ask you, if Great
Britain is not precisely the nation to which a country in the
situation of Ireland, ought to desire to unite itself? Could a
union contracted under such circumstances, with a free consent,
and under equitable conditions, merit to be stigmatized as the
submission of Ireland to a foreign yoke?"
[Image]
The Battle Of Aboukir.
{383}
The bill passed in the English Parliament by a large majority;
but all the eloquence of its defenders, together with the clever
maneuvres of Lords Cornwallis and Castlereagh, were not able to
induce the Irish Parliament to pass similar resolutions, before
the opening of the year 1800. Henry Grattan, long absent from the
house, returned in order to oppose the union: "In all that he
advances, the minister does not discuss--he predicts," said the
Irish orator; "one cannot answer a prophet; all that one can do
is not to believe. That which he wishes to buy of you, cannot be
sold: it is liberty; in exchange he has nothing to offer you. All
that possesses any value you have obtained under a free
constitution; if you renounce it you are not only slaves, but
madmen."
On the 10th of February, 1800, the bill presented by Lord
Castlereagh and discussed with the most extreme violence, was
finally passed by both houses of the Irish Parliament. On the 2nd
of July it received the royal signature. Henceforth the union of
Ireland and England was definitive, and useful and efficacious
for both countries, notwithstanding the difficulties that it was
still to encounter, and the bitterness that it left behind. This
union was of the highest importance to the repose of Great
Britain. Foreign invasions now ceased.
The expedition of General Bonaparte into Egypt diverted his
attention from the projected invasion of England. It had led to
the great naval battle of _Aboukir_ (August 1st, 1799),
where the French Admiral Brueys was killed and the English
Admiral Nelson was severely wounded. The French fleet, after a
heroic resistance, was conquered, and almost entirely destroyed.
Bonaparte found himself shut up in Egypt, while war became again
general in Europe. The Congress of Radstadt, intended to regulate
the relations of France with the Germanic States, had not been
successful, and was officially dissolved in August, 1799: a new
coalition against the French Republic was formed, and henceforth
England was supported by Austria, Russia, Naples, Portugal and
Turkey. Hostilities broke out simultaneously in Switzerland,
Italy, and Germany.
{384}
In this great struggle, sustained by France alone, against the
European world, England took, from the commencement, an active
and glorious part. An attempt upon Holland, under the direction
of the Duke of York and Sir Ralph Abercromby, was unsuccessful.
The finances and determined public opinion of Great Britain
everywhere sustained the courage of her allies.
Bonaparte landed at Fréjus, leaving in Egypt his army under the
command of General Kleber. Some days later he accomplished at
Paris the Revolution of the 18th Brumaire (November 9th, 1799);
the feeble government of the Directory was overturned, and
General Bonaparte seized the power in his triumphant hands,
inspiring in those rivals who were soon to become his
lieutenants, the same ardor which animated himself. Before the
end of the year the victories of Marengo (June 14th, 1800), of
Hochstett (June 19th), and Hohenlinden (Dec. 3), changed the
aspect of affairs. Conferences were opened at Luneville, between
France, the Empire of Austria and the Germanic Confederation. On
the 9th of February, 1801, peace was signed. The Rhine became the
frontier of republican France, and the Adige that of the
Cisalpine republic. At the same time the Emperor Paul I. was won
over by the French, and at his instigation the armed neutrality
against Great Britain was renewed by Russia, Sweden and Denmark.
Once again England found herself alone against France, now
governed by Bonaparte.
Almost immediately master of the situation in Paris, Bonaparte,
at the beginning of his power, personally made overtures of peace
to England, by a letter addressed directly to King George III.
The ministry would not recognize this unusual proceeding, and
Lord Grenville, the minister of Foreign Affairs, replied in the
name of the king, refusing to treat alone without the
co-operation of their allies.
{385}
When the question was brought before parliament, Mr. Pitt rose.
"I am," said he, "too sincere a friend of peace, to content
myself with possessing it only in name; I desire to follow that
course that promises to assure definitively to this country and
to Europe all its benefits. I am too sincere a friend of peace to
lose it by seizing the shadow when the substance is really within
my grasp: 'Cur igitur pacem nolo? quia infida est, quia
periculosa, quia esse non potest.'" The minister was all powerful
upon foreign questions in both houses. Notwithstanding the
weariness of the nation, national pride and the confidence in Mr.
