its tenderest point by this Bill, was determined that it should never
become law; rather than suffer such indignity he would refuse his assent
to the Bill, exerting a prerogative which had lain dormant since the
reign of William III., or take refuge, as he was fond of threatening, in
Hanover. He was saved from either alternative by a plan suggested to him
by Lords Thurlow and Temple, which, although open to the charge of being
unconstitutional, prevented the Bill from passing the Upper House. These
two noblemen, using the hereditary right of British Peers to advise
their sovereign, drew up and laid before George a strong memorandum
against the Bill, which they called "a plan to take more than half the
royal power, and by that means disable his Majesty for the rest of his
reign;" and Temple suggested that the Bill might be stopped in the House
of Lords if the King would authorize him to express his wishes. The King
upon this supplied him with a paper to show to any Lord he pleased. The
purport of it was, that "his Majesty allowed Earl Temple to say that
whoever voted for the India Bill was not only not his friend, but would
be considered by him as an enemy, and if those words were not strong
enough, Earl Temple might use whatever words he might deem stronger and
more to the purpose." The effect of this intimation, acting upon the
minds of waverers and of those who prided themselves in the name of
King's friends, was to secure a majority against the Bill. On the 17th
of December it was lost by nineteen votes, Lord Stormont, a member of
the ministry voting against it. The King thus assumed the strange
position of the opponent of his own responsible ministers. In fact, he
felt the power of the hated Whigs closing around him, and thought any
measure justifiable which would free him from their grasp and enable him
to assume that position which had been the constant aim of his policy.
Moreover, he no doubt relied somewhat on the unpopularity excited by the
coalition, and on the apparently unprincipled and factious conduct of
the united leaders. That his conduct is incompatible with constitutional
monarchy there can be no doubt. If he disliked his ministers' measures
he had one straightforward course open to him;--he should have dismissed
them; if their majority was overwhelming, he should have dissolved
Parliament; if he could not command a majority in the new Parliament, he
was bound to submit. An underhand opposition to ministers, who are alone
responsible to the nation, is entirely destructive of that confidence
which is necessary to the very existence of a constitutional monarchy.
Of course the uproar raised in the House of Commons was great. Motion
after motion condemnatory of the action of the King in the House of
Lords was carried by great majorities. The ministry determined that the
responsibility of removing them should be left to the King, who,
perceiving the necessary consequence of his late step, on the 18th of
December, sent the under secretaries to tell the ministers they were
dismissed, refusing even to see them personally.
[Sidenote: Pitt accepts the Premiership. 1783.]
[Sidenote: Factious violence of the Opposition. 1784.]
The great Whig party and the great following of Lord North being thus
removed from office, it became a question where a ministry was to be
sought. The only party remaining was the little section of Chatham's
followers, headed by the young Pitt, and reinforced by a portion of the
Tories, with whom they may now be considered as incorporated, although
for several years Pitt's policy was decidedly Liberal. To this youth of
twenty-four the King appealed for assistance, and, relying on his own
genius, he had the audacity to accept the struggle, though conscious
that he must be defeated on every division. There followed a scene
unparalleled in parliamentary history. The Cabinet had to be drawn
almost exclusively from the Upper House; Lord Thurlow became Chancellor,
Earl Gower President of the Council, Duke of Rutland Privy Seal, Lord
Carmarthen and Lord Sydney Secretaries of State, and Lord Howe First
Lord of the Admiralty, and this, with Mr. Pitt himself, was the whole
Cabinet. In the House of Commons he could rely only on Dundas and his
cousin William Grenville. When the writ was moved for a new election for
Appleby on Pitt's taking office, it was received with shouts of
laughter; no pity or favour was extended to the new minister; Dundas
could hardly get a hearing on ministerial business, motions of great
importance were pressed on even though Pitt had not yet taken his seat,
and so certain did Fox feel of restoration to office, that he wrote to
a friend in Dublin that he would not dismiss one member of his household
till after the 12th of January. On that day Pitt was to make his
appearance as Prime Minister. An address had been delivered to the King
praying against either an adjournment or dissolution, for this was the
step which Fox's party chiefly feared. On a favourable reply to this
address, short Christmas holidays had been allowed, and the House had to
meet again on the 12th. In those few days Pitt had got ready an India
Bill, but before he was allowed to produce it Fox had succeeded in
carrying no less than five motions against the Government, one of them
pointing to "unconstitutional abuse of his Majesty's sacred name." In
spite of this Pitt produced his Bill, which was similar in character to
the Bill he afterwards carried; it was lost by a majority of only
twenty-one, which on its second reading was still further diminished to
eight.
