The Project Gutenberg EBook of The History of England in Three Volumes,
Vol.III., by E. Farr and E. H. Nolan

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org


Title: The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol.III.
       From George III. to Victoria

Author: E. Farr and E. H. Nolan

Release Date: September 8, 2006 [EBook #19218]

Language: English

Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HISTORY OF ENGLAND ***




Produced by David Widger







[Illustration: frontispiece.jpg QUEEN VICTORIA]

[Illustration: titlepage12.jpg VIGNETTE]



THE HISTORY OF ENGLAND

Volume III.



BY DAVID HUME, ESQ.

1688



London: James S. Virtue, City Road and Ivy Lane
New York: 26 John Street
1860



In Three Volumes:

VOLUME ONE: The History Of England From The Invasion Of Julius Cæsar To
The End Of The Reign Of James The Second............ By David Hume, Esq.

VOLUME TWO: Continued from the Reign of William and Mary to the Death of
George II........................................... by Tobias Smollett.

VOLUME THREE: From the Accession of George III. to the Twenty-Third Year
of the Reign of Queen Victoria............... by E. Farr and E.H. Nolan.




VOLUME THREE




CONTINUATION

OF

THE HISTORY OF ENGLAND,


By E. Farr and E. H. Nolan



[Illustration: 3-001-george3.jpg GEORGE III.]


{GEORGE III. 1760-1765}

GEORGE III.




CHAPTER I.

     Accession of George III...... Meeting of Parliament, &c......
     Judges made independent of the Crown..... Changes in the
     Cabinet..... The Operations of the War..... The Resignation of
     Mr. Pitt..... The Marriage of the King..... Coronation of
     their Majesties..... Meeting of Parliament..... Disturbances
     in Ireland..... War with Spain..... France and Spain declare
     War against Portugal..... Dissensions in the Cabinet.....
     Events in Germany, &c..... Negociations for Peace..... The
     Meeting of Parliament, and the Conclusion of Peace..... The
     Resignation of Bute..... The Character and Impeachment of
     Wilkes..... Changes in the Cabinet..... Meeting of Parliament,
     and further proceedings against Wilkes..... Proposition to
     tax the American Colonies..... Opposition of the Americans.....
     War with the North American Indians..... Domestic
     Occurrences

{1760}




ACCESSION OF GEORGE III.

Few monarchs ever ascended a throne under more auspicious circumstances
than George III. The sources of national wealth and prosperity
were daily becoming developed, and the British arms were everywhere
victorious. So extensive were their conquests, indeed, that it may
be said, the sun rose and set, at this date, within the limits of the
British dominions.

Prince George, who was the eldest son of the late Frederick, Prince of
Wales, was riding on horseback in the neighbourhood of Kew palace, with
his groom of the stole, Lord Bute, when news was brought him that his
grandfather was dead. This intelligence was confirmed soon after by
the arrival of Mr. Pitt, the head of the government, and they repaired
together to Kew. On the next morning George went up to St. James's,
where Pitt waited upon him, and presented the sketch of an address to
be pronounced at the meeting of the privy council. Pitt, however, was
doomed to find a rival where he thought to have found a friend. He was
told by his majesty, that an address had already been prepared, which
convinced him that Bute, on whose favour he had reckoned, would not
be contented with a subordinate place in the new government, but would
aspire to the highest offices in the state. In the course of the day,
October 26th, George was proclaimed king with the usual solemnities.

The accession of George, notwithstanding, did not involve any immediate
change in the existing administration. The Earl of Bute, together with
Prince Edward, Duke of York, were admitted into the privy council, but
it was given out that his majesty was satisfied, and even charmed,
with the existing cabinet, and that he would make no changes, with the
exception of a few in the household and in the minor offices. One of the
first acts of George III., was a proclamation "for the encouragement of
piety and virtue, and for preventing and punishing of vice, profaneness,
and immorality." This was naturally looked upon as a token of his
majesty's virtue and devotion, which view was borne out by his after
character; for although the proclamation may be considered in the
light of a dead letter as regards actual operation, it was enforced,
or recommended, by his example; and example hath a louder tongue either
than precept, proclamations, or laws. From the beginning to the close
of his long reign, George III. manifested a decent, moral, and religious
life, which doubtless had very beneficial effects upon society at large.

On the accession of the new king, parliament was prorogued, first to
the thirteenth, and afterwards to the eighteenth, of November. In the
meantime, public attention was engaged by the equipment of a large
squadron of men-of-war and transports at Portsmouth, and speculations
were rife as to the policy of the monarch--whether it would be
favourable to war or to peace. All classes of society, however, agreed
in anticipating the happiest results from his rule, since he had been
born and bred among them, and was well acquainted with the language,
manners, laws, and institutions of the people over whom he presided.
Loyal and dutiful addresses, expressing such sentiments, were presented
to the young monarch by the city of London, the two universities, and
from various bodies of people, to all which he returned sententious but
suitable replies, declaring his fixed resolve to respect their rights
and conciliate their esteem. A letter was addressed to him by the
venerable Bishop of London, Dr. Sherlock, as a parting benediction, in
which he gave him the following wise council:--"You, sir," he writes,
"are the person whom the people ardently desire; which affection of
theirs is happily returned by your majesty's declared concern for their
prosperity: and let nothing disturb this mutual consent; let there be
but one contest, whether the king loves the people best, or the people
him; and may it be a long, a very long, contest; may it never be
decided, but let it remain doubtful; and may the paternal affection on
the one side, and the filial obedience on the other, he had in perpetual
remembrance."




MEETING OF PARLIAMENT ETC.

The new king met parliament for the first time on the eighteenth of
November. He opened the session with a speech, announcing not only the
state of public and domestic affairs, but also the general principles by
which he intended to rule. One clause in his speech was very gratifying
to the people: "Born and educated in this country," he observed, "I
glory in the name of Briton." Having uttered this memorable sentence, he
said it would be the happiness of his life to promote the happiness and
interests of his loyal and affectionate people; and that their civil
and religious rights were equally as dear to him as the valuable
prerogatives of his crown. He then declared, that on his accession to
the throne of his ancestors he found the kingdom in a flourishing and
glorious state; victorious and happy; although engaged in a necessary
war, which, in the language of the late reign, he designated, "a war for
the Protestant interest." In this speech he neither spoke of peace nor
negociation, but asked the assistance of parliament to prosecute this
war with vigour. Finally, addressing the Commons on the subject of
supplies, he concluded his speech thus:--"The eyes of all Europe are on
you; from your resolutions the Protestant interest hopes for protection,
as well as all our friends for the preservation of their independency;
and our enemies fear the final disappointment of their ambitious and
destructive views: let these hopes and fears be confirmed and augmented,
by the vigour, unanimity, and despatch of our proceedings. In this
expectation I am the more encouraged, by a pleasing circumstance, which
I consider one of the most auspicious omens of my reign--that happy
extinction of divisions, and that union and good harmony, which continue
to prevail amongst my subjects, afford me the most agreeable prospects;
the natural disposition and wish of my heart are to cement and promote
them; and I promise myself, that nothing will arise on your part to
interrupt or disturb a situation so essential to the true and lasting
felicity of this great people." This speech was warmly responded to
by addresses from both houses of parliament; and the supplies for the
ensuing year, amounting to £19,616,119, were cheerfully voted, while the
civil list was fixed at £809,000; the king, on his part, consenting to
such a disposition of the hereditary revenues of the crown, as might
best promote the interests of the nation.

War, therefore, was to be continued, and Mr. Pitt and his colleagues
seemed to be confirmed in office: yet at this very moment the train was
laying for their expulsion. Earl Bute was anxious to become secretary
of state, and he was busily engaged in a correspondence with the noted
intriguer, Bubb Doddington. A few days after the meeting of parliament
his lordship declared to Doddington, that Lord Holderness "was ready at
his desire to quarrel with his fellow ministers, and go to the king and
throw up with seeming-anger, and then he (Bute) might come in without
seeming to displace anybody." This expedient, however, did not please
Doddington, and Bute paid deference to his opinion. Still the two
friends took counsel together on this important affair. In a letter
from Doddington to Bute, which was written in December, he advises "that
nothing be done that can be justly imputed to precipitation; nothing
delayed that can be imputed to fear." He adds: "Remember, my noble and
generous friend, that to recover monarchy from the inveterate usurpation
of oligarchy, is a point too arduous and important to be achieved
without much difficulty, and some degree of danger; though none but what
attentive moderation and unalterable firmness will certainly surmount."

In his career of ambition, Bute, who was "better fitted to perform
Lothario on the stage," than to act as secretary of state, paid small
regard to danger, but kept his eye fixed steadily on the point he had
in view. In January, he told Doddington that "Mr. Pitt meditated a
retreat;" and in the same month Doddington writes to him--"If the
intelligence they bring me be true, Mr. Pitt goes down fast in the city,
and faster at this end of the town: they add, you rise daily. This may
not be true; but if he sinks, you will observe that his system sinks
with him, and that there is nothing to replace it but recalling the
troops and leaving Hanover in deposit." Again, on the 6th of February,
Lord Bute declared, that it was easy to make the Duke of Newcastle
resign, but at the same time he expressed a doubt as to the expediency
of beginning in that quarter. Doddington replied, that he saw no
objection to this step; and that if Bute thought there was, he might put
it into hands that would resign it to him when he thought proper to take
it. But Bute was not disposed to try the duke too much, nor to risk
too bold a leap at once: so all ill humours were concealed under a fair
surface.

Had Earl Bute taken any decisive step thus early in the reign of the new
king, it would probably have exposed him to public derision and scorn.
At this time the old system seemed to please everybody; and among the
supplies voted by the House of Commons, none were more freely granted
than the continental subsidies, and especially that of £670,000 to
the King of Prussia. His victory at Torgau, which subjected all
Saxony--Dresden excepted--to his power, was made known in England just
before the meeting of parliament, and it had the effect of raising him
high in the public favour of the people of England. Nor was it less
advantageous to him on the Continent. His victory, with its results,
indeed, were a full compensation to him for the previous losses he had
sustained during the campaign. Laudohn raised the siege of Cosel, and
evacuated Silesia; the Russians raised that of Colburg, and retreated
into Poland; and the Swedes were driven out of Western Pomerania. In
the same spirit of gratitude, the parliament granted £200,000 to our
colonies in America, for the expenses they had incurred, and the
efforts they had made in the present war--a war which laid some of the
groundworks of the independence which a few years later was claimed by
those colonies.




JUDGES MADE INDEPENDENT OF THE CROWN.

By an act passed in the year 1701, under the reign of William III., the
commissions of the judges were continued _quamdiu bené se gesserint_;
or the power of displacing them was taken from the crown, and their
continuance in office was made solely dependent on the faithful
discharge of their duties, so that it might be lawful to remove them
on the address of both houses to the king. Still, at the demise of the
crown, their offices were vacated, and George II. had even refused to
renew the commission of a judge who had given him personal offence.
Towards the close of this session, his present majesty, in a speech from
the throne, recommended an important improvement in this matter, which
greatly increased his popularity. He declared his wish to render the
bench still more independent of the crown, and the administration of
justice still more impartial; and he recommended that provisions should
be made for the continuance of their commissions and salaries, without
any reference to the death of one king, or the accession of his
successor. In compliance with this expressed wish, a bill was framed for
rendering the judges thus independent, which was carried through both
houses. It received the royal assent on the 19th of March, on which day
his majesty put an end to the session.




CHANGES IN THE CABINET.

Before this event took place, a certain party in the state began to
think that circumstances would authorise them to commence a gradual
change of ministers, and of the policy of the nation. In this his
majesty seems to have coincided, for on the same day that he closed the
session, Mr. Legge, who was co-partner with Mr. Pitt in popularity,
was unceremoniously dismissed from the office of chancellor of the
exchequer, and Sir Francis Dashwood nominated his successor. On the same
day, also, Lord Holderness having secured a pecuniary indemnification,
with the reversion of the wardenship of the cinque ports, resigned the
office of secretary of state in favour of Lord Bute. It was said that
the king "was tired of having two secretaries, of which one (Pitt)
_would_ do nothing, and the other (Holderness) _could_ do nothing; and
that he would have a secretary who both could and would act." At the
same time, Lord Halifax was advanced from the board of trade to be
Lord-lieutenant of Ireland, and was replaced by Lord Barrington; and the
Duke of Richmond, displeased by a military promotion injurious to his
brother, resigned his post as lord of the bed-chamber. Other changes, of
minor importance, took place--such as the introduction of several Tories
into the offices of the court, and there was a considerable addition
made to the peerage. These changes were, doubtless, unpalatable to Mr.
Pitt; but Horace Walpole says that he was somewhat softened by the offer
of the place of cofferer for his brother-in-law, James Grenville. At all
events Mr. Pitt continued in office, and Earl Bute consented to leave
the management of foreign affairs in his hands; but at the same time,
both Bute and his majesty gave him to understand that an end _must_ be
put to the war.




THE OPERATIONS OF THE WAR.

Since the accession of George III., the events of the war had been
various. Although Frederick the Great had driven the Russians and
Austrians from his capital, they were still within his own territory;
while the French were on the side of the Rhine, and the Swedes continued
to threaten invasions. Such was his situation when he heard that George
II, was dead; that his successor was desirous of peace; that some of his
advisers were projecting a separate treaty with France; and that it was
probable that the English subsidies would soon be discontinued. This
intelligence in some degree was confirmed by the tardiness with which
the subsidy, so readily granted by the parliament in December, was paid
into his treasury. Nothing daunted, however, Frederick planned fresh
campaigns, and remonstrated with England; and, as an effect of the bold
front he put upon his affairs, he had the satisfaction of learning,
before he went into winter-quarters, that the Russians had retired
beyond the Vistula, and that the Austrians and Swedes had departed
out of Brandenburg, Silesia, and Pomerania. Still his situation was a
critical one. His losses in men had been great, his coffers were empty,
and his recruiting was therefore difficult: he looked forward to the
campaign of 1761 with doubt and anxiety.

Contrary to the general rules of war, this campaign opened in the very
depth of the winter. Contrasting the strong constitutions of his
troops with the less hardy character of his opponents, Prince Ferdinand
resolved to take them thus by surprise. Accordingly, early in February,
by a sudden attack, he drove the French out of their quarters near
Cassel, and they were only saved from utter destruction, by the defiles,
and other difficulties of the country, which favoured their retreat.
Almost simultaneously with this achievement, the Prussian general,
Sybourg, effected a junction with the Hanoverian general, Sporken,
and took three thousand French prisoners. Subsequently, these generals
defeated the troops of the empire under General Clefeld; and Prince
Ferdinand followed up these advantages by laying siege to Cassel,
Marbourg, and Ziegenhayn. He was ably seconded in his operations by
the Marquis of Granby, but he failed in capturing these places, and
was compelled to retire into the electorate of Hanover. The retreat
of Ferdinand took place in April, and in the same month the hereditary
Prince of Brunswick was defeated by the French under Broglie, near
Frankfort.

At this time, Frederick had certain information that the English were
negociating with the French. This information appears to have paralysed
his efforts, for preparations were not recommenced before June. On their
part the French, also, were inactive till that time, when Broglie, being
joined by the Prince of Soubise with large reinforcements, endeavoured
to drive Prince Ferdinand and the combined army of English and
Hanoverians from their entrenchments at Hohenower. On two several days
Broglie made a fierce attack upon his posts, chiefly directing his
murderous fire against that commanded by Lord Granby; but on the second
day the French gave way, and made a precipitate retreat, leaving behind
them several pieces of cannon, with five thousand of their comrades
sleeping the sleep of death. Their non-success produced mutual
recriminations between Broglie and Soubise, who had never perfectly
agreed, and they resolved to separate: Broglie crossed the Weser, and
threatened to fall upon Hanover, while Soubise crossed the Lippe, as if
with the intention of laying siege to Munster.

The division of the French army caused a corresponding division in that
of Prince Ferdinand; for whilst he marched with one half to watch the
operations of Broglie, the hereditary Prince of Brunswick marched with
the other half to check the career of Soubise. The skill and vigour of
Ferdinand prevented Broglie from making any important conquests, though
he could not protect the country from his ravages. Perceiving, indeed,
that he could not check the onward march of his enemy, Ferdinand turned
aside into Hesse, and cut off all the communications of the French
in that country, destroying their magazines and menacing their forts,
which, as he foresaw, had the effect of alarming Broglie, and causing
him to retreat out of Hanover. In the meantime, the hereditary Prince of
Brunswick had checked the career of Soubise, and destroyed many of his
magazines; and soon after the French went into winter quarters--Soubise
on the Lower Rhine, and Broglie at Cassel.

Frederick had taken the field in the month of April, and had marched
into Silesia, where the fortress of Schweidnitz was threatened by
the Austrian general, Laudon. On his approach, Laudon retreated into
Bohemia, where he was joined by fresh columns of Russians under Marshal
Butterlin. At the same time another Russian horde, under Romanzow,
re-occupied Pomerania. The Austrian and Russian generals conceived that
they could hem in Frederick, and prevent his escape; but aware of his
danger, the skilful monarch threw himself into his fortified camp of
Buntzelwitz, from behind the strong ramparts of which he laughed his
enemies to scorn. A blockade was attempted, but the country, wasted by
long wars, had become like a wilderness, and afforded no food either
for man or horse; while their provision-waggons, 5000 in number, had all
been taken by a flying column of Prussians, under General Platen, who
had also destroyed three of the largest magazines which the Russians had
established on the confines of Poland. Famine stared them in the face,
and breaking up their blockade, Butterlin marched into Pomerania, and
Laudon to an entrenched camp, near Fribourg. Thus relieved, Frederick
marched towards Upper Silesia, which proved to be an unfortunate
movement; for Laudon, taking advantage of it, rushed from his entrenched
camp, made an assault by night upon Schweidnitz, which lie took by
storm, and then took up his winter-quarters in Silesia. About the same
time the Russians, assisted by the Swedes, took Colberg, which enabled
them to winter in Pomerania and Brandenburg.

In the meantime the arms of the English had, for the most part, been
successfully employed. Pondicherry, the capital settlement of the
French in, the East Indies, and their last stronghold in that country,
surrendered at discretion to Colonel Coote, after the garrison and
inhabitants had been reduced to the necessity of feeding on the flesh of
camels and elephants, and even upon dogs and vermin. In the West Indies,
also, Lord Rollo and Sir James Douglas reduced the island of Dominica,
which, contrary to treaty, had been fortified by the French. A
less important conquest was made on the coast of Brittany. A secret
expedition, which had been for some time in preparation, suddenly sailed
from Spithead, and under the command of Commodore Kepple, with troops on
board under General Hodgson, took its course across the Channel. Great
things were expected as the result of this expedition, but it only
enacted the old story of "The mountain in labour." The point against
which this force was directed was the sterile rock of Bellisle, which,
at the expense of two thousand lives, was captured. Thus disappointed,
the people complained of the obstinacy of Pitt, and asked,
sarcastically, what could be done with it? Nevertheless, if it was no
use to England, it was a place of importance to France, as commanding
a large extent of coast, and affording a convenient receptacle to
privateers, whence it was insisted on as a valuable article of exchange,
when peace was concluded between the two nations.




THE RESIGNATION OF MR. PITT.

At this time France was rapidly sinking under the efforts made to
sustain war. Many of her colonies were conquered, her navy was ruined,
and her finances exhausted, while the people were impoverished and
discontented. Under these circumstances the king wished for repose and
peace, and in this wish, Sweden, Poland, and even Russia were ready to
join. Austria alone, whose empress-queen was bent on the recovery of
Silesia, and the overthrow of its conqueror Frederick, was desirous of
prolonging hostilities.