Pitt inspired yet greater efforts. Never were the friends of the
ministry more encouraged. In vain did Mr. Fox re-appear in the
house, ardently and cleverly sustained by Lord Grey. "The proud
and monumental architecture" of his eloquence crushed by its
weight the powerful charm of his adversaries. In his hands
England resisted, with an audacious calmness, coalesced Europe.
So much power and so many victorious efforts were to fall before
a double question of conscience. Sincerely and honestly liberal,
Mr. Pitt was favorable to the political emancipation of the
Catholics, and he also held himself pledged to further their
cause, in consequence of the assistance they had given to his
measures for the union with Ireland. Perhaps he mistook the
resolution of the king regarding this question, and judged
incorrectly of the effect that a great moral agony would be able
to exercise over an intelligence as limited, and a soul as
sincerely conscientious as that of George III.
{386}
The project for the emancipation of the Catholics had during
several months been discussed, in the Council, without the
knowledge of the king; but political treachery or honest scruples
finally made it known to his Majesty. When Lord Castlereagh came
to London, in the month of January, 1801, desirous of assuring
himself that the intentions of Mr. Pitt remained the same, George
III. suddenly addressed Mr. Dundas, an intimate friend of Pitt's,
and who shared his opinions on this subject: "What!" he
exclaimed, in a loud voice, "what is _this_, that this young
lord has brought over which they are going to throw at my head? I
shall reckon any man my personal enemy who proposes any such
measure--the most Jacobinical thing I ever heard of!"
"You'll find," replied Dundas, "among those who are friendly to
that measure, some you never supposed your enemies."
The king was greatly troubled. He wrote to the speaker, Mr.
Addington, a friend of Pitt's, but still more a personal friend
of the sovereign: "I know we think alike on this great subject. I
wish that he would, front himself, open Mr. Pitt's eyes on the
danger arising from the agitating this improper question, which
may prevent his ever speaking to me on a subject on which I can
scarcely keep my temper."
George III. believed himself solemnly bound by his coronation
oath to refuse all liberal alterations of the Constitution, in
favor of the Dissenters as well as of the Catholics. When he was
questioned in regard to the abolition of the Test Act, he
consulted Lord Kenyon and Sir John Scott upon that subject. Both
were favorable to the maintenance of the measure; they
nevertheless replied that it might be abrogated or modified,
without violating his coronation oath or the act of union with
Scotland. Less sincere, and less convinced, Lord Loughborough,
with the complaisance of a courtier, and influenced by political
ambition, had given his opinion to the contrary.
{387}
His arguments strengthened the scruples of the king, who remained
obstinately faithful. To the objections, addressed to him, in
writing, by Mr. Pitt, he replied that he hoped the sentiment of
duty would prevent Mr. Pitt from quitting, while he lived, the
position which he occupied; he pledged himself to keep henceforth
an absolute silence upon the great question on which they
differed, on the condition that Mr. Pitt would absolutely refrain
from presenting it--he could do no more.
The conscience of the minister was more enlightened and more firm
than that of the monarch, and he also considered it engaged in
the question. Political promises and parliamentary embarrassments
prevailed in the mind of Pitt, over the grave danger of a
ministerial crisis in the midst of a terrible war, and in the
presence of financial difficulties, steadily increasing: he
persisted in his resolution to retire. On the 5th of February,
1801. King George III. accepted sadly the resignation of his
great minister. "I do not know how I could have acted otherwise,"
said Mr. Pitt to his friend Rose. "I have nothing to reproach
myself for, unless it is not having sought sooner to reconcile
the king with the idea of the measure in favor of the Catholics,
or at least to persuade his Majesty not to take an active part in
the question." "He was evidently painfully affected," added Rose;
"tears were in his eyes, and he appeared much agitated."
In the presence of the pious and worthy scruples that troubled
the conscience of his sovereign, it was without doubt a noble
error on the part of Mr. Pitt to throw into the balance his own
scruples and praiseworthy engagements; a grave error, moreover,
and which was to greatly imperil England, to disturb anew a
tottering reason, and to retard, more than it served, the cause
of religious and political liberty for which Mr. Pitt had
sacrificed all.
{388}