[Sidenote: Firmness and sagacity of Pitt.]
[Sidenote: Pitt's victory.]
[Sidenote: Dissolution of Parliament and defeat of Whigs. 1784.]
Things began to look a little more encouraging for the minister. He
determined with great wisdom to give the Opposition rope, and urged them
to constant violence by an obstinate refusal to say whether he meant to
dissolve or not. The language of the Opposition had been so violent that
the reaction was becoming strongly marked in the country. "It was a
contest," said Dr. Johnson, "whether the nation should be ruled by the
sceptre of George III. or by the tongue of Fox." All attempts at
mediation failed, although many independent members attempted to effect
it. Fox's hope was, that if Pitt continued to avoid dissolution the 25th
of March would arrive without a new Parliament. On that day the Mutiny
Bill expired, and he hoped by refusing to renew it to compel his rival
to resign. But the tide had now fairly begun to turn; Pitt's bravery was
exciting the sympathy of the people, while the unmeasured virulence of
Fox and his party was constantly damaging them. Pitt, too, had won great
admiration by refusing for himself, although his private means amounted
to scarcely £300 a year, a rich sinecure called the Clerkship of the
Pells. This, with a somewhat ironical pride, he had given to Colonel
Barré in exchange for the pension which the Rockingham ministry had so
scandalously given him. The threats that supplies should be stopped
seemed to many moderate people factious and improper, and numerous
addresses poured in from the Corporation of London and other towns. On
the 8th of March Fox played what may be called his last card; he brought
in a paper under the threatening title of "Representation to the King;"
after many hours of debate it was passed by a majority of one only. It
was plain that the victory of Pitt was secure and that the Opposition
had ruined themselves. Accordingly, when on the next day the Mutiny Bill
came on there was no opposition, and having by firmness and moderation
fairly weathered the storm, Pitt on the 25th recommended the King to
dissolve the Parliament. The elections made it evident that the feeling
of the nation was entirely with Pitt; no less than 160 of Fox's friends
lost their seats--"Fox's martyrs" they were jocosely called. Several
great contests took place, the most notorious of which was that for
Yorkshire, where Wilberforce was brought in triumphantly in opposition
to the great territorial houses, and that for Westminster, where Fox
himself stood against Lord Hood and his old colleague Wray, who had
become a ministerialist. The poll was kept open forty days, amid scenes
of indescribable excitement. For twenty-three days Fox was at the bottom
of the poll, but at length the strenuous canvassing of his friends,
added to the charms of Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, and other lady
politicians, succeeded in placing him second on the list. As more votes
however were registered than there were voters, obviously some fraud had
been committed, and a scrutiny was granted. Meanwhile, as the Whigs held
illegally, no return was made, Westminster was unrepresented, and room
had to be made for Fox in the close borough of Kirkwall. It was not till
the following session that Pitt, who, with some want of liberality,
upheld the conduct of the High Bailiff in refusing the return, was
defeated in the House on the subject. The representatives took their
seats, and Fox got £2000 damages from the Bailiff.
[Sidenote: Pressing measures.]
[Sidenote: Pitt's Budget.]
The great party struggle of the last year, which had terminated in the
utter discomfiture of the Whigs and the establishment of the new Tory
party under Pitt, had not left much time for the real requirements of
the State. India, Ireland, the finances, parliamentary reform, were all
matters which pressed for immediate attention. Firm in his parliamentary
majority and in the support of the King, Pitt proceeded to handle them.