This wish of the king of France--which was also the wish of his
people--seemed to be favoured by circumstances in England. The influence
of Pitt was daily growing weaker, and Bute was fast gaining paramount
ascendancy. The French ministers, therefore, flattered themselves that
there would be no great difficulty in negociating; especially as they
were ready and willing to make some sacrifices, in order to obtain
peace. Accordingly an interchange of memorials was commenced, and in the
month of July Mr. Stanley was dispatched to Paris, while the Count de
Bussy came over to London, for the purpose of negociating. Preliminaries
were mutually proposed and examined. On their part the French offered
to cede Canada; to restore Minorca in exchange for Guadaloupe and
Marigalante; to give up Senegal and Goree for Anamaboo and Acra; to
renounce all claim to Cape Breton, on which no fortification was to
be erected; and to consent that Dunkirk should be demolished. But one
demand made by the French was fatal to the success of the negociations.
They demanded the restitution of all the captures made at sea by the
English before the declaration of war, on the ground that such captures
were contrary to all international law, which restitution was sternly
and absolutely refused, the English ministers arguing, that the right of
all hostile operations results not from a formal declaration of war, but
from the original hostilities of the aggressor. Another obstacle in the
way of peace, was the refusal of the French to restore Cassel, Gueldres,
and other places which they had taken from his Prussian majesty,
although they were ready to evacuate what they occupied in Hanover. And
as if these obstacles were not sufficient, the French preliminaries
were accompanied by a private memorial, demanding from England the
satisfaction of certain claims advanced by Spain, a country with which,
though differences existed, England was at peace. The French ambassador
was given to understand on this point, that the king of England would
never suffer his disputes with Spain to be thus mixed up with the
negociations carrying on with his country, and the cabinet called upon
the Spanish ambassador to disavow all participation in such a procedure,
and to state that his court was neither cognizant of it, nor wished to
blend its trifling differences with the weighty quarrels of France. But
this demand produced an unlooked-for budget, The Spanish ambassador at
first returned an evasive reply, but he was soon authorized by the court
of Spain to declare, that the proceedings of the French envoy had the
entire sanction of his Catholic majesty; and that, while his master was
anxious for peace, he was united as much by mutual interest as by the
ties of blood with the king of France. The fact is, Charles III., who
now occupied the throne of Spain, had privately agreed, before this
date, with the King of France, to consider every power as their common
enemy who might become the enemy of either, and to afford mutual
succours by sea and land. It had been also stipulated between them, that
no proposal of peace to their common enemies was to be made except by
common consent; that the two monarchs were to act as if they formed one
and the same power; that they should maintain for each other all the
possessions which they might possess at the conclusion of peace; and
finally, that the King of Naples might be allowed to participate in
their treaty, though no other family, except a prince of the house of
Bourbon, was to be admitted into this family compact.

Negociations for peace, therefore, proved abortive. Even Bute considered
many of the proposals of the French if not insulting to the majesty
of the British nation, at least inadmissible. Yet these négociations
resulted in the downfall of Pitt. At the council-table, that great
minister represented that Spain was only waiting for the arrival of
her annual plate-fleet from America, and then she would declare war.
He proposed, therefore, that her declaration should be anticipated by
England: that war should be forthwith proclaimed against Spain, and a
fleet sent out to intercept her ships and treasures from the western
world. He likewise proposed an immediate attack upon her colonies;
recommending the capture of the Havannah and the occupation of the
Isthmus of Panama, from whence an expedition might be sent against
Manilla and the Philippine Isles, to intercept the communication between
the continent of South America and the rich regions of the East. It
suited the purpose of Bute, however, to raise the laugh of incredulity
as to the declaration of war by Spain, questioning, at the same time,
the real meaning of the treaty entered into between the two Bourbons.
The other members of the cabinet also--Lord Temple excepted--pronounced
the measures proposed by Pitt too precipitate, and he had no alternative
but to resign; especially as he found, also, that the king was adverse
to his schemes. Accordingly, on the 6th of October, Pitt delivered
up his seals to the king, which his majesty received with ease and
firmness, but without requesting him to resume them. The monarch,
notwithstanding, lamented to him the loss of so valuable a servant,
while he declared that even if his cabinet had been unanimous for war
with Spain, he should have found great difficulty in consenting to such
a measure. Pitt was affected by the kind, yet dignified, behaviour of
the young king. "I confess, sire," said he, with emotion, "I had but
too much reason to expect your majesty's displeasure: I did not come
prepared for this exceeding goodness: pardon me, sir; it overpowers,--it
oppresses me."

Pitt retired with a pension of £3,000 per annum, which was to be
continued for three lives. The peerage was offered him, but he declined
it personally, accepting it only for his wife and her issue. He was
succeeded in office by Lord Egremont, son of the great Tory, Sir William
Wyndam. At the same time Lord Temple retired from office, and the privy
seal was given to the Duke of Bedford. The resignation of Mr. Pitt, with
his honours and rewards, were published in the Gazette on the following
day, and in the same paper a letter was published from the English
ambassador at Madrid, which was replete with assurances of the pacific
intentions of Spain. On this circumstance, combined with the resignation
of Mr. Pitt, Burke remarks:--"It must be owned that this manouvre was
very skilfully executed: for it at once gave the people to understand
the true motive to the resignation, the insufficiency of that motive,
and the gracious-ness of the king, notwithstanding the abrupt departure
of his minister. If after this the late minister should choose to
enter into opposition, he must go into it loaded and oppressed with the
imputation of the blackest ingratitude; if, on the other hand, he should
retire from business, or should concur in support of that administration
which he had left, because he disapproved its measures, his acquiescence
would be attributed by the multitude to a bargain for his forsaking
the public, and that the title and his pension were the considerations.
These were the barriers that opposed against that torrent of popular
rage which it was apprehended would proceed from this resignation. And
the truth is, they answered their end perfectly."

This reasoning of Mr. Burke was strictly correct. The friends and
partisans of Mr. Pitt raised violent clamours against Bute, for
displacing a man who had raised the nation from its once abject state to
the pinnacle of glory; and addresses, resolutions, and condolences
were set on foot in London and the greater corporations, with a view
of exciting the smaller cities and boroughs in England to follow the
example. The press, also, was active in vilifying Bute for the part
he had taken in this affair. But Bute had his friends as well as his
enemies, and Pitt had his enemies as well as his friends. The press
worked on both sides of the question; while it vilified Bute, it
animadverted on Pitt's pensions and honours. At the same time the people
were only partially in the favour of the ex-minister. The progress
of addresses, resolutions, and condolences was languid, and in some
instances the people were disposed to cast odium _upon_, and to blacken
the character _of_, the retired secretary. The popularity of Pitt was,
in truth, obscured with mists and clouds for a time, and it was not
till after he had raised a few thunder-storms of opposition, that his
political atmosphere once again became radiant with the sunshine of
prosperity. For the mind of Pitt was not to be long borne down by its
heavy weight of gratitude to royalty, or by public accusations: he soon
shook off the one, and resolutely braved the other.




THE MARRIAGE OF THE KING.

On the 8th of July the young king having called an extraordinary
council, made the following declaration to its members:--"Having nothing
so much at heart as to procure the welfare and happiness of my people,
and to render the same stable and permanent to posterity, I have, ever
since my accession to the throne, turned my thoughts towards the choice
of a princess for my consort; and I now with great satisfaction acquaint
you, that after the fullest information, and mature deliberation, I am
come to a resolution to demand in marriage the Princess Charlotte of
Mecklenberg Strelitz; a princess distinguished by every eminent virtue
and amiable endowment; whose illustrious line has constantly shown the
firmest zeal for the Protestant religion, and a particular attachment
to my family. I have judged it proper to communicate to you these my
intentions, in order that you may be fully apprised of a matter so
highly important to me and to my kingdoms, and which I persuade myself
will be most acceptable to my loving subjects."

The preliminary negociations concerning this union had been conducted
with great secresy, whence this announcement occasioned some surprise to
most of the members of the extraordinary council. It met, however, with
the warmest approbation of them all, and the treaty was concluded on the
15th of August. The Earl of Harcourt, with the Duchesses of Ancaster and
Hamilton, were selected to escort the young bride to England, and Lord
Anson was the commander of the fleet destined to convoy the royal yacht.
Princess Charlotte arrived in England on the 7th of September, and on
the following day she was escorted to St. James's, where she was met by
his majesty.

Before the arrival of the future Queen of England, in a letter to one
of his correspondents, Lord Harcourt had given this description of
her:--"Our queen, that is to be, has seen very little of the world;
but her very good sense, vivacity, and cheerfulness, I dare say will
recommend her to the king, and make her the darling of the British
nation. She is no regular beauty; but she is of a pretty size, has a
charming complexion, with very pretty eyes, and is finely made." Lord
Harcourt was right in his conjectures concerning the views which the
king would take of his young bride. It is said, that in the first
interview, although he saluted her tenderly, the king was disappointed
in not finding in the princess those personal charms which he had
expected. But this was only a momentary feeling. The king soon
became interested in her artlessness, cheerful manners, and obliging
disposition, while the whole court was loud in their praises of her
affability, and even of her beauty. "In half an hour," says Horace
Walpole, "one heard of nothing but proclamations of her beauty:
everybody was content; everybody was pleased." So the marriage
took place in the midst of good-humour and rejoicings: the nuptial
benediction was given by Dr. Seeker, Archbishop of Canterbury, and the
Duke of Cumberland gave away the bride.




CORONATION OF THEIR MAJESTIES.

Extraordinary preparations were made for the coronation of their
majesties. It took place on the 22nd of September, and though described
as solemn and magnificent, it did not materially differ from preceding
coronations. The crown was placed on the head of the monarch by
Archbishop Seeker, and before his majesty partook of the holy sacrament,
he exhibited a very pleasing instance of piety before the assembled
court. As he approached the altar, he asked if he might lay aside his
crown; and when the archbishop, after consulting with Bishop Pearce,
replied, that no order existed on the subject in the service, he
rejoined, "Then it ought to be done;" at the same time taking the diadem
from his head, he placed it, reverentially, on the altar. His majesty
wished the queen to manifest the same reverence to the Almighty, but
being informed that her crown was fastened to her hair, he did not press
the subject. On the return of the procession, an incident occurred,
which, had it happened among the nations of antiquity, would have been
considered an omen of evil portent, which could only have been averted
by a whole hecatomb of sacrifices. The most valuable diamond in his
majesty's diadem fell from it, and was for some time lost, but it was
afterwards found, and restored to his crown. The coronation of George
III. could boast of one very extraordinary spectator among the many
thousands present. This was Charles Edward Stuart, the young Pretender,
who had come over in disguise, and who obtained admission into the
abbey, and witnessed all the ceremonies consecrating a king on that
throne which he considered legitimately belonged to his father or
himself! It is said that George knew that he was in London, and that
he would not allow him to be molested; feeling, no doubt, secure in the
affections of a loyal people. And that he was secure, the éclat with
which the great festival of his coronation passed off, fully manifested.
All combined to testify that their majesties were very popular, and that
they had good reasons for anticipating a happy and prosperous reign.




MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

The new parliament met on the 3rd of November, when Sir John Cust was
elected speaker of the commons. He was presented to his majesty on the
6th, on which day the king, having first approved of the choice, thus
addressed both houses:--"At the opening of the first parliament summoned
and elected under my authority, I with pleasure notice an event which
has made me completely happy, and given universal joy to my loving
subjects. My marriage with a princess, eminently distinguished by every
virtue and amiable endowment, while it affords me all possible domestic
comfort, cannot but highly contribute to the happiness of my kingdoms,
which has been, and always shall be, the first object in every action of
my life.

"It has been my earnest wish that this first period of my reign might be
marked with another felicity; the restoring of the blessings of peace to
my people, and putting an end to the calamities of war, under which so
great a part of Europe suffers: but though overtures were made to
me, and my good brother and ally, the King of Prussia, by the several
belligerent powers, in order to a general pacification, for which
purpose a congress was appointed, and propositions were made to me by
France for a particular peace with that crown, which were followed by an
actual négociation; yet that congress has not hitherto taken place, and
the negociation with France is entirely broken off.

"The sincerity of my disposition to effectuate this good work has been
manifested in the progress of it: and I have the consolation to reflect,
that the continuance of the war, and the further effusion of Christian
blood, to which it was the desire of my heart to put a stop, cannot,
with justice, be imputed to me.

"Our military operations have been in no degree suspended or delayed;
and it has pleased God to grant us further important success, by the
conquest of the islands of Belleisle and Dominica: and by the reduction
of Pondicherry, which has in a manner annihilated the French power in
the East Indies. In other parts, where the enemy's numbers were greatly
superior, their principal designs and projects have been generally
disappointed, by a conduct which does the highest honour to the
distinguished capacity of my general, Prince Ferdinand of Brunswick, and
by the valour of my troops. The magnanimity and ability of the King of
Prussia have eminently appeared in resisting such numerous armies, and
surmounting so great difficulties.

"In this situation I am glad to have an opportunity of receiving the
truest information of the sense of my people by a new choice of their
representatives: I am fully persuaded you will agree with me in opinion,
that the steady exertion of our most vigorous efforts, in every part
where the enemy may still be attacked with advantage, is the only means
that can be productive of such a peace as may with reason be expected
from our successes. It is therefore my fixed resolution, with your
concurrence and support, to carry on the war in the most effectual
manner, for the interest and advantage of my kingdoms; and to maintain
to the utmost of my power the good faith and honour of my crown, by
adhering firmly to the engagements entered into with my allies. In
this I will persevere until my enemies, moved by their own losses and
distresses, and touched with the miseries of so many nations, shall
yield to the equitable conditions of an honourable peace: in which
case, as well as in the prosecution of the war, I do assure you, no
consideration whatever shall make me depart from the true interests of
these my kingdoms, and the honour and dignity of my crown."

His majesty concluded his speech by calling upon the commons for
adequate supplies to enable him to prosecute the war with vigour, and by
asking for a provision for the queen in case she should survive him. The
commons, besides the usual address, sent a message of congratulation to
the queen, and they proved the sincerity of their professions by making
her a grant of £100,000 per annum, with Somerset House and the Lodge in
Richmond Park annexed: a patent also passed the privy seal, granting her
majesty the yearly sum of £40,000 for the support of her dignity. On the
subject of the supplies for the ensuing year, however, a long and
stormy debate took place; and a month elapsed before they were finally
adjusted. Opposition to them chiefly arose from the circumstance that
the sentiments of the people, and likewise of the court, were beginning
to change respecting the German war. But Lord Egremont found himself
compelled to walk in the very steps which Pitt had marked out, at
least for some time, and the large demands made were pressed upon the
parliament, and finally received its sanction. Seventy thousand seamen
were voted, and it was agreed to maintain 67,676 effective men, beside
the militia of England, two regiments of fencibles in Scotland, the
provincial troops in America, and 67,167 German auxiliaries. Some new
taxes, also, were imposed, including an additional one on windows, and
an increased duty on spirituous liquors, in order to pay the interest
of £12,000,000, which it was found necessary to borrow, to make good
the deficiences of last session. In the whole the supplies for the year
1762, voted by the parliament, amounted to more than £18,000,000: two
millions of which were required for the defence of Portugal.

{GEORGE III. 1760-1765}




DISTURBANCES IN IRELAND.

In the month of October, Lord Halifax, the new Lord-lieutenant of
Ireland met his Majesty's first parliament in that country. The Irish
parliament responded to the sentiments of the English parliament
respecting the accession of the young monarch. Addresses replete with
loyalty were voted by both houses; and the greatest confidence was
expressed in the rule of Lord Halifax, auguring the happiest results
from his administration, and promising cordial co-operation. That
ill-fated country, however, was restless as the waves of the ocean.
During the viceroyalty of the Duke of Bedford, it had been totally
under the dominion of the lord's justices, and they had recently made
an attempt to gain popularity, by expressing doubts in the privy
council concerning the propriety of sending over a money bill, lest the
rejection of it should occasion the dissolution of the new parliament,
and thereby endanger the peace of the country. They were opposed in
their views by Lord Chancellor Bowes and his party, and party violence
was inflamed to the highest pitch. The popular coalition prevailed so
far as to alter the established custom, by sending a bill not for the
actual supplies, but relating to a vote of credit for Ireland, whence
all ferment on this subject subsided. In such a contest it is not likely
that the people would have joined, but they had grievances of their
own, which endangered the public tranquillity. In his speech to the new
parliament, Lord Halifax had recommended that the linen trade, which had
been confined to the southern parts of the kingdom, should be extended
throughout the country, inasmuch as there was a large demand for it, and
it might thereby be made a source of wealth to the whole country. True
patriots would have observed the wisdom of, and have acquiesced in, this
measure; but self-interest in Ireland, as in all countries under the
face of the sun, prevailed over the feelings of patriotism. The people
in the southern parts of the kingdom murmured at such a project, as
it would affect their personal interests, and their discontents were
increased by the conversion of considerable quantities of land from a
state of tillage to that of pasturage, for the purpose of feeding more
cattle. By this measure, great numbers of the peasantry were deprived
at once, not only of employment, but of their cottages. Many small farms
were indeed still let to some cottagers at rack-rent, which cottages
had the right of commonage, guaranteed to them in their leases; but
afterwards the commons were enclosed, and no recompense was made to the
tenants by the landlords. Thus provoked, and being joined by the idle
and dissolute, these unhappy people sought to redress their own wrongs
by acts of violence. Fences were destroyed, horses and arms were
seized, cattle were maltreated, and obnoxious persons, especially
tithe-proctors, were exposed to their vengeance. Many were stripped
naked, and made to ride on horses with saddles formed of the skins of
hedgehogs, or buried up to their chins in holes lined with thorns
that were trodden down closely to their bodies. From their outrageous
violence these people obtained the name of "Levellers," but afterwards,
from the circumstance of their wearing white shirts over their clothes
for the purpose of disguise, they were termed "White Boys." Their
outrages demanded the strong arm of the law, and the royal troops were
employed in their suppression. Many suffered the extreme penalty of the
law, though many more were permitted to escape through the lenity of
the judges, whence the disorders long prevailed. As the rioters were
all Romanists, a popish plot was suspected, and the Romish clergy were
charged with promoting their outrages. A motion was made in parliament
to investigate this matter, but there not being sufficient evidence
to inculpate any parties, it was dropped, and no efficient remedy was
therefore applied to heal the disorder.




WAR WITH SPAIN.

The year had not closed before the ministers found that a rupture with
Spain was inevitable. The first intimation of it was detected in the
menacing conduct of the court of Versailles; and Lord Bristol, the
English ambassador at Madrid, was instructed to demand the real
intentions of Charles III., and the real purport of the family compact.
General Wall, the Spanish minister replied more insolently than before;
but an open rupture was avoided till the plate-ships had arrived at
Cadiz with all the wealth expected from Spanish America. Then it was
seen that the political vision of Pitt could penetrate much deeper than
that of Bute and his colleagues. Complaining of the haughty spirit and
the discord which prevailed in the British cabinet, and of the insults
offered to his sovereign, Wall informed Bristol that he might leave
Spain as soon as he pleased, and at the same time issued orders to
detain all English ships then in the ports of Spain. Lord Bristol
returned; the Count of Fuentes, the Spanish ambassador, quitted London,
and war was mutually declared by both countries.

The declaration of war was made on the 4th of January, and on the 19th
parliament met after its adjournment, when the king informed both houses
of the measures he had been compelled to adopt. The members of both
houses were unanimous in their approbation of his majesty's conduct,
and in assurances of vigorous support. The consideration of the
intelligence, notwithstanding, caused a stormy debate, but as no regular
opposition was organized, and government was supported by Pitt, clamour
died away, and the war met with general approbation. In the house
of lords, a motion was made reprobating the expense of the German
campaigns, and recommending a recall of the British troops for the
security of our own dominions; but it was strongly opposed, and the
previous question was carried by a large majority. Preparations were
therefore made for war with Spain, without diminishing the expenses
of the war in Germany; and while fresh troops were enlisted, some wise
alterations were made by parliament in the militia laws, by which a
line was drawn between those persons liable to serve, and such as were
exempt.

