Chapter XXXVII.

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}