The finances were naturally in a bad condition at the close of an
unsuccessful war. The funds were standing only at 56 or 57, the unfunded
debt was upwards of £12,000,000, and there was a considerable deficiency
in the Civil List. One of the principal sources of the revenue was
destroyed by systematic smuggling of tea. Men of otherwise respectable
character and considerable capital were embarked in this trade. Large
vessels brought their tea, and lay off at some distance, distributing
their cargoes to small vessels, which landed them here and there on the
coast. Regular receiving-houses were established and lines of carriers
which brought the tea to the towns. It was estimated that the smuggled
tea was at least as much as that which paid duty. Pitt lowered the duty
both for this article and for spirits, the other great smuggled
commodity, so as to withdraw the temptation from the smugglers. The
deficit was made up by a house and window tax; this is known as the
Commutation Tax. An Act called the Hovering Act was also passed, which
extended the limits of the authority of the revenue officers to four
leagues from the coast. Half the unfunded debt Pitt funded, and made up
the deficit, which he considered a little below a million, by taxes on
various commodities. These arrangements though they show no great
novelty, were much applauded at the time.
[Sidenote: Pitt's India Bill. 1784.]
Having thus cleared the way for general legislation, Pitt proceeded to
bring in his India Bill. It was very like the one which had been
defeated the preceding year, and was probably chiefly the work of
Dundas. The fate of Fox's Bills had shown the strength of the India
House, while the necessity for some Government control was acknowledged
by all parties. The present measure was therefore one of compromise. A
new ministerial department was established which should exercise the
whole political control of the Company; this was to be called the Board
of Control. By it was laid the foundation of that system of double
government which continued in force till 1858. All business was to be
carried on in the name of the Company, which retained the whole
patronage except the appointment of the commander-in-chief, and other
higher functionaries, whose appointment was subject to the veto of the
Crown; but the Board of Control absolutely dictated the political
conduct of the Government. Thus the chartered rights of the Company were
left untouched; the balance of influence was not upset by a sudden
change of patronage; the Board of Control, being ministerial, passed in
or out of office with the ministry, but India was secured against
mercantile views of policy by its political management being withdrawn
from the hands of a merchant company. It was certainly a less complete
Bill than its predecessor, it could not be a permanent arrangement, but
tided over the present difficulty, and was carried without serious
opposition.
[Sidenote: Condition of Ireland.]
[Sidenote: Flood's democratic measure of reform.]
[Sidenote: Pitt's policy for Ireland.]
[Sidenote: Selfish commercial opposition.]
[Sidenote: Pitt recognizes the necessity for a union.]
Much more difficult was the settlement of Ireland. The rational and
patriotic demands of the volunteers, which had led to the legislation of
1780 and 1782, had been satisfied by those measures, but had been
followed, as is always the case in Ireland, by agitation of a more
revolutionary character. The leadership of the movement had passed from
Grattan to Flood, rather a demagogue than a statesman, and the
volunteers, a national and patriotic body, gradually dwindled to
nothing, and in their place arose a clamorous and revolutionary
democracy. The cry put forward was for parliamentary reform, the urgent
necessity for which was indeed obvious. In a Parliament of 300, 116
seats were held by nominees of no more than 25 proprietors. The
Government commanded 186 votes, pledged to them in exchange for the
possession or hope of offices or pensions, 12 members were regarded as
honest supporters of the Government, the regular Opposition was about
82, 30 Whig nominees, and 52 members of the popular party. To this
Parliament Flood introduced a sweeping measure of reform. A scene of
wild uproar was the consequence, the Bill was thrown out by a large
majority; no better success attended its reintroduction in a more
moderate form. The mob rose in wild disorder, and acts of ferocious
cruelty were perpetrated. The leader of this movement outside Parliament
was Napper Tandy, an ironmonger, who did not scruple to intrigue with
the Court of France. Some of the lower priests were also engaged on the
popular side, but as Flood refused the franchise to the Catholics in his
proposition, the main body held aloof from the movement. This state of
disorder Pitt intended to improve by reforming the Parliament in a more
practical and moderate manner and by commercial arrangements. All
attempts at parliamentary reform had however to be abandoned; but the
minister felt that before any vigorous measures could be adopted it was
necessary to grant justice to the people. He determined therefore to
complete the work of 1780, and to establish real commercial equality
between England and Ireland. At the same time he strongly held that
equality of privilege implied equality of burdens. In accordance with
this view eleven resolutions were brought into the Irish Parliament and
accepted without much opposition. By these the restrictions of trade,
which had already been removed as far as regarded Europe and the West
Indies, would be removed in like manner with regard to the rest of the
world; and with regard to imports, England and Ireland would become one
nation, so that goods landed in Ireland could be re-imported into
England without further duty. In exchange for this, all the hereditary
income of the Crown, which was derived chiefly from customs, beyond the
sum of £656,000 was to be applied to the support of the Imperial navy.