Operations were commenced in the Havannah. On the 5th of March, an
expedition sailed under the command of General Lord Albemarle and
Admiral Pococke, in order to strike a severe blow against the commerce
of Spain in that quarter. This expedition was joined in the West Indies
by a strong squadron commanded by Sir James Douglas, and sailing through
the Straits of Bahama, it arrived before the Havannah on the 5th of
June. A landing was easily effected and siege was laid to the Moro,
a strong fort which defended the harbour, and which was considered
impregnable. The difficulties in making the approaches on a hard rocky
soil were great, and the troops suffered from sickness, fatigue, and
the fire of the enemy; but being joined by fresh reinforcements from New
York and our West Indian Islands, the fort was isolated from the town,
and it was then stormed through a narrow and perilous breach, and
carried at the point of the bayonet. The city of Havannah maintained the
siege a fortnight longer; but it was compelled to capitulate, and it was
yielded up with 180 miles of country westward, or all the best part of
the island of Cuba. Nine Spanish ships of the line and three frigates
were taken in the harbour, and three ships of the line and a galleon
were destroyed, while the booty that fell into the hands of the victors
amounted to £3,000,000 sterling. But the ultimate advantages of this
victory promised to be greater than its immediate results. By the
possession of the Havannah, indeed, England obtained the absolute
command of the passage pursued by the plate-fleets of Spain, and seemed
to lay the wealth of that country at her feet.

It was not in the western hemisphere alone, that the dominions of the
King of Spain were attacked. When the news of the war reached the
East Indies an armament was fitted out at Madras, under the command
of Admiral Cornish and Sir William Draper, which suddenly appeared
off Manilla, the capital of Luconia, and the surrounding isles. Draper
landed his forces and took possession of the suburbs of Manilla, before
the inhabitants were well aware of the war between Spain and England.
Manilla was governed by the archbishop, who proved by his conduct, that
like the ecclesiastics of the middle ages, he could both fight and say
mass. The archbishop excited the natives to assault the assailants in
the rear, while at the head of about eight hundred Spainards he opposed
them in front. The Indians fought with almost incredible ferocity; but
they were cut to pieces by the sword, or died gnawing with their teeth
the bayonets by which they were transfixed. The works of Manilla were
carried by storm, and Draper's forces, which were chiefly composed of
Sepoys and Lascars, began to plunder and destroy the city. The inner
citadel, however, remained uncaptured, and the archbishop with the
magistrates, and some of the garrison threw themselves into it for
safety. A capitulation ensued, by which the city and port of Manilla,
with several ships and the military stores, were surrendered to
England, while a ransom was given for all private property, amounting
to 4,000,000 dollars. The fruits of this important conquest did not
terminate here. Two ships were despatched from the British squadron
to intercept the rich galleon Phillippina, and though they missed this
prize, they captured the Santa Trinidad, a great Manilla and Acapulco
galleon, with a cargo valued at 3,000,000 dollars. The whole group of
islands then submitted to the English flag.

The English arms were equally successful in a series of attacks on
the remaining French West India Islands. Martinique, Grenada, the
Grenadines, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, and Tobago, were all captured by an
army under general Moncton and a squadron under Admiral Rodney, so that
England obtained possession of the entire chain of the Caribbees. It
was in vain that the French in that part of the world sought to stem the
onward progress of the British arms: they were overpowering, and being
hopeless of succour from their mother-country, the French everywhere
submitted to the conquerors.




FRANCE AND SPAIN DECLARE WAR AGAINST PORTUGAL.

Before the news of the loss of Havannah and Manilla reached the court
of Spain, that court had commenced a land campaign on the continent. A
close alliance had long subsisted between England and Portugal, whence
France and Spain at this period chose to consider the king of Portugal
as the creature of the King of England. These two powers therefore
determined on a rupture with Portugal, unless the Portuguese should
renounce their English alliance. Preparations were accordingly made
for an invasion of Portugal by France as well as by Spain, while in the
meantime a joint memorial was presented by the two powers, inviting the
king of that country to join the alliance of the Bourbons against Great
Britain, which they were pleased to designate "the common enemy of all
maritime nations." At the same time they insisted that he should expel
all English merchants and English sojourners from his kingdom, and close
his ports to English shipping. It was added that ii he acceeded to these
proposals, his fortresses and sea-ports should be garrisoned by French
and Spanish troops to protect him from England's vengeance, but that
if he refused--and the answer was to be given within four days--he must
take the consequences of such a line of policy.

There were circumstances existing which ought to have disarmed all
hostility on the part of France and Spain towards Portugal, even if
that hostility had been founded in justice. The Portuguese had not yet
recovered from the effects of the earthquake which, in 1756, had reduced
a third part of Lisbon to a ruinous heap. Then again, the Portuguese
power was acknowledged to be weak; but, above all, the King of Portugal
was the near relation of the King of Spain. The weakness of the
Portuguese government, however, was rather a temptation than a barrier
to the view of the Spanish monarch, and as for the claims of kindred,
they were absorbed in his views of ambition. Portugal was incorporated
geographically, and he longed to incorporate it politically with Spain,
whence the claims of misfortune and kindred were overlooked by him.
Conscience, moreover, was not allowed to assert its sway over his
actions, for he had armed himself against its lawful power by leaving
the decision of peace or war to his Portuguese majesty. If he joined
the Bourbon alliance, well and good, for the forces of France and Spain
would obtain possession of Portugal at an easy rate; but if not, if
he still adhered to his old alliance with England, then it would be
manifest to all the world, if he lost the kingdom, it would be his own
fault: in such cheap estimation does ambition hold morality.

At this period, Portugal had not an army exceeding 20,000 men, and her
fleet was reduced to six ships of the line and a few frigates, while her
fortresses were in ruins. In such a desperate condition, therefore, it
might have been expected that, however repugnant to his inclinations,
the heir of the house of Braganza would have broken his alliance with
England, and have joined the Family Compact. Prudence would seem to have
dictated such a step, but he acted otherwise. He had spirit enough to
declare that he would never submit to such conditions; and the French
and Spanish ambassadors quitted Lisbon, while their armies on the
frontiers put themselves in motion towards his capital. Ruin seemed to
await the monarch of Portugal. Braganza, Miranda, and Torre de Moncorvo
were captured by the Marquis of Saria, who commanded the Spanish army
north of the Douro, while another body of Spanish troops penetrated
south of the Douro into Beira, and occupied a post near Almeida. But
the Spaniards were doomed to receive a check. The militia and the brave
peasantry of Portugal, assisted and directed by some British officers,
maintained a destructive war of posts on the forces of Saria, and thus
stemmed his onward progress till relief came from England.

On the 11th of May, George III. ordered the following message to be laid
before the house of commons:--"His majesty, relying on the known zeal
and affection of his faithful commons, and considering that in
this conjuncture emergencies may arise, which may be of the utmost
importance, and be attended with the most pernicious consequences, if
proper means should not be immediately applied to prevent or defeat
them; and his majesty also taking into his most serious consideration
the imminent danger with which the kingdom of Portugal, an ancient and
natural ally of his crown, is threatened by the powers now in open
war with his majesty, and of what importance the preservation of that
kingdom is to the commercial interests of this country, is desirous that
the house would enable him to defray any extraordinary expenses of the
war incurred, or to be incurred for the service of the year 1762; and to
take all such measures as may be necessary to disappoint or defeat
any enterprises or designs of his enemies against his majesty or his
allies."

This message was favourably received; Pitt advocated the cause of our
ancient ally with fervour and eloquence, and the house of commons voted
£1,000,000 sterling for the purposes therein specified. And this vote
was followed by prompt and effective measures to arrest the arms of
France and Spain. Eight thousand British troops under the command
of Lord Tyrawley, the Earl of Loudon, General Townshend, Lord George
Lennox, and Brigadiers Crawford and Burgoyne, landed in Portugal, and
immediately commenced operations. At the same time the native Portuguese
army consented to submit to the command of the Count de la Lippe, an
active and experienced German officer, who had commanded the British
artillery in Germany. The events of this campaign were complicated and
various. Lippe concentrated the principal part of the Portuguese forces
at Puente de Marcello, to prevent the progress of the Spanish arms
northward, while Brigadier Burgoyne was detached to fall upon Valencia
d'Alcantara, on the frontiers of Spain, southward. Burgoyne carried
Valencia d'Alcantara by a _coup-de-main_, capturing a Spanish general
with all his staff, and all the magazines which Spain had there
collected for the purpose of an invasion along the Tagus, and then
retraced his steps to Pnente de Marcello. At the same time Almeida was
taken by the Spanish general, Count d'Aranda, and having garrisoned this
place, and Ciudad Rodrigo, he marched towards the Tagus, designing to
pass into the Alemtejo. When, however, he arrived at Villa Velha, on the
Tagus, he found that the passage of the river would be disputed. Lippe,
aware of his designs, had marched to Abrantes, the key of Portugal on
the Tagus, and had posted detachments under Burgoyne and the Count
de St. Jago at the adjacent passes of Alvite and at Niza. The Spanish
general obtained possession of the castle of Villa Velha, and drove
the Count de St. Jago from the pass of Alvite; but while some of the
Spaniards were pursuing the routed Portuguese forces, Burgoyne threw
a detachment across the Tagus upon Villa Velha, and while the Count
d'Abrantes was amused in front by a feigned attack from Niza, this
detachment, commanded by Colonel Lee, entered their quarters in the
rear, and began a terrible fire of musquetry. It was under cover of the
night that Lee entered the quarters of the Spanish commander, and thus
surprised, the Spaniards were routed with terrible slaughter, while
their magazines were destroyed and their guns spiked. This was a blow
from which the Spaniards could not recover; and the French invading
forces having failed in their co-operation, his provisions beginning to
fail, the autumnal rains to descend in torrents, and the peasantry to
block up the roads, the Count d'Aranda dismantled the few fortresses he
had taken, and returned to Spain. To all these losses and defeats was
added the capture of the Spanish ship, Hermione, off Cape St. Vincent,
by the English, having treasure on board that amounted to nearly
£1,000,000 sterling. The only expedition of the English which failed
during this year was that against Buenos Ayres, which was as ill
conceived as it was paltry. But this gave Spain no hope for the future.
Taught experience by reverses, the war with England became, indeed,
unpopular with the Spanish people, and their universal cry was, at
the close of this campaign, "Peace with England, and war with all the
world!"




DISSENSIONS IN THE CABINET.

Early in January of this year died the Czarina Elizabeth, one of the
most bitter and inveterate enemies of our ally, the King of Prussia. She
was succeeded in her empire by Peter III., who, by the month of March,
had concluded a close alliance with Frederick, placing an army of 20,000
men, which had hitherto fought against him, entirely at his disposal to
fight against Austria. This had no sooner become known to the English
cabinet, than Bute and his party proposed that no further subsidies
should be paid to Frederick; at the same time, they reminded his
Prussian majesty, that he had himself declared that if he were once
secured by the neutrality of Russia, he should have little need of
further assistance from England. But the old Duke of Newcastle would
not admit the validity of this reasoning of his colleagues. He waited
on Bute, and declared his intention to resign, unless a subsidy of
£2,000,000 was paid, and the continental war continued. Bute answered
drily, "that if the money were granted, peace might be retarded;" but he
never requested him to continue in office, nor said a civil word to the
aged politician. Accordingly, the Duke repaired from the minister to his
master, and resigned his office, refusing a pension which was offered
as a reward for his services, and for the large sacrifices which he had
made since he had been minister, out of his private fortunes. "If he
could no longer be permitted to serve his country," he said, "he was at
least determined not to be a burden on it: that if his private fortune
had suffered by his loyalty, it was his pleasure, his glory, and his
pride; and that he desired no reward but his majesty's approbation."
Horace Walpole says, that he retired from the royal presence
comparatively a poor man, to find how solitary and deserted could be the
mansion of an ex-minister. Newcastle had been more than forty-five years
in the cabinet, and this utter disregard to money-making exhibits his
patriotism in a strong light: few would have served their country so
long without well replenishing their coffers, especially at that age,
when the virtues of disinterestedness and self-abnegation were exotic
rather than indigenous to the human heart.

Bute had his reasons for answering the Duke of Newcastle coldly, and the
result answered his expectations. He succeeded the ex-minister at the
head of the treasury, "taking the reins of government with almost as
little experience as Phaeton, and meeting with a fall almost as soon."
Mr. George Grenville was appointed secretary of state; but he afterwards
exchanged posts with Lord Halifax, who had recently been appointed head
of the admiralty. Lord Barrington was removed from the Exchequer in
which office he was succeeded by Sir Francis Dashwood, and he was
appointed treasurer of the navy. Soon after the Duke of Devonshire
resigned his post of lord high chamberlain, and the Earl of Hardwicke
retired from public life altogether. Many of the friends of the duke
retained their places or accepted others; but several noblemen and
commoners of distinction before the end of the year ranged themselves in
the ranks of opposition. Amongst these was the Duke of Newcastle,
who, although during the summer he had abstained from opposing the
government, at length formed a political connexion with the Duke of
Cumberland, whom he had before invariably opposed.




EVENTS IN GERMANY, ETC.

Frederick of Prussia had not only entered into an alliance with Russia,
but towards the end of May he had concluded a peace with Sweden.
Backed by these two powers he boasted that he was in possession of
more advantages than he could have derived from gaining three pitched
battles, and without waiting for the English subsidy he took the field.
He began operations in Silesia, and directed his attention to the
recovery of Schweidnitz. He was aided in his designs by his brother,
Prince Henry, who had gained an important battle near Freyburg, and thus
changed the aspect of affairs in Saxony; but while he was intent on his
plans, he was threatened with a sudden reverse of fortune. This was the
death of his new ally, the Czar Peter.

After making peace with Frederick, and sending 20,000 of his troops
to serve under him, Peter, from a spirit of admiration of the Prussian
monarch, and of enthusiasm in his cause, insisted upon introducing the
Prussian discipline, and even the Prussian uniform into his army. He
set the example by appearing in the dress of a Prussian general, and he
often observed that, if he had remained Duke of Holstein, he would have
commanded a regiment in the Prussian service, and have become personally
acquainted with Frederick. This naturally offended the national
prejudices; but he took a more fatal step for his own welfare, by
building or dedicating Protestant chapels, by ordering the removal
of painted images of saints from the churches, and by checking the
entrances of novices into convents. By these measures he therefore
gained himself many enemies both among the military and the priesthood.
Every third man he admitted into his councils or his presence, it has
been said, was a traitor. His fall, however, might have been far distant
but for the wife of his bosom. Catherine, Princess of Anhalt Zerbst,
charmed the Russians as much as Peter disgusted them, and she was,
moreover, induced to believe that he had discovered her guilty connexion
with Count Gregory Orloff, and entertained a design of divorcing her and
casting her into prison, that he might raise his own favourite mistress,
Elizabeth Countess of Woronzow, to the throne. Hence--and being also
inflamed with ambition--Catherine lent a willing ear to the complaints
of the army, clergy, and nobility, and, aided by them, she effected
another revolution in Russia. Habited in the garb of a man, and
surrounded by some of the military and nobility, she proceeded to
the church of the Virgin Mary of Casan, where a vast concourse of the
clergy, the nobles, and the soldiery hailed her on her arrival as their
deliverer. She was crowned sole empress by the Archbishop of Novogorod,
and all present took the oath of allegiance to her. From the church,
Catherine proceeded to the senate, which at once acknowledged her right,
and swore fidelity to her cause. All the adherents of her husband were
then arrested, and Peter himself was thrown into prison, where, after a
few days, he died, as some say by disease, but more probably as others
assert, by assassination.

No one was more interested in these proceedings than Frederick of
Prussia. He conceived that he might find an enemy as implacable in
Catherine as he had found in her predecessor, Elizabeth. His forebodings
were not fully realized, for while the empress recalled the Russian
troops serving under him, she restored the Prussian territories which
had been occupied by Elizabeth, and promised to observe a strict
neutrality. Thus set free from his fears, Frederick proceeded in his
campaign with his accustomed vigour. Schweidnitz and Silesia were
recovered, and the Austrians were driven into Bohemia, one part of the
Prussian army advancing to the very gates of Prague. At the same time,
the allied armies, under Prince Ferdinand and the Marquis of Granby,
reduced Cassel, expelled the French from Hesse, and effected the
salvation of Hanover--events which created alarm and despondency in the
French cabinet.




NEGOCIATIONS FOR PEACE.

Notwithstanding the uninterrupted success of the British arms, Lord Bute
was still anxious for peace. And his views at this time were seconded by
the voice of the people, who loudly complained of the increased taxation
and the expenses and burdens consequent upon this protracted war.
Accordingly, having indirectly sounded some of the French cabinet, Bute
engaged the neutral King of Sardinia to propose that it should resume
négociations for peace. Both France and Spain, taught experience by
their reverses, were eager for such a consummation; and Louis XV. had no
sooner received the hint, than he acted upon it with all his heart and
soul. Notes were interchanged, and it was agreed that a minister
should be appointed on either side forthwith. In compliance with this
agreement, the Duke of Bedford went as plenipotentiary and ambassador
extraordinary to Paris, and the Duke de Nivernois came over to London in
the same capacity. Preliminaries for peace were signed at Fontainbleau,
on the third of November, by the ministers of Great Britain, France,
Spain, and Portugal; and the sanction of the British parliament only was
wanting to carry them into effect.

The terms of the preliminaries signed at Fontainbleau were as
follow:--France consented to restore Minorca; to evacuate Hanover,
Cleves, Wesel, Gueldres, the territories of the Landgrave of Hesse, the
Duke of Brunswick, and the Count de la Lippe Bucke-burg, and every place
taken from his Prussian majesty. France, also, renounced all pretensions
to Nova Scotia, and ceded the islands of Cape Breton and St. John, with
the entire province of Canada, including the islands in the Gulf and
River of St. Lawrence; that part of Louisiana which is situate east of
the Mississippi, and the tract between the Ohio and St. Lawrence, on
which French forts had been erected, and which had been the proximate
cause of the war. On her part Spain resigned East and West Florida, with
all pretensions to fish on the coast of Newfoundland; and conceded the
full right of cutting logwood in the Bay of Honduras. France and Spain
promised full restitution to Portugal, and the fortifications of Dunkirk
were to be demolished, according to the tenor of previous treaties. For
these advantages, England agreed to restore Pondicherry, in the East
Indies, Goree, in Africa, and Martinique, Guadaloupe, Mari-galante,
Desirade, and St. Lucie, in the West Indies, to France, together with
Belleisle, in Europe. To Spain she was to give up the Havannah, with all
other conquests in Cuba, The conquests England retained, beside those
specified in the preliminaries, were Senegal, in Africa, and St.
Vincent, Dominique, Tobago, Grenada, and the Grenadines, in the West
Indies. On the whole, England would evidently become a great gainer; but
the terms gave rise to great contention, and a struggle of party on the
meeting of Parliament.




THE MEETING OF PARLIAMENT AND THE CONCLUSION OF PEACE.

Although the great body of the people of England desired peace,
yet there was a section of the community equally desirous for the
continuance of the war. The citizens of London had largely profited by
it; and during the negociations of last year they had instructed their
representatives to oppose any peace which did not reserve to England
all, or the greater part, of their conquests. This feeling was
heightened by the successes of the last campaign, and while the whole
glory of the war was assigned by them to Pitt, the very name of peace
was considered as a sacrifice of the national honour. Encouraged by
these feelings, Pitt organised a party in opposition to the cabinet, and
he was aided in this by many of the Whigs, who, irritated by the removal
of so many of their adherents from office, looked with jealousy upon the
actions of the favourite minister, Bute. The premier, likewise, was very
unpopular with the people, for although his views of peace coincided
with their own, yet he lacked the genius which could alone command
their admiration; and his cold, formal manners, and known lust of power,
subjected him to their scorn and contempt.