Thus the money paid would bear a direct proportion to the advantages
gained by Ireland by the extension of her trade. Pitt, sure of the
economical soundness of the principles on which this Bill was based,
only courted full discussion. He underrated the selfishness of the
commercial interest. On the resolutions being introduced to the English
Parliament, the strongest opposition was raised by merchants and
manufacturers, afraid of a fresh competitor; and Fox and Burke, the
first of whom was confessedly ignorant of the laws of political economy,
turned the opposition to their party purposes. The Bill had to be
altered considerably, restrictions with regard to the Asiatic trade had
to be continued, thus seriously diminishing the advantage granted to
Ireland, while Pitt laid himself open to the charge of encroaching upon
the newly-earned independence of that country by trying to establish the
commercial superiority of England, since all this commercial legislation
was to emanate from the English Parliament. The Whigs took immediate
advantage of this error, and, unable to stop the Bill in the English
Parliament, used all their eloquence to inflame the patriotic feeling of
the Irish. The Bill in its changed form was therefore rejected in Dublin
(August), and Pitt began to feel the necessity for that great measure
which he completed eighteen years afterwards. If either true
parliamentary reform was to be brought about or commercial equality to
be established, not only legislative equality, but legislative union, it
was plain, would be necessary.
[Sidenote: Failure of Pitt's Reform Bill.]
This was not the only defeat which the ministry suffered. It was no more
successful in its efforts at parliamentary reform in England. In fact,
the interest felt in the question had begun to flag; it had been raised
to its utmost by the separation between the representatives of the
people and the people they represented, which had been so obvious during
the administration of Grenville, and by the long and disastrous triumph
of royal influence under Lord North. But Pitt's success rested entirely
upon the will of the constituencies after the late dissolution, and the
people were on the whole satisfied with their representation. But with
Pitt, as with his father, the reform of Parliament had always been a
favourite object; he now produced a Bill by which he hoped to win all
parties to his side, but its very timidity weakened its popularity. He
proposed to disfranchise thirty-six rotten boroughs, and to give the
seventy-two seats thus gained to the counties and to London and
Westminster. Thus far he was true to his old plan, but afraid of the
opposition of borough proprietors, he consented to recognize as a part
of the Constitution their rights of proprietorship, and designed to set
apart a fund of £1,000,000 to satisfy the claims of the possessors of
the boroughs which he wished to destroy. Such as it was the Bill was
rejected by a majority of seventy, and Pitt regarded the question
henceforward as settled against him. It is to be observed that all these
measures, whether successful or not, were such as we should now speak of
as Liberal measures.
[Sidenote: His financial success.]
[Sidenote: Commercial treaty with France. Sept. 1786.]
The success of the Government in its financial schemes, on the other
hand, was marked, although the arrangement which at this time excited
most admiration has since been recognized as based upon an absurd
fallacy. Alarmed at the great increase of the National Debt, and
inspired with an honest wish to reduce it, Pitt produced his plan for a
sinking fund. His taxes had been so successful, and the financial
recovery of the nation at peace and under a firm Government had been
such, that he found himself possessed of a surplus closely bordering on
a million, and suggested that this million should annually be set aside
and vested in commissioners to accumulate at compound interest. It was
to be beyond the control of Government, and this fund with its
accumulations was to be applied, as circumstances permitted, to the
reduction of the debt. The principle is obviously sound as far as it
goes, that is to say, what a nation saves it can clearly apply to the
purpose of reducing its liabilities, but there the matter ends; there is
and can be no peculiar and mysterious power in a sinking fund. But this
was not seen by Pitt, or by those who approved of his plan, and when
times of difficulty arose, the million went on year by year being
religiously set aside, although not only one million, but many millions
were yearly borrowed for the purpose of covering the current expenses of
the year. Interest, and often much higher interest, was thus paid out on
the one side in order that a less interest might be gained on the other.
It was not till the year 1828 that this fallacy was finally exposed by
Lord Grenville, who, strangely enough, had been the chairman of the
committee who first recommended its adoption. It had however been
virtually abandoned in 1807. Although he fell into this error, Pitt's
financial views were generally broad; thus about this time he entered
into a commercial treaty with France, by which, with some very few
exceptions, prohibitory duties between the countries were repealed, a
moderate tariff was established, and the famous Methuen Treaty with
Portugal, which had almost excluded French wines, and changed the habits
of the English nation, giving them a taste for the hot wines of the
Peninsula, was abrogated. He also greatly simplified the custom duties,
supplying their place in some instances with excise or customs levied
inland, a most beneficial measure, but formerly so unpopular that it had
almost proved fatal to the ministry of Walpole, the only great financial
minister England had had during the century.
[Sidenote: Charges against Warren Hastings.]
[Sidenote: Pitt supports them.]
[Sidenote: Consequent impeachment. 1787.]
These measures, important as they were, excited little attention in
comparison with the threatened impeachment of Warren Hastings. Though,
as we have seen, censured, and almost recalled in 1781, the
Governor-General had latterly retained his post unmolested, and came
home in June 1785 on the natural expiration of his office. At home he
was well received, but he had two vindictive enemies in the House of
Commons, one, Edmund Burke, whose imagination had always been strongly
drawn towards the majestic history of Hindostan, and whose hatred of
oppression had been strongly fired by the accounts which had lately been
received from India; the other, Philip Francis, the rancorous and
defeated rival of the late Governor-General; and Hastings had scarcely
arrived in England before Burke gave notice that he should call
attention to his conduct. The feeling in England that Hastings had on
the whole done a great work was so strong, that, although the ministry
had shown him many marks of favour, it is possible that even Burke might
have left him untouched had not his injudicious and wearisome agent,
Major Scott, challenged inquiry. Burke accepted the challenge, and in
April produced specific charges against him, based principally on his
war with the Rohillas and on his conduct to Cheyte Singh and the Begums
of Oude. Hastings, who was always unable to understand the feeling of
the House of Commons, insisted on being personally heard at the bar, and
wearied the House by reading a written document of enormous length,
which occupied a day and a half in reading. On the first charge,
however, with regard to the Rohilla war, a considerable majority was in
his favour; it will be remembered that this belonged to the first period
of his administration, and it was upon this that he had been already
censured; but as Dundas, the original mover of the vote of censure,
urged, with much show of right, the fault was an old one, and had been
condoned by the subsequent appointment of Hastings as Governor-General.
Hastings and his friends believed that his cause had gained the support
of Government and was now secure. Great was their dismay when, upon the
second charge with regard to Cheyte Singh, which was brought forward by
Fox, Pitt rose and declared, that although he regarded Cheyte Singh as
the vassal of the Bengal Empire, and liable to be called on for
assistance, he could not but regard the infliction of a fine of £500,000
for the non-payment of £50,000 as ridiculously and shamefully
exorbitant. On these grounds, he said, he should support the charge, all
his friends voted with him, and Fox's resolution passed by a majority of
forty. This entirely changed the aspect of affairs, but the lateness of
the season (June 1786) rendered it necessary that the completion of the
charges should be postponed till the next year. In the February of that
year Sheridan, in a speech occupying five hours and forty minutes,
produced the charge with regard to the Begums of Oude. So striking was
this piece of oratory that it was deemed necessary to adjourn the House
lest the excitement produced by it should prevent cool judgment of the
matter. Again, and with the same result as before, Pitt both spoke and
voted in favour of the charge. On these and other charges Burke, in May,
founded a resolution of impeachment, and proceeding to the Upper House,
impeached the late Governor-General, who was taken into custody and
admitted to bail. The trial did not actually begin till February 1788.
[Sidenote: Conduct of the Prince of Wales.]