Parliament met on the 25th of November, and the preliminaries of peace
were then laid before both houses for their decision. In his opening
speech, his majesty remarked upon this subject:--"It was impossible to
execute what this nation has so gloriously performed in all parts of the
world, without the loss of great numbers of men. When you consider this
loss, whether on the principles of policy or humanity, you will see one
of the many reasons which induced me to enter early into negociation,
so as to make considerable progress in it before the fate of many
operations was determined; and now, to hasten the conclusion of it, to
prevent the necessity of making preparations for another campaign. As by
this peace my territories are greatly augmented, and new sources opened
for trades and manufactures, it is my earnest desire that you would
consider of such methods, in the settlements of our new acquisitions, as
shall most effectually tend to the security of those countries, and
to the improvement of the commerce and navigation of Great Britain. I
cannot mention our acquisitions without earnestly recommending to your
care and attention my gallant subjects, by whose valour they were made.
We could never have carried on this extensive war without the greatest
union at home. You will find the same union peculiarly necessary in
order to make the best use of the great advantages acquired by the
peace, and to lay the foundation of that economy which we owe to
ourselves and to our posterity, and which can alone relieve this nation
from the heavy burdens brought on it by the necessities of this long and
expensive war."

There were points in this pacific speech of his majesty which were
perfectly unanswerable. Humanity, and the burdens of the country
demanded that the sword should be sheathed, and the demand was
eloquently seconded by the great advantages which England would secure
by the peace. Notwithstanding, opposition was not disarmed, and a fierce
war of words ensued. The motion for an address in the house of commons,
approving of the terms of the treaty, was moved by Mr. Fox, Pitt's
ancient rival, who still retained the lucrative place of paymaster of
the forces. Pitt followed on the opposite side. He came to the house,
suffering from gout and wrapped up in flannel; but, nevertheless,
supported by two members, in an elaborate argument of more than three
hours, he advanced every objection that could be urged against the
negociations. The whole tenor of the treaty was denounced by him as
unsound and impolitic, and as derogatory to the honour of England. He
came, he said, at the hazard of his life to the house that day, to lift
up his voice, his hand, and his arm against the preliminary articles of
a treaty which obscured all the glories of the war, surrendered up
the interests of the nation, and sacrificed the public faith by the
abandonment of long-tried and faithful allies. Fox, supported by George
Grenville, replied in a less eloquent; tone, but with more cogent
arguments, and the ministers obtained a large majority. In the house of
lords, Bute undertook the defence of the measure, and in his speech,
the clauses of which fell from his lips like so many minute-guns, he
detailed the rise and progress of the negociations at large, and set
forth the advantages which England would derive from the treaty in
the best manner his talents for oratory--which were very mean--would
permit. He concluded his speech with declaring, that he desired no other
epitaph to be inscribed on his tomb, than that he was the adviser of
such a peace. He was opposed by Lord Temple, and supported by the Earl
of Halifax; and notwithstanding all the arguments of the opposing peers,
the address was carried by a large majority. The treaty was therefore
signed, and commercial communications, which had been stopped during the
war, were reopened with France.

Pitt had declared in his speech, that the desertion of the King of
Prussia, England's most magnanimous ally, was insidious, base, and
treacherous. A glance at the preliminaries will suffice to prove that
Frederick's interests were not forgotten. Frederick, moreover, was now
in a condition to defend himself. At this very time, in fact, he had
induced all the princes and states in Germany to sign a declaration of
neutrality, which led first to a truce between Austria and Prussia,
then to a congress, and finally, in that congress, to a treaty of peace
between Austria, Prussia, Saxony, and Poland. This treaty was not signed
till the 15th of February, 1763, but its terms were agreed upon before
the close of the present year. Frederick retained Silesia, and all the
territories that belonged to him before the war, and the other powers
were compelled to rest satisfied with their legitimate possessions,
without the slightest reparation for the damages they had endured, and
the sums they had spent, during this dream of their ambition. Thus ended
this Seven Years' War--a war which had cost millions of lives, and in
which a large portion of Europe was devastated, and carnage was earned
into every quarter of the globe. England was a gainer by it, but her
acquisitions cost so much blood, and treasures, that it may fairly be
questioned whether her advantages were commensurate with the price she
paid for them.




THE RESIGNATION OF BUTE.

Notwithstanding the large majority ministers had obtained in both houses
of parliament on the subject of the newly-signed treaty, causes were at
work which soon effected their overthrow. Pitt was resolutely bent on
driving Bute from office; his stern opposition being ostensibly founded
on an assertion that he had thrown away the best advantages in the
treaty of peace. He was joined in his opposition by the old Duke of
Newcastle, whose halls again became the resort of politicians. Meetings
were held at his residence, in which nobles and commons alike concerted
together the means of making the peace unpopular, and bringing Bute into
still greater contempt with the public. Pens, dipped in gall, were set
to work to demonstrate to the people that Martinique, Guadaloupe, St.
Lucie, Pondicherry, and the Havannah ought to have been retained in the
treaty of Fontainebleau; that compensation in money ought to have been
obtained from both France and Spain; that, by demolishing the forts
in Honduras, English subjects were deprived of the log-wood trade, and
subjected to the jealous rage of the Spaniards; and that an opportunity
of humbling the house of Bourbon had been completely thrown away. In
maintaining these propositions, dark insinuations were thrown out,
reflecting upon the characters of Bute, the king's mother, and the Duke
of Bedford. They had all, it was said, touched French gold. Epigrams,
scandals, and stories, also, concerning Bute and the princess dowager,
rang from one end of the country to the other. And the conduct of the
princess and Bute seemed to justify the scandal, although it does not
appear to have rested on sure grounds. Thus they precluded, as much as
possible, all access to the king, except to Bute's relatives connexions,
and dependents; and when Bute visited the princess it was generally
in the evening, and then in a sedan-chair belonging to a lady of the
household of the princess, and with close-drawn curtains. His enemies
did not fail to take advantage of his imprudent conduct, and they soon
succeeded in making him the most unpopular man in the three kingdoms.
This soon became manifest to the royal favourite; for addresses on
occasion of this peace were refused by the counties of York and Surrey,
and they came in slowly and ill-supported from other quarters. Bute,
however, was too proud and unconciliating to make any attempt to set
himself right in public opinion, and he suffered his enemies to work on,
till his character became unredeemable, and his downfall was effected.

Still Bute might possibly have enjoyed his high station for some time
longer had there not existed at this time a necessity for an increase
of taxation, and for a loan of three millions and a half, to enable
government to pay debts contracted during the war. This necessity could
not be fairly imputed to Bute, but he was unfortunate in his plan of
raising the loan, and in his choice of new taxes. Instead of throwing
the loan open to competition, he disposed of the shares privately, and
they immediately rose to eleven per cent, premium; whence he was charged
with gratifying himself or his dependents with £350,000 at the public
expense. His new tax was produced in the shape of ten shillings duty
per hogshead on cider and perry, which was to be paid by the first
purchaser, while an additional duty of eight pounds per ton was proposed
to be laid on French wines, and half that sum on other wines. The tax
on cider raised such a storm of opposition from the country members
generally, without reference to party, that Bute was induced to alter
both the sum and the mode of levying it--four shillings per hogshead was
to be paid, and it was to be levied upon the grower, through the medium
of the exciseman. This was not an unreasonable tax, for ale and porter
were already taxed both directly and indirectly, and no argument could
show that while a liquor produced from malt contributed to the public
exigencies, a liquor produced from apples should be exempt. Englishmen,
however, were always averse to the visits of the excisemen; and the
city of London, the cities of Exeter and Worcester, and the counties of
Devonshire and Herefordshire, the interests of which were concerned
in the matter more nearly than the citizens of London, petitioned the
commons, the lords, and the throne, against the bill. A general threat
was made, that the apples should rot upon the ground rather than be made
into a beverage subject to such a duty and such annoyances. In the
house of commons, also, Pitt spoke long and eloquently against the bill;
inveighing bitterly against the intrusion of officers into the private
dwellings of Englishmen; quoting the well-known maxim that in England
"every man's house is his castle." Stern opposition was, moreover, made
in the house of lords; and, had Bute been wise, he would have bowed
deferentially to the public feeling, and have adopted some other mode
of raising the money less repugnant to the temper and disposition of the
people. Bute, however, to use a figurative expression, proudly bared his
head to the tempest which was playing around him. He was determined
that the bill should pass, and he carried his point despite the fierce
opposition of the whole country. The bill passed into a law, and
although there were four different kinds of cider, varying in price from
five to fifty shillings per hogshead, they were all taxed alike.

Yet Bute was not made of such stern material that he could defy the
people with impunity. He had gained this victory over them, but he
evidently felt that their voice was omnipotent, and that if he longer
resisted it, he might possibly one day, and that soon, be doomed to
suffer disgrace by defeat. Under these circumstances, almost as soon
as the bill passed into a law, he surprised his friends and his enemies
alike, by suddenly tendering his resignation. Opinions varied as to his
motives for taking such a step. Some of his enemies said that he had
retired from the rising storm of national indignation, and that Pitt
had politically killed him; others that the king and queen, whose strict
morality of conduct was well known, had at length taken umbrage at his
intimacy with the queen dowager; while others asserted that he abandoned
his post from a consciousness of guilt, and a dread of impeachment for
certain acts not yet made known to the public. On the other hand,
his friends asserted that his retirement arose from his hatred of the
intrigues of a public life, and represented him as panting in the midst
of the toils of his office for literary and rural retirement. His own
reason, as expressed to a friend, was, that he found himself powerless
in his own cabinet. "Single in a cabinet of my own forming," he
observed, "no aid in the house of lords to support me, except two peers,
[Denbigh and Pomfret]; both the secretaries of state silent, and the
lord chief justice, whom I myself brought into office, voting for me,
yet speaking against me; the ground I tread upon is so hollow, that I am
afraid, not only of falling myself, but of involving my royal master in
my ruin. It is time for me to retire." Bute retired as proudly as he had
exercised his office, for he neither asked for pension nor sinecure, and
his retirement was followed by that of Sir Francis Dashwood, chancellor
of the exchequer, and of Fox, who were elevated to the peerage: the
former as Baron le Despencer, and the latter as Baron Holland. Mr.
George Grenville succeeded to the premiership, and also to the place
which had been occupied by Dashwood, uniting in himself the offices of
chancellor of the exchequer and first lord of the treasury. But Bute
still acted behind the scenes. He pulled the strings, and Grenville and
the rest of the cabinet answered his motions, as mechanically as though
they had been so many puppets. Grenville, indeed, seems to have been
chosen by the king and Bute, as a willing instrument for carrying their
plans into ready execution.




THE CHARACTER AND IMPEACHMENT OF WILKES.

One of the most sturdy opponents of Bute and his administration had been
the celebrated John Wilkes, member of parliament for Aylesbury, and a
lieutenant-colonel in the Buckinghamshire militia. On first entering
into office, Bute, by the advice of Bubb Doddington, had established a
newspaper, styled "The Briton," the ostensible object of which was,
to advocate the measures of Bute's administration. Many writers were
employed to write for this paper; and while they exalted the premier,
they did not fail to vilify his opponents. To oppose this organ of the
ministers, another paper was set on foot, and conducted by Wilkes, under
the the title of "The North Briton." Wilkes was a man of ruined fortune
and of dissolute habits; but he was active, enterprising, and daring,
and possessed a considerable fund of wit and repartee. In the beginning
of this reign, he had solicited a lucrative post under government,
but had been disappointed. His failure was attributed by him to the
influence which Bute held over the monarch, and he began to vent his
spleen against the minister and his coadjutors in scandalizing and
calumniating their actions and private characters. Both in conversation
and in the "North Briton," they were ever made the butts of his ready
wit. He even reviled, stigmatized, and heaped curses upon Bute's country
and countrymen. According to his showing, the river Tweed was the line
of demarcation between all that was honourable and noble, and all that
was dishonourable and servile--south of that river, honour, virtue,
and patriotism flourished; north of it, malice, meanness, and slavery
prevailed. Every Scotchman was painted by him as a hungry beggar,
time-server, and traitor. Wilkes was, perhaps, not singular in his
antipathies at this time against the Scotch, for wiser men than him
exhibited them in their writings and in their conversation, arising in a
great measure from the circumstance of the introduction of large numbers
of them into the offices of government. But in this, Bute acted as any
other man would have done under similar circumstances, as every one
possesses by nature a predilection for their own country and countrymen.
This conduct, therefore, of Wilkes was as unwise as it was unjust and
impolitic. Still no danger would have occurred to himself from the
display of such bitter feelings, had he confined his malevolence to the
subjects of Great Britain. Grown bold by impunity, however, Wilkes at
length pointed his pen at the royal family, and even at the monarch
himself; and, by so doing, he raised a persecution against himself,
which has rendered him a prominent object in the annals of his country.
On the 19th of April his majesty prorogued parliament, and in the next
number of the "North Briton," the celebrated 45th, Wilkes accused the
monarch of uttering a direct falsehood in his speech on that occasion.
Whether Grenville was more sensitive than his predecessor had shown
himself, or whether Bute instigated him to take notice of this attack,
in order to revenge himself upon Wilkes, is not clear, but it is certain
that on the 26th a general warrant was issued from the secretary of
state's office, signed and sealed by Lord Halifax, for the arrest of the
authors, printers, and publishers of the seditious paper, and for the
seizure of their papers. No names were specified in this warrant, and
within three days, no less than forty-nine persons were taken upon mere
suspicion. These were innocent, but on the 29th, Kearsley, the
avowed publisher, and Balfe, the printer, were taken into custody, who
confessed that Wilkes was the author of the paper. Accordingly, the
crown lawyers having been consulted, the messengers were directed to
seize Wilkes, and bring him forthwith before the secretary of state.
It was in vain that the offender asserted that they were acting upon an
illegal warrant: his papers were seized, and he was carried before Lord
Halifax. At the request of Wilkes, his friend, Lord Temple, applied to
the court of common pleas for a writ of habeas corpus, and the motion
was granted; but before it could be prepared, he was committed to the
Tower in close custody, and his friends, his counsel, and his solicitor
were denied access to him. The confinement of Wilkes, however, was
of short duration, for on the 3rd of May, a writ of habeas corpus was
directed to the constable of the Tower, by which he was brought before
the court in Westminster Hall. In that court he made a virulent speech
against the existing administration, broadly asserting that there was a
plot among its members for destroying the liberties of the nation, and
that he was selected as their victim, because they could not corrupt him
with their gold. The court took time to consider the matter, and on the
6th, Lord Chief Justice Pratt proceeded to deliver the joint opinion of
the judges. This opinion was, that though the commitment of Wilkes
and the general warrant were not in themselves illegal, as they were
justified by numerous precedents, yet he was entitled to his discharge
by virtue of his privilege as a member of parliament; that privilege
being only forfeited by members who were guilty either of treason,
felony, or a breach of the peace. Wilkes was therefore discharged, but
the attorney-general immediately instituted a prosecution against him
for the libel in question, and the king deprived him of his commission
as colonel in the Buckinghamshire militia, and dismissed his friend Lord
Temple from the lord-lieutenancy of Buckinghamshire, and struck his
name out of the roll of privy councillors. The liberation of Wilkes was
followed by a long inky war. Upon regaining the use of his pen, he wrote
a letter to the secretaries of state, in which he complained of the
treatment he had received, and accused them of holding in their hands,
goods of which his house had been robbed by their messengers. This
letter, to which government replied, was printed and distributed by
thousands, and considerable numbers of the opposition in parliament
rallied round the author of the "North Briton," while the populace began
to hail him throughout the country, as the noblest patriot England had
known since the days of Algernon Sidney and Hampden. Taking advantage
of his popularity, when he found publishers averse to the hazard of
publishing his works, he established a printing-press in his own house,
where he struck off copies of the proceedings against him, which were
sold at one guinea each; a blasphemous and obscene poem entitled, "An
Essay on Woman," with annotations; and the forty-five first numbers of
the "North Briton," with notes and emendations. His pen was seconded by
hundreds of newspaper writers and pamphleteers who wrote on his behalf,
and John Wilkes thereby became one of the most popular men in all
England. Men, even of talents and probity, though they detested his
immoralities, associated his name with the idea of liberty, and the
proceedings against him were designated as the tyrannical efforts of
arbitrary power.

{GEORGE III. 1760-1765}




CHANGES IN THE CABINET.

Mr. George Grenville had been first brought into notice by his connexion
with Mr. Pitt. He was a man of integrity and of understanding, but he
lacked the personal influence, and the abilities which could alone
give stability to a political party. His proceedings against Wilkes,
moreover, had brought his cabinet into public contempt, and in the month
of August he was deprived of the best supporter of his administration,
by the death of Lord Egremont. The loss of this nobleman brought his
cabinet, indeed, to the verge of dissolution, and a coalition of parties
was hence deemed desirable. To this end Bute waited, at his majesty's
commands, on his stern rival, Pitt, to whom he stated the king's wish of
employing political talent and integrity without respect of persons
or parties. This was done without the knowledge of the members of
the existing cabinet, and Pitt consented to wait upon his majesty at
Buckingham House. He was received graciously, and in a conference which
lasted three hours, he expatiated on the infirmities of the peace, and
the disorders of the state; and the remedy he proposed to adopt, was the
restoration of the Whigs to office; they only, he asserted, having the
public confidence. This was on Saturday, the 27th of August, and at this
time his majesty made no objection to his proposals, and he appointed a
second interview on the following Monday. On Sunday, Pitt was closeted
with the Duke of Newcastle, in arranging the new administration, in full
confidence that the king was acquiescent. Pitt, however, did not find
his majesty so pliant on the Monday, as he expected, and he was doomed
to experience a complete disappointment of his views and hopes. The king
wished to provide for Grenville, by allotting him the profitable place
of paymaster of the forces, and to restore Lord Temple to favour, by
placing him at the head of the treasury; but although both Grenville and
Temple were Pitt's relatives, he would not consent. "The alliance of the
great Whig interests which had supported the revolution government,"
he said, "was indispensable." The whole project, therefore, fell to the
ground. His majesty broke up the conference by observing, "This will not
do; my honour is concerned, and I must support it."

Negociation with Pitt having failed, overtures were made to the Duke of
Bedford, who, it was thought, possessed sufficient influence--though he
was little less unpopular than Bute himself--to support the tottering
cabinet. His grace accepted the post of lord president of the council,
Lord Sandwich was made secretary of state, and Lord Egmont was placed at
the head of the admiralty. Grenville still retained his post, though the
Duke of Bedford gave his name to the ministry.




MEETING OF PARLIAMENT, AND FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AGAINST WILKES.

Parliament met on the 15th of November, when his majesty exhorted both
houses to cultivate the blessings of peace; to improve the commercial
acquisitions of the country; to attend to the reduction of the debts
contracted in the late war; to improve the navy; and to promote domestic
union, and discourage the licentious spirit which prevailed, to the
utter subversion of the true principles of liberty.

The allusion in his Majesty's speech to the licentious spirit prevalent
at that time in England, had reference to Wilkes and his associates.
Many men of fashion and dissipation had lived with him and upon him
recently as boon companions and partners in debauchery. Together with
him, they formed the Dilettanti Club in Palace Yard, and they also
revived the Hell-Fire Club of the days of the Duke of Wharton, at
Medmenham Abbey, Bucks, where they revelled in obscenity, and made
everything that was moral or religious, a subject of their scorn and
derision. Over the grand entrance of this abbey was inscribed, _Fays ce
que voudras_, "Do what you like;" and the jokes of the members of the
club consisted principally in wearing monkish dresses, and drinking wine
out of a communion cup to a pagan divinity. For the entertainment of
these men, some of whom were even more conspicuous in their profligacy
than Wilkes himself, he took a house at the court end of the town, by
which he incurred expenses his fortune could not support, and which they
were not willing to discharge. They could feast at his table, and drink
his claret; but his entertainments and his wit, which they equally
enjoyed, must be set down to his own account. Nay, one of his
companions, the new secretary of state, Lord Sandwich, one of the most
notorious of the whole club, now suddenly turned round upon him, and
accused him of leading a profligate and debauched life!

On the return of the commons to their own house, Grenville, aware of the
intention of Wilkes to make a formal complaint respecting the breach of
privilege, anticipated him by relating what had passed in the arrest
and liberation of that member, and by laying the libel on the table.
The house by a large majority-resolved, that the 45th No. of the "North
Briton" was a false, scandalous, and seditious libel, and ordered that
the said paper should be burned by the hands of the common hangman.
In reply, Wilkes declared that the rights of all the members had been
violated in his person, and he requested that the question of privilege
should be at once taken into consideration. The house adjourned this
question for one week, but on the same night, Lord Sandwich produced in
the house of lords, a copy of the "Essay on Woman," and loudly exclaimed
against the profaneness and indecency of this poetical production of
Wilkes. His attack on Wilkes surprised most men who heard him, but he
was followed by one who had a right to complain. Dr. Warburton, now
Bishop of Gloucester, inveighed bitterly on the use which had been made
of his name in the annotations, and commented in severe language on the
outrageous infidelity of the production, declaring that when the author
of it arrived in hell, he would not find one companion there among its
"blackest fiends." A day was appointed for bringing John Wilkes to their
lordship's bar, to answer to a charge of a breach of privilege; but in
the meantime, an event occurred which rendered it impossible for him
to appear. In the course of the debate in the lower house, Mr. Martin,
member for Camelford, who had been secretary to the treasury during
Bute's administration, and had been attacked in the "North Briton,"
stigmatized Wilkes as a "cowardly, malignant, and scandalous scoundrel."
His words were twice repeated, as he looked across the house at the
object of his attack, with rage flashing from his eyes. Wilkes seemed
to hear with cool indifference, but on leaving the house, he addressed a
note to Martin, and a meeting in Hyde Park was the consequence, in which
the former was dangerously wounded. It was reported the next day that
he was delirious, and crowds of people surrounded his house, hooting
and shouting at his murderers: had he died, the populace would have
considered him a martyr in the cause of liberty; but he recovered.

The question of privilege came on in the house of commons on the 23rd of
November, and it lasted two whole days. Wilkes was defended by Pitt, who
came to the house again enveloped in flannel, and this time supported by
crutches. While Pitt defended him, however, he was careful to maintain
his own character. He condemned the whole series of "North Britons,"
as illiberal, unmanly, and detestable; declaimed against all national
reflections, as having a tendency to promote disloyal feelings and
disunity: asserted that his majesty's complaint was well founded, just,
and necessary; and declared that the author did not deserve to rank
among the human species, as he was the blasphemer of his God, and the
libeller of his sovereign. He was not connected with Wilkes, he said,
nor had he any connexion with writers of his stamp. At the same time, he
reprobated the facility with which parliament was surrendering its own
privileges, carefully impressing on the house, that in so doing, he
was simply delivering a constitutional opinion, and not vindicating the
character of John Wilkes. The speech of Pitt was characterised by great
eloquence and acuteness, but the measure was warmly defended by other
members, and at the conclusion, a resolution was carried by a large
majority, to the effect, "That the privilege of parliament does not
extend to the case of writing and publishing seditious libels, nor ought
to be allowed to obstruct the ordinary course of the laws in the speedy
and effectual prosecution of so heinous and dangerous an offence."
The concurrence of the lords was not obtained without considerable
difficulty, and when it was obtained, a spirited protest was signed
by seventeen peers, affirming it to be "incompatible with the dignity,
gravity, and justice of the house, thus to explain away a parliamentary
privilege of such magnitude and importance, founded in the wisdom of
ages, declared with precision in their standing orders, repeatedly
confirmed, and hitherto preserved inviolable by the spirit of their
ancestors; called to it only by the other house on a particular
occasion, and to serve a particular purpose, _ex post facto, ex
parte, et pendente lite_, the courts below." On the 1st of December, a
conference of both houses took place, when both lords and commons agreed
in a loyal address to the king, expressive of their detestation of the
libels against him; and Wilkes was ordered to attend at the bar of the
commons in a week, should his health permit.

In the meantime--on the 3rd of the month--there was a terrible riot in
London occasioned, by the burning of the "North Briton" in Cheapside.
The execution of this sentence was entrusted to Alderman Harley,
sheriff of London, and he assembled the city officers and the common
hangman at the Royal Exchange, to put it into effect. The people,
however, manifested a very different spirit from that of their
representatives. So violent were they, that Harley was compelled
to retreat to the Mansion House, where the lord mayor was sitting,
surrounded by members of the common council, who were almost to a man
the friends and admirers of Wilkes, and therefore not disposed to take
part in the matter. The hangman was compelled to follow the sheriff. He
had succeeded in partially burning the paper with a link, when cheered
on by some gentlemen standing at the windows of houses near the spot,
the mob rushed upon him, and rescued the fragments, carrying them in
triumph to Temple Bar, where a fire was kindled and a large jack-boot
was committed to the flames, in derision of the Earl of Bute. The city
was restored to its usual tranquillity in about an hour and a half,
the mob dispersing of their own accord; but the affair occupied the
attention of parliament four days, during which time nothing else was
done, except voting a pension of £80,000 as a dowry to the Princess
Augusta, the king's sister, who was about to be married to the Duke
of Brunswick. In the debate on the subject of the riot, it was fully
manifested that the populace of London was generally in favour of
Wilkes; but both houses concurred in voting that the rioters were
disturbers of the public peace, dangerous to the liberties of the
country, and obstructors of national justice. Thanks were also voted to
the sheriffs, and an address was presented to his majesty, praying that
measures might be taken to discover and punish the offenders.

By their proceedings against Wilkes ministers had surrounded themselves
with a maze of perplexity. Actions were brought by the printers, and
others arrested under the general warrant, to recover damages for false
imprisonment, and a verdict was universally given in their favour. These
actions were brought against the messengers: Wilkes had nobler game
in view. He brought actions against the two secretaries of state,
Lord Egremont and Lord Halifax, and against Robert Wood, Esq., late
under-secretary. Egremont was now dead, Halifax stood upon his privilege
and defied the court, till relieved by the sentence of outlawry that was
passed upon Wilkes, but Wood was condemned to pay £1000 damages to the
plaintiff. At this trial, the lord chief justice Pratt was bold enough
to declare that general warrants were unconstitutional, illegal, and
absolutely void, and to challenge a reference of this opinion to the
twelve judges. This was not deemed expedient, and Pratt's judgment
respecting the illegality of warrants was shortly afterwards confirmed
by the court of king's bench. The boldness of Pratt secured for him
great popularity. He was presented with the freedom of the cities of
London and Dublin, and others; and in addition to this mark of respect,
the corporation of London requested that he would sit for his picture,
which was to be placed in Guildhall, as a memorial of their gratitude.

The popularity of Wilkes was at this time increased by an attempt made
upon his life by one Alexander Dun, a Scotchman, who sought admission
into the patriot's house, and who publicly declared that he and ten
others were determined to cut him off. A new penknife was found in his
pocket, and for this alleged attempt against the life of a member of
parliament, Dun was carried before the commons, who voted him insane,
and ordered his dismissal. The court of king's bench, however, committed
Dun to prison for want of bail and securities, and looking upon facts
only in a cursory light, the people believed that the government was
determined to make away with the defender of their liberties. All this
tended to render the cabinet so obnoxious, that Horace Walpole was
apprehensive that there would have been some violent commotion.

When the day arrived for the attendance of Wilkes at the bar of the
house of commons, two medical gentlemen, Dr. Brocklesby and Mr. Graves
appeared, and made a declaration that he was unable, from the state of
his health, to obey the summons. The house granted a week's delay, and
the excuse being repeated, the grant was extended beyond the Christmas
recess. At the same time it was ordered that a physician and surgeon of
their own appointing should see Wilkes, and report their opinion on his
case. These were refused admittance into his house; but to vindicate the
character of his own medical attendants, and to have the laugh at the
ministry, he called in two Scotch doctors, observing that as the house
wished him to be watched, two Scotchmen would prove the most proper
spies.

The Christmas recess arrived, and the Christmas festivities afforded a
short truce to this war of politicians. Wilkes, who could not have been
so ill as represented, went to Paris, where he obtained great admiration
by his wit in the salons and soirées of that gay city. He was thus
employed when the parliament met on the 19th of January, 1764. This was
the day fixed for his appearance, but the speaker produced a letter from
him, enclosing a certificate signed by a French physician and a French
surgeon, testifying that he could not quit Paris without danger to his
life. This certificate wanted the signature of a notary public to give
it authenticity, and the house, therefore, resolved to proceed against
Wilkes as though he were present. Witnesses and papers were examined,
and it was resolved, that No. 45 of the "North Briton," which had been
voted a seditious libel, contained expressions of unexampled insolence
and contumely toward his majesty, the grossest aspersions upon both
houses of parliament, and the most audacious defiance of the whole
legislative authority. It was also denounced as having a manifest
tendency to alienate the affections of the people from their king,
to withdraw them from obedience to the laws, and to excite them to
insurrection. On the next day it was further resolved, that Wilkes
should be expelled the house, and a new writ was issued for the borough
of Aylesbury; a measure which ultimately had the effect of rendering him
a popular champion in the struggle between the house of commons and the
electors of Middlesex, which defined the power of the representative
body in relation to its constituency. Even now it greatly increased
the popularity of Wilkes among the great body of the people. On every
opportune occasion they loudly expressed their sentiments in his favour.
The king and his ministers were compelled to hear whenever they
appeared in public the grating and unwelcome exclamation of, "Wilkes and
liberty!"

Although ministers had triumphed over Wilkes personally, by obtaining
his expulsion from the house, yet they were doomed to suffer a check
from a motion naturally arising out of his prosecution. On the 13th
of February, it was moved by the opposition, that Wilkes' complaint of
breach of privilege should be heard. On this subject they obtained a
large majority; his complaint being thrown out, after a stormy debate
which lasted three days and one whole night. This, however, was followed
by a resolution moved by Sir William Meredith, in which they were not
so successful, namely, "That a general warrant for apprehending and
securing the authors, printers, and publishers of a seditious libel,
together with their papers, is not warranted by law." An adjournment was
proposed, but Pitt and others made speeches upon the subject, and when
the house divided, ministers had only the small majority of fourteen
upon the question of adjournment. This was virtually a defeat, and the
illegality of general warrants was so effectually established by the
numbers who voted on the side of the opposition, and by the sentiments
of the orators, that henceforth the use of them was wholly discontinued.
If, therefore, this prosecution of Wilkes was impolitic, it had at least
the effect of settling a great constitutional principle; nor was it long
before the measures taken against him effected other alterations in the
constitution equally important.

Wilkes having entered an appearance in Westminster Hall, was at length
tried and convicted on two indictments, for publishing the 45th Number
of the North Briton, and the "Essay on Woman." He was afterwards
outlawed for not appearing in court to receive his sentence, whence
the suit he had instituted against Lord Halifax fell to the ground.
The cause of Wilkes, however, being identified with that of the
constitution, his popularity remained undiminished, and the spirit
excited by the proceedings against him was still as rife with bitterness
as ever.




PROPOSITION TO TAX THE AMERICAN COLONIES.

It was at this troubled season that George Grenville brought forward a
motion for extracting a direct revenue from the colonies. The idea was
not altogether new, for such a scheme had been hinted at during Sir
Robert Walpole's administration. At this time it seems to have been
revived, by the general complaint heard among the people of England, of
the burden of taxation which they were called upon to bear. His majesty
proposed such a step, as a just, as well as advantageous measure for
relieving the country from the financial difficulties which had been
occasioned by a war undertaken for the protection and security of the
colonies themselves. Accordingly, a series of resolutions, respecting
new duties to be laid on goods imported by the Americans, was brought
into the House by Grenville on the 10th of March. These resolutions
passed with little notice; General Conway, it is said, being the only
member who protested against them; and they received the royal assent on
the 5th of April. The minister, also, proposed raising a direct revenue
from the colonies in the shape of a stamp-tax, but this was objected
to by the opposition, and it was postponed to another session. Certain
restrictions, however, were at the same time laid upon the profitable
contraband trade carried on by the Americans with the Spanish colonies;
a trade alike advantageous to England and the North American colonists,
but of which the Spanish government was constantly and bitterly
complaining to the court of Great Britain.




OPPOSITION OF THE AMERICANS.

It seems probable that ministers undertook this scheme of taxation, in
order to gain popularity. It had that effect in some slight degree. The
country gentlemen, in particular, were well pleased with the prospect of
the non-increase on the diminution of the land-tax, and other sections
of the community hoped eventually to have their burdens lightened by
such a measure. In proroguing parliament the king expressed his hearty
approbation of it, auguring the augmentation of the public revenues, a
unity of the interests of his most distant possessions, and an increase
of commerce, as its natural results. Like the Greek fisherman in
Theocritus, all dreamed of gold; but in the course of a few months this
pleasant dream was swept away by a strong wind across the Atlantic.

The inhabitants of New England received these "wise regulations" of the
British parliament "like knives put to their throats." Perceiving that
the claim made by their mother-country to tax the colonies for her own
benefit, and at her own discretion, might possibly introduce a system of
oppression, they boldly denied the authority of parliament to levy any
direct tax on the colonies, and declared that it was a violation of
their rights as colonists, possessing by charter the privilege of taxing
themselves for their own support; and as British subjects, who ought not
to be taxed without their legitimate representatives. The disaffection
of the northern provinces extended to those of the south, and, as a
strong measure of resistance, all engaged to abstain from the use of
those luxuries which had hitherto been imported from Great Britain. They
also made colonial taxation a subject of their petitions to king, lords,
and commons, and thus firmly established the principle of resistance to
such a measure. Their resistance was confirmed by an unwise measure of
Grenville, who determined to intrust the execution of his prohibitory
orders to military and naval officers, who were disposed to act with
rigour. Government, also, had increased the salaries of judges, which
gave rise to an opinion that it was desirous of diminishing their
independence; and the governors had recently acted very arbitrarily, and
when complaints were made no attention was paid to them, or if a reply
was given, it was accompanied with rebuke. The colonists, moreover, were
encouraged in their spirit of resistance by the emigration of numbers
who had lately left England, and who being disaffected persons, diffused
republican sentiments in all the provinces. The seeds of discontent
were, in fact, sown far and wide before this new system of taxation
was projected, and it had the effect of causing them to germinate and
flourish.




WAR WITH THE NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS.

It unfortunately happened, that the news of colonial taxation arrived in
America when the colonists were in no very pleasant humour. On quitting
Canada, the French government still retained some slight connexion with
the native Indians, and partly by their agents, and in part through
encroachments made by the British on their hunting-grounds, they
were incited to war. The tribes flew to arms, designing to make a
simultaneous attack on all the English back-settlements in harvest-time,
and though their secret was made known, and their intentions prevented
in some places, yet the frontiers of Pennsylvania, Maryland, and
Virginia were mercilessly ravaged by them, and the inhabitants in those
parts utterly destroyed. The Indians also captured several forts in
Canada, and massacred the garrisons; and their flying parties frequently
intercepted and butchered the troops that were marching from place to
place, and plundered and murdered the traders in the upper part of the
country. Success made them more bold, and it seems probable, from the
display of courage and of military talent which they manifested, that
French officers were among them. They even resolved to advance on the
principal force stationed at Fort Pitt, and they marched forward in full
confidence of victory. In their route they defeated a detachment under
Captain Dalzel, and killed that unfortunate officer, and the soldiers
escaped with difficulty into Fort Detroit. Fort Pitt was now surrounded
by them, but they soon abandoned it, in order to attack Colonel Bouquet,
who was advancing with a strong corps under his command for its relief.
Fearful struggles took place between Colonel Bouquet and the Indians,
in which a great number was killed on both sides, but they were finally
routed, and as their bravest chiefs had perished, it was supposed that
their loss was irreparable. The Indians, however, in the other parts
of the country were not discouraged, and they surrounded an escort,
and slew about eighty officers and men near the falls of Niagara. Thus
disheartened, General Amherst used the powerful influence of Sir William
Johnstone, who was enabled to detach the Indians of the Six Nations
from the confederacy, and to engage them on the side of the British,
and after various skirmishes and surprises, the rest submitted on
conditions, or retired into the depths of their native wilds and
forests. In the treaty concluded with them all occasions of future
quarrels were guarded against; the limits of their territories were
accurately defined; their past offences forgiven; and they were
re-admitted to the friendship of Great Britain: the Indians on their
part solemnly engaging to commit no more acts of violence.

These occurrences had for the most part happened in the summer and
autumn of the year 1763. But the recollection of them was, from their
very nature, strongly impressed upon the minds of the colonists, when
they heard of the system proposed for their taxation. Moreover, every
one was armed for the defence of his home and property against the
Indians, and being now freed from their terrors in that quarter, they
were bold to think that they might be used against their mother-country,
should the scheme of colonial taxation not be abandoned. Hence the
colonists made a show of resistance by passing strong resolutions
against the measure, which were transmitted to their agents in London,
to be laid before government. The province of Pennsylvania appointed a
new agent to London, in the person of the celebrated Benjamin Franklin,
who was instructed to oppose the stamp-act to the very utmost, and
indeed every other act that might be proposed to the British parliament
to tax the Americans without their consent. A more efficient agent
than Franklin could not have been chosen by the Pennsylvanians. Born in
humble life, he had, nevertheless, raised himself by genius and steady
perseverance, to be a man of property and science, a leading magistrate,
a high functionary in their state, a powerful writer, a statesman, and a
philosopher.




DOMESTIC OCCURRENCES.

The measures of the new administration were generally approved of in the
house of commons, and on dismissing the parliament the king thanked
the members of both houses for their wise and spirited exertions,
and exhorted them all to employ the present season of tranquillity in
perfecting the peace so happily commenced. There was occasion for this
exhortation. The cider-tax occasioned many turbulent meetings, which
frequently ended in riot, and a great scarcity of provisions caused
an increase of robberies and crime to a large amount. These evils were
augmented by the discharge of large bodies of soldiers and sailors,
who either could not find employment, or from their previous occupation
could not settle down into habits of industry. Moreover, country
gentlemen and landed proprietors from all parts of the United Kingdom
came to the metropolis, in order to gain posts under government, leaving
their estates to be managed by stewards and bailiffs, the results of
which were that they involved themselves in debt, and that they
raised their rents for the purpose of relieving themselves. Discontent
everywhere prevailed, and especially in Scotland and Ireland, and many
thousands emigrated to the North American provinces, that they might be
able to obtain a subsistence for their families, and at the same time
preserve their religion and the customs of their fathers.

This year was marked by many maritime discoveries. A spirit of
enterprize, fostered by the munificence of the king, was displayed,
indeed, equal to that which distinguished the 15th and 16th centuries,
and which produced advantages to the country of equal importance to
those produced by the recent war. Byron, Wallis, Carteret, Cook, and
Mulgrave, all set sail during this year, and in a few years discoveries
were made which outrivalled all which had occurred since the expeditions
of Columbus.

During this autumn Pitt broke his recently-formed league with the old
Duke of Newcastle, telling him in a letter that he resolved henceforward
to act for himself, to keep himself free from all stipulations, and to
oppose or support measures in parliament upon his own responsibility. It
is not clear why Pitt came to this resolution; but perhaps it may
have arisen from his growing infirmity of body and temper, and of his
overbearing pride. From his letter, in fact, it is made very manifest
that his pride was offended, because the system of war which he had so
long and eloquently defended was given up "by silence" in a full house.
Hence it was, probably, that he was induced to stand single, and dare to
appeal to his country solely upon the merits--real or supposed--of his
principles. At all events, it seems certain that his resolution did
not arise, as some have imagined, from dark and inexplicable intrigue,
though it may wear that imposing aspect. But after all, as it has been
well observed, it is next to impossible to understand the extraordinary
alternations of alliance, neutrality, and opposition, between Pitt and
the old Duke of Newcastle.

In the course of this year, the treaty of Fontainbleau was somewhat
shaken by a French ship of the line having seized Turk's Island, in the
West Indies, and making the English inhabitants prisoners. The Spaniards
also annoyed and interrupted the English logwood-cutters at Honduras,
and were supposed to have seized a ship in the Mediterranean. These
occurrences happened during the recess of parliament, but before the
houses met, both the court of France and Spain disavowed all hostile
proceedings, and gave explanations to the English cabinet, which were
deemed satisfactory. It was evident, however, that the Bourbon courts
were not satisfied with the terms of the recent peace, and that their
weakness alone prevented them from renewing the struggle: their chagrin
and enmity were but ill-concealed under the mask of friendship, which
defeat in the field of battle had compelled them to wear.




CHAPTER II.

{GEORGE III. 1765-1769}

     The Meeting of Parliament..... Debates on Colonial
     Taxation..... Instability of the Cabinet..... Attempts to
     form a new Administration..... Opposition to the Stamp
     Duties in America..... Embarrassment of Ministers and
     Meeting of Parliament..... Sentiments of the Americans on
     the Declaratory  Act..... The Dissolution of the
     Rockingham  Cabinet..... Decline of Lord Chatham's
     Popularity..... Meeting of Parliament..... East India
     Question..... American Taxation..... Changes in the
     Ministry..... Proceedings in America..... Domestic Troubles
     and  Commotions..... The Return of Wilkes, &c......
     Resignation of Lord Chatham..... The Affairs of Wilkes.....
     Meeting of Parliament..... Debate on Wilkes, &c......
     Debates on America..... East India Affairs..... Prorogation
     of Parliament, &c...... Discontents in England and Ireland.

{1765}




THE MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

Parliament assembled on the 10th of January, 1765. The leading topics of
the king's speech referred to continental events, from which he augured
the continuation of peace. In allusion to American taxation and American
discontents, he recommended the carrying out of Grenville's measures,
and the enforcing obedience in the colonies. He remarked:--"The
experience I have had of your former conduct makes me rely on your
wisdom and firmness, in promoting that obedience to the laws, and
respect to the legislative authority of this kingdom, which is
essentially necessary for the safety of the whole, and in establishing
such regulations as may best connect and strengthen every part of my
dominions for their mutual benefit and support." In this speech, also,
his majesty announced the approaching marriage of his youngest sister,
the Princess Caroline, with the Prince Royal of Denmark: a union which
was ultimately attended with tragical consequences.

Early in this session complaints were made by the opposition that the
court of Spain had not paid the Manilla ransom, which gave rise to
an angry debate; the ministers warmly defending the conduct of the
Spaniards in this particular. An attempt was also again made by the
opposition to procure a resolution against the illegality of general
warrants, but decision on this point was eluded, and the previous
question carried. Another motion, to restrain the attorney-general in
his power of filing informations _ex officio_, which was made by the
opposition, was likewise negatived by a ministerial majority. But these
were only so many preludes to a storm which took place on the subject of
colonial taxation.




DEBATES ON COLONIAL TAXATION.

It has been seen that the measure of laying a duty on stamps had been
postponed, in order to give the colonists time to propose any other
mode of taxation in lieu of it more agreeable to their own feelings. The
agents of America, however, all replied that they were instructed not
only to oppose the stamp-tax, but every other bill which assumed as a
principle the right of taxing the colonies. They urged in reply to
the statement, that it was reasonable for America to contribute her
proportion toward the general expenses of the empire; that, "America had
never been backward in obeying the constitutional requisitions of the
crown, and contributing liberally, in her own assemblies, towards
the expenses of wars, in which, conjointly with England, she had
been engaged; that in the course of the last memorable contest, her
patriotism had been so conspicuous, that large sums had been repeatedly
voted, as an indemnification to the colonists for exertions allowed
to be far beyond their means and resources; and that the proper
compensation to Britain for the expense of rearing and protecting her
colonies was the monopoly of their trade, the absolute direction and
regulation of which was universally acknowledged to be inherent in the
British legislature."

In all ages of the world sovereign states have assumed to themselves the
right of taxing their dependant colonies for the general good. A glance
at ancient history, however, is sufficient to prove that there is danger
in the expedient. By colonial taxation Athens involved herself in many
dangerous wars, which proved highly prejudicial to her interests, and
which reads a powerful lesson to modern states and kingdoms on this
subject. The British king and British cabinet, however, had, like the
Athenians, to learn a lesson from experience, and not from the pages
of history. Conceiving that they had gone too far to recede, they were
resolutely determined not to yield their claim of right. The memorials
were not even allowed to be read in the house, for the British
legislature, with few exceptions, considered the right which they
questioned to be indisputable. Fifty-five resolutions of the committee
of ways and means, relating to this branch of the revenue, were agreed
to by the commons, and they were afterwards incorporated into an act
for laying nearly the same stamp-duties on the American colonies as were
payable at the time in England. The debate on this subject was generally
languid, but on Townshend venturing to assert, that the Americans were
"children planted by our care and nourished by our indulgence," Colonel
Barre, who had served beyond the Atlantic, and knew both the country and
people well, exclaimed vehemently, "They planted by your care! No! your
oppression planted them in America--they fled from your tyranny to
a then uncultivated and inhospitable wilderness, exposed to all the
hardships to which human nature is liable. They nourished by your
indulgence! No! they grew by your neglect of them; your care of them
was displayed, as soon as you began to take care about them, in sending
persons to rule them who were the deputies of deputies of ministers--men
whose behaviour on many occasions has caused the blood of those sons
of liberty to recoil within them--men who have been promoted to the
highest seats of justice in that country, in order to escape being
brought to the bar of justice in their own. I have been conversant with
the Americans, and I know them to be loyal indeed, but a people jealous
of their liberties, and who will vindicate them if ever they should be
violated; and let my prediction of this day be remembered, that the same
spirit of freedom which actuated that people at first will accompany
them still." The prediction of Colonel Barre was treated as emanating
from his loss of the regiment which he had commanded in America; and
the bill passed both houses without any difficulty, and it received the
royal assent by commission on the 22nd of March. It passed from a lack
of knowledge of American affairs; from an indifference to the interests
of the colonists; and from sheer cupidity. The profits which we had
derived from commerce with the Americans, and which were the ostensible
object proposed in planting the colonies, were not sufficient: if we
could obtain it, we must share in their profits likewise. But this was
a question which time only could solve; a riddle, which events must
explain.




INSTABILITY OF THE CABINET.

Ministers seemed to have carried matters with a high hand in parliament
during the previous debates, but there were nevertheless causes at work
which tended to weaken and dissolve their administration. The Americans
had already put their threats into execution concerning their abstinence
from the use of British goods, and this created great alarm among
shipowners, merchants, manufacturers, artizans, and labourers. The
complaints of the two latter classes of the community were increased
by a scarcity of bread, and the high price of provisions, which were
ascribed to the maladministration of the ministers. These popular
discontents, however, might have been disregarded, had not Grenville
given offence to a royal personage, whose resentment would have ensured
the downfall of even a much greater and more popular man than the prime
minister.

About a week after he had given his assent to the American Stamp Act,
it was reported that his majesty was seriously ill, and it would appear
that his illness was a slight attack of that fearful malady which thrice
afflicted him during his long reign, and incapacitated him for his
kingly duties. This time his malady was transient; but, taking warning
by it, he acquainted his ministers that he was anxious for a Regency
Bill, and told them the particulars of his intention. The sketch of such
a bill was drawn up by Fox, now Lord Holland, which left the regent
to be named by the king, and which, among other members of the royal
family, omitted the name of the queen. The queen's name was subsequently
added, but no mention was made of the Princess-dowager of Wales. The
king himself proposed that he should be invested with power, from time
to time, by instruments under his sign manual, to appoint either the
queen or any other person of the royal family, usually residing in Great
Britain, to be guardian of his succession and regent of the kingdom,
until his successor should have attained his eighteenth year. A bill to
this effect was carried in the upper house, but in the commons a motion
was made requiring the king to name those persons whom he would intrust
with so important a charge. This motion was negatived, and a question
was then raised as to the construction of the words "any other member
of the royal family," and the answer given was, that they meant
"the descendants of George the Second." This interpretation would have
excluded the princess-dowager from all share in the public councils, and
therefore an amendment was moved at the next reading to insert her
name next to that of the queen. This amendment was carried by a large
majority; but it was foreseen that the king would resent the insult put
upon his mother in both houses, and would attempt to rid himself of Mr.
Grenville and Lord Halifax, who had omitted to insert her name in the
bill at the very outset of the proceedings.

On the 15th of May, the king went in person to give his assent to
this bill. On that occasion a mob of silk-weavers and others, from
Spitalfields, went to St. James's Palace with black flags and other
symptoms of mourning and distress, to present a petition, complaining
that they were reduced to a state of starvation by the importation of
French silks. Both houses of parliament were surrounded by them, where
they insulted various members, and even terrified the lords into an
adjournment. In the evening they attacked Bedford-house, and began to
pull down the walls, declaring that the duke had been bribed to make the
treaty of Fontainbleau, and that it had brought poverty and all other
curses into England. The riot act was read, and the mob dispersed, but
the streets were crowded with soldiers for some days for fear of an
outbreak. Reports were also spread of mutinies among the sailors at
Portsmouth, insurrections among the Norwich weavers, and riots in Essex
and Lancashire. The cabinet and country alike seemed to be fast going
to pieces; whence his majesty, combined with the insult offered to his
mother, resolved to make some attempt to form a new administration,
hoping thereby to effect a change in the aspect of public affairs.




ATTEMPTS TO FORM A NEW ADMINISTRATION.

In a letter written to the Earl of Hertford, when the yells of the
populace of London were ringing in his ears, Mr. Burke writes:--"The
Regency Bill has shown such want of capacity in the ministers, such an
inattention to the honour of the crown, if not such a design against it;
such imposition and surprise upon the king, and such a misrepresentation
of the disposition of parliament to the sovereign, that there is no
doubt a fixed resolution to get rid of them all--unless perhaps of
Grenville--but principally of the Duke of Bedford; so that you will have
much more reason to be surprised to find the ministry standing by the
end of next week, than to hear of their entire removal. Nothing but an
intractable temper in your friend Pitt can prevent a most admirable
and lasting system from being put together, and this crisis will show
whether pride or patriotism be predominant in his character: for you may
be assured he has it now in his power to come into the service of his
country upon any plan of politics he may choose to dictate, with great
and honourable terms to himself and to every friend he has in the world,
and with such a strength of power as will be equal to everything but
absolute despotism over the king and kingdom. A few days will show
whether he will take this part, or that of continuing on his back at
Hayes, talking fustian, excluded from all ministerial, and incapable
of all parliamentary service: for his gout is worse than ever, but his
pride may disable him more than his gout."

At the very time Burke wrote thus, negociations were in progress with
Pitt. For when ministers went to the king on the 16th of May, to receive
his commands for his speech at the end of the session, he had given them
to understand that he would only have it prorogued, since he intended
to make a change in the administration. In consequence of this
determination, his majesty sent his uncle, the Duke of Cumberland,
to Hayes, in Kent, to treat with Pitt. The final reply of Pitt to the
offers is said to have been, "that he was ready to go to St. James's
provided he might carry with him the constitution." A total change of
men, measures, and counsels was involved in this reply; but the king had
some "friends" whom he wished to retain in their official situations,
and such a sweeping change could not be conceded. The Duke of Cumberland
continued his endeavours to form a ministry for a day or two, but no
one, possessing any merit, would undertake office when it was known
that Pitt had refused, and the king was compelled to retain his old
ministers. This was a mortifying circumstance in itself, but it was
rendered doubly so by the insolent behaviour of some of the members of
the cabinet. When he desired to know the conditions of their continuance
in office, they peremptorily demanded a royal promise of never
consulting the Earl of Bute; the instant dismissal of Mr. Mackenzie, his
lordship's brother, from his high offices in Scotland; the deprivation
of the paymastership of the forces, held by Lord Holland, which should
be given to a member of the House of Commons; the nomination of Lord
Granby to be head of the army; and the discretionary power of nominating
to the government of Ireland whoever they pleased. The king expressed
his anger and astonishment at these hard terms, and bade them return at
ten o'clock at night for his answer. A partial compliance, however, was
necessary, and before the appointed hour he sent them word by the lord
chancellor that he would not bind himself by a promise never to consult
Bute, though he acquiesced in the propriety of not letting him interfere
in the councils of the state; that he consented to displace Mr.
Mackenzie from his office, as well as Lord Holland; but that he
absolutely refused the article about Lord Granby. Ministers now took
time to consider, but they were too fond of office to retire without
being actually compelled. On the following morning they gave up the
point of Lord Granby, and contented themselves with the promise of
not permitting Bute to interfere. They were, therefore, to continue in
office; and Charles Townshend was made paymaster of the forces, while
Lord Weymouth was appointed to the government in Ireland. But the king
considered that he was dishonoured, and that he was held in thraldom
by his ministers, whence he soon made fresh efforts to deliver himself.
Again he negociated with Pitt, and again negociations with him fell to
the ground. Pitt could not engage without Lord Temple, and Temple, when
sent for, raised objections which rendered the whole scheme abortive.
But the king was resolute in his determination to free himself from the
chains by which his ministers had enthralled him. Early in July, he
once more applied to his uncle, who undertook to treat with the Duke
of Newcastle, whose parliamentary weight was nearly a counterpoise to
Pitt's oratory and popularity. Newcastle joined Cumberland in addressing
himself to the more moderate section of the opposition, and at length
a new ministry was formed. The Marquis of Rockingham became head of the
treasury; General Conway became one of the secretaries of state, and was
intrusted with the House of Commons; the Duke of Grafton was the other
secretary of state; Mr. Dowdeswell was the chancellor of the exchequer;
the Earl of Hertford was made lord-lieutenant of Ireland, instead of
Lord Weymouth; the president's chair, vacated by the Duke of Bedford,
was given to Lord Winchelsea; and the Duke of Newcastle contented
himself with the privy seal. The celebrated Edmund Burke was engaged as
private secretary by Lord Rockingham, and now, for the first time, had
a seat in parliament. There seemed a reasonable hope that this ministry
would obtain strength and durability, but it wanted Pitt for its
supporter; and it was weakened in October by the death of the Duke of
Cumberland. This blow was more severely felt, because there was a want
of union in the members of this cabinet from the first, and where
there is no union there can be no real strength. Moreover, the Earl
of Rockingham, though one of the most honest, honourable, and
well-intentioned men in existence at that period, lacked the ability
for collecting the scattered energies of party, and forming them into a
system, whence it was soon found that his cabinet was unpopular; and, at
no distant period of time, it was compelled to give place to another. In
the whole course of its existence, indeed, it exhibited the lack of that
vitality which could alone make it memorable and enduring.

{GEORGE III 1765-1769.}




OPPOSITION TO THE STAMP DUTIES IN AMERICA.

The fatal effects of Grenville's Stamp Act were soon made manifest--the
storm which the anticipation of it had raised, grew into a perfect
hurricane as soon as it was known in America that it was consummated.
Throughout the whole country a disposition existed to resist to the
death, rather than submit. The episcopalian and aristocratic colonists
of Virginia, alike with the presbyterian and democratic colonists of New
England, denounced the measure in the strongest language, and displayed
strong feelings of dislike to it. Nay, the Assembly of Virginia, which
hitherto had been pre-eminent in loyalty, was now the first to set an
example of disobedience. The House of Assembly there was shaken by
the eloquence of Patrick Henry, who took the lead in the debate. In
a resolution which he brought forward against the Stamp Act, Henry
exclaimed--"Cæsar had his Brutus; Charles I. his Oliver Cromwell; and
George III."--the orator at this point was interrupted by a voice crying
"treason!" and, pausing for a moment, he added, "and George III. may
profit by that example. If that be treason, make the most of it." When
tranquillity was restored, the assembly voted a series of resolutions,
declaring that the first settlers in Virginia had brought with them all
the privileges and immunities enjoyed by the people of England; that
they possessed the exclusive right of taxing themselves in their own
representative assemblies, which right had been constantly recognised by
the king and parliament of Great Britain; and that every attempt to
vest such a power in any other person or persons was illegal,
unconstitutional, and unjust, and had a tendency to destroy both
British and American independence. This had a great effect on the other
colonies, and the house of representatives of Boston suggested that a
congress should be held at New York, whither each province should send
deputies to concert measures for averting the grievance of the Stamp
Act. Nine out of thirteen of the colonies sent their delegates to this
congress, and fourteen strong resolutions were passed condemnatory of
the bill; and three petitions were concocted--one to the king, another
to the lords, and a third to the commons. From the decorous manner
adopted in its proceedings little alarm was excited, but by it an
important point was gained to the Americans--a closer connexion
was established by the meeting among the leading men of the various
colonies; and thus a way was prepared for a more general and extensive
combination should it be required by circumstances.

It was not in the assemblies alone that resistance to the Stamp Act was
manifested. Ominous proceedings were adopted by the public. As soon as
the news of it arrived in America, at Boston the colours of the shipping
were hoisted half-mast high, and the bells were rung muffled; at New
York the act was printed with a skull and cross bones, and hawked about
the streets by the title of "England's Folly, and America's Ruin;" while
at Philadelphia the people spiked the very guns on the ramparts.
The public irritation daily increased, and when at length the stamps
arrived, it was found impossible either to put them into circulation,
or to preserve them from destruction. The distributors were even forced
publicly to renounce, on oath, all concern with them; and riots broke
out in Boston, and several other cities, at which the public authorities
were compelled to connive. Law-agents generally resolved to forego the
practice of their profession rather than use stamps, and all stamped
mercantile or custom-house papers were seized as the ships came into
port, and publicly committed to the flames. By the 1st of November, the
time when the act came into operation, not a sheet of stamped paper was
to be found; and, therefore, all business which could not be legally
carried on without it, was brought to a stand--the courts of justice
were closed, and the ports shut up.

These measures were followed by others far more injurious to the
interests of Great Britain. Merchants entered into solemn engagements
not to order any more goods from England; to recall the orders already
given, if not fulfilled by the 1st of January, 1766; and not to dispose
of any goods sent to them on commission after that date, unless the
Stamp Act, and even the Sugar and Paper-money Acts were repealed.
Measures were also taken to render the importation of British
manufactures unnecessary. A society for the promotion of arts and
commerce was instituted at New York, and markets opened for the sale of
home-made goods, which soon poured into them from every quarter. Linens,
woollens, paper-hangings, coarse kind of iron-ware, and various other
articles of domestic life were approved by the society, and eagerly
purchased by the public. People of the highest fashion even preferred
wearing home-spun, or old clothes, rather than purchase articles which
could conduce to the welfare of Britain; and lest the new manufactories
should fail from want of materials, many entered into an engagement to
abstain from the flesh of the lamb. All classes were animated by the
spirit of resistance to their mother-country, and resolutions began to
be circulated of stopping exports as well as imports, and of preventing
the tobacco of Virginia and South Carolina from finding its way into the
British markets. The flame even spread to the West Indian plantations;
for in the islands of St. Christopher and Nevis, all stamps were
committed to the flames, and the distributors compelled to resign
office. Here was evidently work for the British Cabinet during the next
session of parliament, and we proceed to show how they acted.




EMBARRASSMENT OF MINISTERS AND MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

During the recess, ministers, who were divided in opinion and thwarted
by the king, could do nothing. It would not appear, indeed, that the
subject was considered of such vital importance as to demand instant
attention and extraordinary exertions. Parliament met on the 17th of
December, but it was only to be prorogued for the Christmas holidays,
and the king merely mentioned in his speech, that something had occurred
in America which would demand the attention of the legislature. In the
meantime a meeting was held at Rockingham-house, for the purpose of
arranging measures against the opening of the session, and particularly
with respect to America. Yet no vigorous measures were resolved on, and
all which they did decide upon was merely the terms in which the king's
speech should be comprised when parliament reassembled.

{A.D. 1766}

Parliament reassembled on the 14th of January, when his majesty spoke
more at length on the subject of the American colonies, and said that
the papers were ordered to be laid before them. The subject was pointed
out to the members as the principal object of their deliberation, and it
was left to their wisdom, in full confidence the judgment and moderation
of the two houses would conciliate the colonists without compromising
the rights of the British legislature. Everything had been done, his
majesty said, by the governors, and the commanders of the forces in
America, for the suppression of riot and tumult, and the effectual
support of lawful authority--they had failed, and the rest was left to
them.

His majesty's speech was followed by the presentation of the petitions
from America, and of numerous petitions from the great manufacturing
towns of the kingdom, which set forth the present ruin of all classes,
with the prospective derangement of the national finances; all which
seemed to declare that the time was arrived when effectual measures
should be taken for their redemption. Then succeeded the debate. It was
opened in the commons by Mr. Nugent, who condemned the opposition made
by the colonists, to what he deemed a reasonable and easy tax, yet
expressed his willingness to abandon it, provided they would solicit its
repeal as a boon, and acknowledge the right of the British legislature
to impose it: with him "a peppercorn as an acknowledgment of a right was
of more value than millions without such a concession." Burke followed;
but nothing more is known of his first speech in parliament than that he
astonished the house by the force and fancy of his eloquence, and that
he gained by it the golden opinion of Pitt. That more experienced
orator next spoke, and his sentiments were more to the purpose. After
condemning the daring measures adopted by the late administration, and
blaming the indecision and tardy efforts of their successors, against
whom, as men, he had nothing to allege, as they were men of fair
characters, and such as he rejoiced to see in his majesty's service,
bowing with grace and dignity to them, he observed--"Pardon me,
gentlemen, but confidence is a plant of slow growth in an aged bosom;
youth is the season of credulity. By comparing events with each other,
and reasoning from effects to causes, methinks I plainly discover an
overruling influence. I have had the honour to serve the crown, and if I
could have submitted to influence, I might have continued to serve, but
I would not be responsible for others. I have no local attachments:
it is indifferent to me whether a man was rocked in his cradle on this
side, or the other side of the Tweed. I sought for merit wherever it was
to be found. It is my boast that I was the first minister who looked for
it, and found it in the mountains of the north. I called it forth, and
drew into your service a hardy and intrepid race of men!--men who, when
left to your jealousy, became a prey to the artifices of your enemies,
and had gone nigh to overturn the state in the war before the last.
These men, in the last war, were brought to combat on your side; they
served with fidelity as they fought with valour, and conquered for you
in every part of the world. Detested be the national reflections against
them!--they are unjust, groundless, illiberal, unmanly. When I ceased
to serve his majesty as a minister, it was not the country of the man by
which I was moved; but the man of that country wanted wisdom, and held
principles incompatible with freedom."

The great orator proceeded to observe, that when the resolution of
taxing America was first taken he was ill in bed, and if he could have
been brought to the floor of that house, he would have given his firm
testimony against the measure. He then expressed a hope that the members
of the British legislature would not consider it a point of honour, or
themselves bound to persevere in carrying out what they had begun.
His opinion was, that Great Britain had no right to lay a tax on the
American colonies; but at the same time he uttered this seemingly
contradictory opinion--that her authority over them was sovereign in
all cases of legislation. He said--"The colonists are subjects of this
kingdom, equally entitled with yourselves to all the natural advantages
of mankind, and the peculiar privileges of Englishmen: equally bound by
its laws, and equally participating in its free constitution. Taxation
is no part of the legislative power. Taxes are the voluntary gift and
grant of the commons alone. In legislation, the three estates of the
realm are alike concerned; but the concurrence of the peers and the
crown to a tax is only necessary to clothe it with the form of a law.
The gift and grant is of the commons alone." Having shown in what way
the great bulk of the land had passed into the hands of the commons, he
remarked--"When, therefore, in this house, we give and grant, we give
and grant what is our own. But in an American tax what do we do?
We, your majesty's commons of Great Britain, give and grant to your
majesty--what? our own property?--No; we give and grant the property
of your majesty's commons of America! It is an absurdity in terms. The
distinction between legislation and taxation is essentially necessary to
liberty. The crown, the peers, are equally legislative powers with the
commons. If taxation be a part of simple legislation, the crown and the
peers have rights to taxation as well as yourselves--rights which they
will claim, which they will exercise, whenever the principle can be
supported by power." Pitt then proceeded to combat the arguments
of those who asserted that America was represented in the British
parliament. "I would fain know," said he, "by whom an American is
represented here. Is he represented by any knight of the shire, in any
county in this kingdom? Or will you tell him that he is represented
by any representative of a borough--a borough which perhaps its own
representatives never saw? This is what is called the rotten part of the
constitution. It cannot last a century: if it does not drop, it must be
amputated." Pitt concluded by reasserting, that the commons of America,
represented in their assemblies, had ever been in possession of the
constitutional right of granting their own money; and this kingdom had
ever been in the possession of the rights of binding the colonies by her
laws, and by her regulations and restrictions in trade, navigation,
and manufactures, and in fact in everything, except taking money out of
their pockets without their free and full consent.

The house was awed by Pitt's oratory, and, for some time, no one rose to
reply. General Conway at length broke the silence by frankly declaring
that his sentiments were generally conformable to those of Pitt; and by
excusing ministers for their tardy notice of the subject, on the grounds
that the first news of the troubles were vague and imperfect. In denying
the continued ascendency of Bute, however, the general spoke with great
warmth, utterly disclaiming it for himself, and, as far as he could
discern, for all the members of the cabinet. Grenville, who followed,
did not treat Pitt with such urbanity. He defended himself and his
measures with great warmth and ability, and boldly declared that the
seditious spirit of the colonies owed its birth to the factions in the
house of commons, and that gentlemen were careless of the consequences
of what they uttered, provided it answered the purposes of opposition.
As he ceased speaking, several members rose together; but Pitt was among
them, and a loud cry was made for him, so that the rest gave way, and
left him to answer the attack. Taking no notice of the denial which
Conway gave to his charge concerning Bute's holding paramount influence
in the cabinet, which denial he could not with justice gainsay, he
confined his remarks to Grenville's arguments and grave charge. Since,
he said, that member had gone into the justice, policy, and expediency
of the Stamp Act, he would follow him through the whole field, and
combat all his arguments. He bitterly complained that Grenville should
have designated the liberty of speech in that house as a crime; but
declared that the imputation should not prevent him from uttering his
sentiments upon the subject. He then proceeded thus:--"The gentleman
tells us America is obstinate--America is almost in open rebellion. I
rejoice that America has resisted. Three millions of people, so dead to
all the feelings of liberty as voluntary to submit to be slaves, would
have been fit instruments to make slaves of the rest." Pitt then said,
that in all our wants of money, no minister, since the revolution,
had ever thought of taxing the American colonies; that he had, when in
office, refused to burn his fingers with an American Stamp Act; and he
recapitulated his arguments to prove that legislation and taxation were
two different things, and that while we had a right to regulate the
trade of the colonists, we could not legally or justly impose taxes upon
them. He then asserted, that the profits to Great Britain from the trade
of the colonies were two millions a year, and that this was the sum
which carried England triumphantly through the last war, and the price
America paid us for protection. "And shall," he asked, "a miserable
financier come with a boast, that he can fetch a peppercorn into the
exchequer by the loss of millions to the nation?" He added--"I am
convinced the whole commercial system of America may be altered to
advantage: you have prohibited where you ought to have encouraged,
and you have encouraged where you ought to have prohibited: improper
restraints have been laid on the Continent in favour of the islands. Let
the acts of parliament, in consequence of treaties, remain; but let not
an English minister become a custom-house officer for Spain or for any
foreign power. Much is wrong; much may be amended for the general
good of the whole. The gentleman must not wonder that he was not
contradicted, when, as a minister, he asserted the right of parliament
to tax America. I know not how it is, but there is a modesty in this
house which does not choose to contradict a minister--even your chair,
sir, looks towards St. James's. I wish gentlemen would think better of
this modesty; if they do not, perhaps the collective body may begin to
abate of its respect for the representative. A great deal has been said
without doors of the power, the strength of America--it is a topic that
ought to be cautiously meddled with. In a good cause, on a sound bottom,
the force of this country can crush America to atoms; but on this
ground, on the Stamp Act, when so many here will think it a crying
injustice, I am one who will lift up my hands against it;--in such a
cause your success would be hazardous. America, if she fell, would fall
like a strong man; she would embrace the pillars of the state, and
pull down the constitution along with her." Pitt, then deprecating
the conduct of those who judged the Americans with an eye of severity,
said--"I acknowledge they have not acted in all things with prudence
and temper; they have been wronged; they have been driven to madness
by injustice. Will you punish them for the madness you have occasioned?
Rather let prudence and temper come first from this side. I will
undertake for America that she will follow the example. There are
two lines in a ballad of Prior, on a man's behaviour to his wife,
so applicable to you and your colonies, that I cannot help repeating
them:--

     'Be to her faults a little blind;
      Be to her virtues very kind.'"

Pitt concluded by proposing that the Stamp Act should be repealed,
absolutely, totally, and immediately; but at the same time he advised,
that the repeal should be accompanied by the strongest declaration of
the sovereign authority of this country over the colonies, in everything
that relates to trade and manufactures--in fact, in everything except
taking their money out of their pockets without their consent.

This speech of Mr. Pitt had a potent effect upon the administration and
the country at large. Nearly all the ministers coincided in his views,
and petitions, which poured into the house from all parts against the
stamp act, and which had been imperiously rejected by the late cabinet,
were received with all due deference. Burke made two speeches against
it, which were commended by Pitt, and filled the town with wonder. So
great was the change in public opinion upon the subject, that a bill was
brought in by the ministers for the repeal of the act, which bill was
passed by a great majority. It was accompanied by a declaratory bill,
setting forth the supreme right, sovereignty, &c. of Great Britain over
her colonies in all other matters of legislation, and reprobating the
tumultuous proceedings of the colonists. The repeal act was sent up
to the lords, where it encountered a violent opposition, but it passed
toward the end of March, when it received the reluctant consent of the
crown. Sixty-one peers entered a strong protest against its non-taxing
principle, and it was observed that in both houses the members belonging
to the royal household voted with the opposition: a strong proof of his
majesty's feeling upon this subject.

It was asserted by some that ministers were "bullied" into the repeal
of the stamp act by Pitt. This was manifestly unjust, both to the
great orator and the ministers themselves. In this session they showed
themselves equally ready to redress grievances at home as in America.
Thus they proposed and carried a repeal of the obnoxious cider-tax,
laying on a different duty, and the mode of collecting it; they passed
an act for restraining the importation of foreign silks; and they
abolished the old duties on houses and windows, and settled the rates
with greater equity toward the middle and lower classes of society. They
also appeased the general apprehension of a scarcity of bread, by
orders to prevent the exportation of corn, and by enforcing the old laws
against monopoly, forestalling, and regrating. Moreover, they passed a
bill for opening free ports in the islands of Dominica and Jamaica; made
several new and important regulations in the commercial system of the
colonies; and took off some burdensome restrictions. Finally, they
promoted the extension of trade in general by a commercial treaty with
Russia, and they obtained from France a liquidation of those bills which
had been left unsettled since the cession of Canada.

Still, though the legislative acts of this administration were of great
importance to the country, and were calculated to insure popularity,
its doom was sealed. By a large portion of the community, the members of
which it was composed were considered as intruders, who kept Pitt out
of office, and they had lost the confidence of the king by the repeal
of the Stamp Act. The resentment of the king was also excited by their
omitting to procure a supply of money for his younger brothers. Sensible
of their weakness, the Duke of Grafton resigned office, and the seals
which he resigned were given to the Duke of Richmond. When he resigned
he declared that he had no fault to find with his colleague's, except
that they wanted strength, and that his opinion was, Mr. Pitt alone
could give vigour and solidity to any administration in the present
state of affairs. Under him, his grace said, he was "willing to serve
in any capacity, not merely as a general officer, but as a pioneer:
under him he would take up a spade or a mattock." Such was the situation
in which the ministers found themselves at the close of this session,
which was prorogued early in June.




SENTIMENTS OF THE AMERICANS ON THE DECLARATORY ACT.

The manner in which the repeal of the Stamp Act was received in America
seemed to justify the measure. Although accompanied with the Declaratory
Act, it was welcomed by many persons among the higher classes, of honest
and upright mind, with great satisfaction. Washington declared that
those who were instrumental in procuring the repeal were entitled to the
thanks of all well-wishers to Great Britain and her colonies. There
were fierce republican spirits, however, in New England, who viewed the
Declaratory Act in the same light which they had viewed the Stamp Act;
and as soon as the first burst of joy had subsided, this was made the
subject of their declamation, and a stimulus to popular excitement.
Public writers were employed to prevent a return of harmony between
Great Britain and her colonies, and though addresses of thanks were
voted by the assemblies to the king, this was but an evanescent show
of gratitude. The same temper was found especially to prevail in the
assembly of Massachusets against the Declaratory Act, as had been
displayed against the Stamp Act, and the spirit of resistance soon
spread to the other colonies. The right of legislative authority assumed
by Great Britain over her colonies was loudly questioned, and bills were
passed in the assemblies independently of the British parliament, and
in defiance of our declared sovereign legislative right. One breach was
therefore healed by the repeal of the Stamp Act, but another was opened
by the scarcely less obnoxious act with which it was accompanied. A tree
of liberty had been planted, and there was a universal disposition
to preserve its leaves and its fruits from the touch of kingly and
sovereign power.




THE DISSOLUTION OF THE ROCKINGHAM CABINET.

The seeds of the dissolution of the ministry, as before shown, were
thickly scattered, and it was easy to foresee that the event was at
no great distance. Its fall, however, might have been retarded for a
little space, had it not been for the intrigues of the chancellor, Henry
Earl of Northington. In order to discredit the cabinet, that nobleman
started numerous difficulties on some legal points that were submitted
to his judgment, and set on foot several intrigues, which accelerated
its downfall. The first token of his defection appeared in the strong
dissatisfaction which he exhibited on account of the commercial treaty
with Russia, and it was soon after made more fully manifest in a meeting
of ministers on the subject of the government of Canada. There appears
to have been no good ground for his opposition, but Northington panted
for retirement, and longed to serve his ancient friend Pitt; whence it
pleased him to denounce a report drawn up and submitted to the council
on this subject as theoretical, visionary, and unworthy of practical
statesmen. The meeting broke up without coming to any conclusion, and
before another could be convened, Northington demanded an audience of
the king; resigned under the pretence that the present ministry was
unable to carry on the government; and recommended that his majesty
should call Pitt into his councils. In consequence of this,
Pitt received the personal commands of his majesty to form a new
administration, offering him a _carte blanche_ for its formation.

Hitherto Pitt had manifested great patriotism, having served his
country, apparently, for the love of it alone. That he was ambitious,
however, he now proved. In reply to his majesty's commands he spoke of
his infirmities, and--although he was only fifty-eight years old--of his
great age. Under these circumstances he proposed taking to himself not
the premiership, with the direction of the house of commons, but the
office of privy-seal, which implied his exaltation to the peerage. The
king and the country alike stared with astonishment at this proposition,
but his views were not thwarted, and he proceeded to form his own
cabinet. Negociations failed with Lord Temple, the Marquess of
Rockingham, Lord Gower, Mr. Dowdeswell, and Lord Scarborough. In
the midst of them, however, Pitt received an autograph note from
his majesty, announcing his creation as Earl of Chatham, and thus
stimulated, he proceeded in his task. On the 2nd of August the members
of the new cabinet were formally announced in the Gazette. Pitt, as
Earl of Chatham, took the office of privy-seal; Lord Camden was made
chancellor; the Earl of Shelburne was appointed one of the secretaries
of state; General Conway continued in office as the other; the Duke of
Grafton was made first lord of the treasury; Charles Townshend became
chancellor of the exchequer; Sir Charles Saunders succeeded to the
admiralty; and the Earl of Hillsborough was nominated first lord of
trade. Several changes were also made in the subordinate places of the
treasury and the admiralty boards, and the strange medley, which soon
became more mixed and various, has been thus described by Burke:--"He
[Lord Chatham] made an administration so chequered and speckled; he
put together a piece of joinery so crossly indented and whimsically
dovetailed; a cabinet so variously inlaid; such a piece of diversified
mosaic; such a tesselated pavement without cement; here a bit of black
stone, and there a bit of white; patriots and courtiers; king's friends
and republicans; Whigs and Tories; treacherous friends and open enemies;
that it was indeed a very curious show, but utterly unsafe to touch,
and unsure to stand on. The colleagues whom he had assorted at the same
boards stared at each other, and were obliged to ask, Sir, your name?
Sir, you have the advantage of me. Mr. Such-a-one, I beg a thousand
pardons. I venture to say it did so happen, that persons had a single
office divided between them, who had never spoken to each other in their
lives, until they found themselves, they knew not how, pigging together,
heads and points, in the same truckle bed."




DECLINE OF LORD CHATHAM'S POPULARITY.

Lord Chesterfield characterised the exaltation of Pitt to an earldom as
"a fall up stairs"--a fall which hurt him so much, that he would never
be able to stand upright again. By his acceptance of a coronet, in
truth, he greatly diminished his popularity. Burke undermined his
influence in the city by two clever publications: in the first of these
he gave an account of the late short administration, and in the second
he gave a humorous and ironical reply to it, in which the disingenuous
conduct of their successors was ably exposed. The wit of Chesterfield
ably seconded the pen of Burke; and the Earl of Chatham soon found that
though he was dignified by the king, he had shorn himself of all his
honours in the sight of the people. The influence which the Earl of Bute
was supposed to have had over him tended still more to blight his fair
fame. He was taunted with being a willing agent of men whom he did not
esteem, and his acceptance of a peerage was a never-failing source of
invective. Moreover, in his negociations with his brother-in-law, Lord
Temple, he had quarrelled with that nobleman, and all its disparaging
circumstances were freely discussed to his lasting disadvantage.. A
shower of pamphlets appealed against him, and the city of London,
where his influence had recently reigned paramount, mortified him, by
declining repeated proposals of presenting him with an address on his
appointment. Men saw in him no longer the unblemished patriot, but
looked upon him as a cringing slave to royalty for place and power. In
their displeasure they may have judged too harshly, but it is certain,
as Lord Chesterfield observed, that he was no longer Mr. Pitt in any
respect, but _only_ the Earl of Chatham. The charms of his eloquence
were lost for ever, for when the people can place no confidence in their
rulers, the finest oratory is but an empty sound.

It happened unfortunately for the Earl of Chatham's popularity, that
owing to a deficiency in the harvest of last year great scarcity
prevailed, and as distress existed on the continent. The people, always
disposed to look upon the dark side of the picture, apprehended that
the country would be involved in all the horrors of famine. The price
of provisions greatly increased, and in consequence tumultuous riots
occurred in various parts of the kingdom, in which many lives were lost.
Some of the rioters were captured, and special commissions were sent
into the country to try them, and, in many instances, they were brought
to condign punishment. A proclamation was issued for enforcing the law
against forestallers and regraters, but as the price of all articles
rose, and the city of London made a representation to the throne
respecting large orders for wheat which had been received from the
continent, another was issued prohibiting its exportation. At the same
time an embargo was laid by royal authority on all outward-bound vessels
laden with corn.

It was not in England alone that the waning influence of the Earl of
Chatham became manifest. One of his first diplomatic attempts was to
establish a powerful northern confederacy, principally between England,
Prussia, and Russia, in order to counterbalance the formidable alliance
framed by the Bourbons in their family compact. The king of Prussia,
however, was averse to the formation of any new and stricter connexions
with England, as well on account of the usage he had met with during the
late war, as of the unsettled state of the government of Great Britain
since the peace. "Till he saw," he said, "more stability in our
administration, he did not choose to draw his connexions with us
closer," and the negociations was therefore dropped.




MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

The session was opened on the 11th of November, and the principal
topic of the king's speech was the scarcity of corn; and measures were
recommended, if necessary, for allaying or remedying the evil. The
address was opposed in both houses, and in the commons four amendments
were moved, but the government in every instance had a majority. On the
subject of the embargo, however, and the delay of assembling parliament
when the country was in such critical circumstances, ministers had a
harder battle to fight. It was thought right to pass a bill of indemnity
in favour of those who had acted in obedience to the council with
respect to the embargo, and when this bill was brought in by a member
of the cabinet, a remark was made, that although it provided for the
security of the inferior officers, who had acted under the proclamation,
it passed over those who advised the measure. This gave rise to much
altercation and debate, especially among the lords, where the Earl of
Chatham, Lord Camden, and others, who had long been the advocates of
popular rights, vindicated the present exercise of royal prerogative,
not on the plea of necessity but of right: arguing that a dispensing
power was inherent in the crown, which might be exerted during the
recess of parliament, but which expired whenever parliament reassembled.
Camden asserted that Junius Brutus would not have hesitated to entrust
such a power even to a Nero, and that it was at most but "a forty
day's tyranny." The Earl of Chatham was a more powerful advocate of the
measure. He vindicated the issuing of the embargo by legal authority
during the recess of parliament as an act of power justifiable on the
ground of necessity, and he read a paragraph from Locke on Government,
to show that his views were borne out by that great friend of liberty,
that constitutional philosopher, and that liberal statesman. The
sentiments of the ministers, however, were strongly opposed by Lords
Temple, Lyttleton, and Mansfield, the latter of whom, though he had once
been spell-bound by court influence, "rode the great horse Liberty with
much applause." The Earl of Chatham replied, but the constitutional
principles which his opposers laid down could not be answered with
success, for although parliament passed the act of indemnity, yet the
opposition lords so enlightened the public mind upon the subject, that
the cry was instantly raised that the present ministers had sold their
consciences to the court, and were in a league to extend the prerogative
beyond the precedent of the worst periods in English history. The
ferment was greatly increased by Mr. Beckford's declaring in the house
of commons, that the crown had in all cases of necessity a power to
dispense with laws: an assertion which retraction, explanation, and
contradiction from the same lips, could not efface from the public mind.
When the bill passed it was in an amended state: the amendment including
the advisers, as well as the officers, who had acted under the orders
of council in enforcing the embargo. But even this, which implied an
acknowledgment of error, was not sufficient to satisfy the public mind,
for the clamour still continued against the ministers. The Earl of
Chatham was also embarrassed by other circumstances, and in order to
strengthen his hands, he was compelled to forego his determination,
and to overlook his declaration, that he would never again have any
connexion with the old Duke of Newcastle. The duke had a party which
would be important to so weak a cabinet, and in order to gratify him,
Lord Edgecumbe was ungraciously dismissed from his office of treasurer
of the household, to make room for Sir John Shelley, a near relation
of his grace. But the remedy was as bad as the disease. Indignant at the
treatment which their colleague had received, Lord Resborough, the Duke
of Portland, the Earl of Scarborough, Lord Monson, Sir Charles Saunders,
first lord of the admiralty, Admiral Keppel, and Sir William Meredith,
all sent in their resignation, and they, with their adherents, ranged
themselves on the side of the opposition. These numerous secessions
compelled Chatham to negociate more explicitly, not only with
Newcastle's party, but with that also which was headed by the Duke of
Bedford. The place of first lord of the admiralty was offered to
Lord Gower, who took a journey to Woburn, for the express purpose of
consulting his grace upon the subject. But negociations with the Bedford
party concluded with its total alienation from the administration, nor
were those who accepted office thoroughly conciliated. These were Sir
Edward Hawke, who was made first lord of the admiralty, and Sir Percy
Brett and Mr. Jenkinson, who filled the other seats of the board; while
Lords Hillsborough and Le Despenser were appointed joint postmasters.
The ministry, as thus patched up, was more anomalous than ever, and
Chatham aware of this, and seeing that his popularity was daily more and
more declining, became a prey to grief, disappointment, and vexation.
At times he sank into the lowest state of despondency, and left his
incapable colleagues, to make their own arrangements and adopt their
own measures. But they could not act efficiently without him. Burke
says:--"Having put so much the larger part of his enemies and opposers
into power, the confusion was such that his own principles could not
possibly have any effect, or influence, in the conduct of others. If
ever he fell into a fit of the gout, or if any other cause withdrew
him from public cares, principles directly the contrary were sure to
predominate. When he had executed his plan, he had not an inch of ground
to stand upon. When he had accomplished his scheme of administration,
he was no longer a minister. When his face was hid but for a moment, his
whole system was on a wide sea without chart or compass." Yet Chatham,
just before the recess, put a bold front upon his affairs in the house.
He proclaimed a war against party cabals, and asserted that his great
point was to destroy faction, and that he could face and dare the
greatest and proudest connexions. But this was an Herculean task which
neither Chatham nor any other minister has yet been able to accomplish.
Faction is an hydra-headed monster, which no man can destroy, either by
the charms of his eloquence or the terror of his countenance.

{A.D. 1767}

Chatham found that the warfare was an unequal one, and that he had not
sufficient strength to withstand the power of his enemies. Hence, at the
end of December, when all the appointments were made, he retired to his
estate of Burton Pynset, which had been recently left him, where he took
up his abode, doing nothing for the state, and yet taking the salary
attached to his office. Parliament reassembled after the recess without
him, his friends in the cabinet wondering at, and the king himself
lamenting, his absence. Yet the ministers attempted to work without him.
The chancellor of the exchequer proposed that the land-tax should be
continued at four shillings in the pound, stating that the proceeds of
such a tax would enable him to bring about the most brilliant operation
of finance recorded in the annals of Great Britain. This was a new
measure, for hitherto it had been the practice at the return of peace to
take off any addition that had been made to the land-tax in time of war.
Hence when Townshend proposed it in committee he was laughed at by the
country members, who contended for its reduction to three, or even
two, shillings in the pound. Townshend had nobody by him to second his
assertions, or give him powerful support; and when Mr. Grenville moved
that the land-tax should be reduced to three shillings, his motion
was carried by a majority of eighteen. It was said that the country
gentlemen in effecting this reduction, "had bribed themselves with a
shilling in the pound of their own land-tax," but as this was the first
money-bill in which any cabinet had been successfully opposed since
the Revolution, it was rightly viewed as a symptom of weakness in the
administration: yet Townshend retained his office.

{GEORGE III. 1765-1769}




EAST INDIA QUESTION.

The great question discussed in parliament during this session related
to the East Indies. At this period the East India Company held "the
gorgeous East in fee." The merchant princes of Leadenhall-street, who
commenced their career with a strip of sea-coast on the outermost limits
of Hindostan, had now acquired principalities and kingdoms, and had even
made themselves masters of the vast inheritance of Aurungzebe. Fortunate
as the Argonauts, they found and possessed themselves of the "golden
fleece," which had been the object of their search. Enormous fortunes
were made with a rapidity hitherto unknown, and they were gathered into
the laps of even the most obscure adventurers. The fables of the ring
and the lamp were more than realised, and the fountain from whence these
riches ran appeared to flow from an inexhaustible source. Men had only
to go and stand by its brink, and if avarice could be satisfied, they
might soon return home with not only sufficient wealth to maintain
them in opulence and splendour, but with some to spare for the poor and
needy.

Such were the views which government seems to have taken of these
merchant princes. Early in November a committee was appointed for
investigating the nature of their charters, treaties, and grants, and
for calculating the expenses which had been incurred on their account
by government. In the course of this scrutiny two questions suggested
themselves to the committee; namely, whether the company had any right
to territorial acquisitions, and whether it was proper for them to enjoy
a monopoly of trade. Some of the members argued that the company had
a right, while on the other side some maintained that, from the costly
protection afforded it, government had an equitable claim to the
revenues of all territory acquired by conquest. It was the opinion of
the cabinet, that the state did not possess its proper share of the
company's profits, and the chancellor of the exchequer conceived that by
either taking their territorial conquests into the hands of government,
or making them pay largely for keeping that management in their ow a
hands, the state would obtain that wealth of which it stood so much
in need. Chatham's attention was drawn to this subject, but he merely
advised that Beckford should make a motion for examining into the state
of the East India Company, and remained still in the west of England.
This motion was made, and the house resolved itself into a committee of
inquiry, and called for papers. In the meantime the company suggested
an amicable arrangement, and presented a series of demands, among which
were--that the administration should prolong the charter to the year
1800, or to a further term, and to confirm to the company the sole and
exclusive trade of the East Indies for three years at least after the
expiration of the charter granted in the last reign; that it should
agree to an alteration in the inland duty upon tea, with the view of
preventing smuggling; that it should allow a drawback on the exportation
of tea; that it should alter the duties on calicoes and muslins; that
it should consent to some proper methods of recruiting the company's
military forces, and for strengthening their cause in India; that it
should prevent the commanders of the company's ships and others from
conveying any kind of warlike stores clandestinely to the East Indies;
that it should use its strong interposition with the court of France
to obtain large sums of money which the company had expended for the
maintenance and transport of French prisoners to Europe; and that it
should use its strong interposition likewise with the court of Spain
with respect to the Manilla ransom, that the company might obtain
indemnification for the great expenses incurred by that expedition. The
company laid before the house their charters, treaties with the native
sovereigns, letters and correspondence, and the state of their revenues
in Bengal, Bahar, and Orissa; but the whole affair was so complicated,
that the ministers could not make themselves thoroughly masters of
the subject. Not one would, in fact, undertake the management of the
business. They shifted the proposals from one to another, and could not
come to any determination what to accept or what to reject. At every
stage of the business it was attended with violent debates. Townshend
was strongly in favour of an amicable arrangement with the company,
laying great stress on the _quantum_ to be given for the prolongation of
the term of their charter, while Company declared that the salvation
of the country depended upon the proper adjustment of this nice affair.
Still Chatham kept aloof from the business, and he either would not from
illness, or could not from despondency, give his thoughts and directions
in writing as to what steps to take and what further motion to make. In
the end, therefore, after many divisions, a bill was framed, granting
nearly all that was asked for by the company, and binding it to pay
£400,000 per annum, in half-yearly payments, and to indemnify the
exchequer, should any loss be sustained in consequence of lower-ing
the inland duties on tea, and the allowance of the drawback on its
exportation. But the term of this contract was limited to two years;
commencing from the 1st of February of the current year; so that the
company had a further interference with their territories and wealth in
prospect: but till the expiration of that term, their territorial rights
were fully admitted.

While this subject was under parliamentary discussion, the proprietors
of East India stock demanded of the court, that, as the company had
gained so much territory and so many new advantages, a larger dividend
should be declared. In compliance with this demand the dividends were
increased from ten to twelve and a half per cent., which step called for
the interference of government. In order to check a proceeding which was
considered calculated to renew the gambling stock and share jobbing of
the memorable South Sea year, two bills were brought into the house by
ministers; one for regulating the qualifications of voters in trading
companies, and the other for restraining and limiting the making of
dividends by the company; fixing them at ten per cent. This latter bill
encountered a most violent opposition both by the company and in the
house, particularly by the lords, but it was carried, and received the
royal sanction.




AMERICAN TAXATION.

Soon after the reassembling of parliament Mr. Grenville, intent upon
taxing America, had proposed saddling that country for the support
of troops, &c, and the chancellor of the exchequer, in reply, pledged
himself to the house to find a revenue in the colonies sufficient to
meet the expenses. Accordingly, during the session, he introduced a
bill to lay certain duties on glass, tea, paper, and painters' colours,
imported from Great Britain into America. This bill was carried through
both houses with the greatest facility, and another act passed with
equal facility, which placed these duties, and all other customs and
duties in the American colonies, under the management of the
king's resident commissioners. These acts were followed by one more
justifiable. The assembly of New York had refused to comply with the
statute requiring a grant of additional rations to the troops stationed
in that province; and the refractory disposition of the colonists made
it manifest that their intention was to deny the jurisdiction of Great
Britain altogether. It was evident that a spirit of infatuation had
taken deep root in America, and it was easy to foresee that confusion
and bloodshed would one day ensue. Under these circumstances, and with a
view of checking the onward progress of the march of insubordination, an
act was passed, prohibiting the governor, council, and assembly of New
York from passing any legislative act, till satisfaction should be given
as to the treatment of the commissioners and troops, and submission paid
to the Mutiny Act. But no measure which the parliament of England could
devise, whether coercive or conciliatory, could tame the fierce spirit
which the Stamp Act had created, and the new scheme of duties on imports
was calculated to confirm in hostility to Great Britain. The breach grew
wider and wider, until at length it was past all remedy.




CHANGES IN THE MINISTRY.

Parliament was prorogued on the 2nd of July, with a speech from his
majesty, in which he acknowledged annuities of £8000, which had been
settled during this session on each of the king's brothers; namely, the
Dukes of York, Gloucester, and Cumberland. During the recess, an event
occurred which threatened to overthrow the tottering cabinet. This
was the death of Charles Townshend, who suddenly expired on the 4th of
September. But before his death, there were signs of a dissolution of
the ministry, and Townshend was actually engaged in the projection of
a new administration. Lord Northington and General Conway had both
expressed a wish to resign, and the Duke of Grafton showed a greater
disposition for pleasure than for business, whence negociations were
opened by Townshend with the Rockingham party.

His death set these aside, but several changes soon afterwards took
place among the great officers of state. The Earl of Chatham, afflicted
with the gout, and indisposed to business, still remained idle; and the
king therefore, authorized the Duke of Grafton to make the necessary
changes in the cabinet. All that could be done, however, before the
meeting of parliament, was to entrust the seals of the office of
chancellor of the exchequer to Lord Mansfield, chief justice of the
king's bench, and to empower him to renew negociations with the Duke of
Bedford, in which the Duke of Grafton had been unsuccessful.

The ministry was in this unsettled state when the parliament met in
November. The principal point recommended to its attention by his
majesty was the high price of corn, with the consequent suffering of the
poor. This subject was also impressed on parliament by strong petitions
from all parts of the country; and an act was passed, extending the
prohibition against exportation, and encouraging the importation of
grain.

In the midst of these proceedings, Lord North was prevailed upon to
accept the chancellorship of the exchequer; Mr. Thomas Townshend, cousin
of the late Charles Townshend, succeeded him as joint paymaster of the
forces; and his place, as one of the lords of the treasury, was given
to Mr. Jenkinson. Soon after this, General Conway and Lord Northington
insisted on resigning, and fresh overtures were made to the Duke of
Bedford. That nobleman having been gained over, Earl Gower became
president of the council in the place of Lord Northington, and Lord
Weymouth secretary of state in lieu of Conway. At the same time the Earl
of Hillsborough was appointed third secretary of state, which was a new
office; and he was succeeded as joint paymaster with Lord North, by
the Duke of Bedford's ally, Lord Sandwich. General Conway was
appointed lieutenant-general of the ordnance; and the ministry, thus
reconstructed, took the name of the Duke of Grafton's administration. As
for the Earl of Chatham he was still a cipher, keeping aloof at Bath, or
at Burton Pynsent, or at Hayes in Kent, where he would neither see
nor speak to anybody. But he still retained the privy seal, and still
retained the emoluments of office, and the king was afraid to deprive
him of them.

{A.D. 1768}

Parliament, in this session, extended the act which restricted the
East India Company's dividends to ten per cent.; but scarcely any
other business was transacted beside the voting of supplies. The king
prorogued parliament on the 10th of March, and on the 12th of that month
it was dissolved by proclamation, it having nearly completed its legal
term of seven years.




PROCEEDINGS IN AMERICA.

The new Revenue Act, which imposed duties on various articles of
merchandise, excited great resentment in America. It was looked upon by
the colonists, indeed, as a deceptive measure, having a similar object
to that of the Stamp Act, and it had the effect of reviving a question,
which the British parliament should have endeavoured to have consigned
to utter oblivion. The Americans, animated by a spirit of resistance,
would now no longer acknowledge that distinction between external and
internal taxation, on which they had at first grounded their claim
for relief. Their presses teemed with invectives against the British
legislature, and it was confidently asserted that England was resolved
to reduce the colonies to a state of abject slavery. The assembly of
Massachusets Bay took the lead in opposing the government, and it soon
engaged the other colonies to join in resisting the mother-country.
A petition was likewise sent by that house to the king, and letters,
signed by their speaker, to several of the British cabinet, containing
statements of their rights and grievances, and soliciting relief.

A letter was also sent to Mr. De Berdt, their agent in London,
instructing him to oppose the obnoxious measure on every ground of right
and policy. This letter adverted to the appropriation of the revenue
intended to be thus unconstitutionally raised--stating that it was to
supply a support for governors and judges, and a standing army. On both
these grounds, as well as its unconstitutional nature, the house opposed
it, remarking, on the subject of the standing army, in the following
terms, by way of remonstrance:--"As Englishmen and British subjects, we
have an aversion to a standing army, which we reckon dangerous to our
civil liberties; and considering the examples of ancient times, it seems
a little surprising that a mother-state should trust large bodies of
mercenary troops in her colonies, at so great a distance from her; lest,
in process of time, when the spirits of the people shall be depressed by
the military power, another Caesar should arise and usurp the authority
of his master."

A circular letter was sent, in the name of the assembly of Massachusets
Bay, to the other provincial assemblies, informing them of the measures
already taken; and it was couched in such terms that it had the effect
of lulling the suspicions of some whose opinions were not so violent,
and of making many of them firm adherents to the cause of liberty. The
conduct of this republican assembly excited strong indignation in the
ministry. A letter was sent, by Lord Hillsborough, to the governor,
expressing great displeasure against those who had endeavoured to revive
the dissensions which had been so injurious to both countries, and
directing him to dissolve the assembly if it should decline to rescind
the vote which gave rise to the circular. This letter was laid before
the house; but instead of rescinding the vote, it justified the spirit
and language of the circular, and declared that, as it had been answered
by several of the assemblies, the vote had been already executed, and
could not therefore be rescinded. The conclusion of this uncompromising
reply was as follows:--"We take this opportunity faithfully to represent
to your excellency, that the new revenue acts and measures are not only
disagreeable, but in every view are deemed an insupportable burden and
grievance, with very few exceptions, by all the freeholders and other
inhabitants of this jurisdiction: and we beg leave, once for all, to
assure your excellency, that those of this opinion are no 'party or
expiring faction;'--they have at all times been ready to devote their
time and fortune to his majesty's service. Of loyalty, this majority
could as reasonably boast as any who may happen to enjoy your
excellency's smiles: their reputation, rank, and fortune, are at least
equal to those who may have sometimes been considered as the only
friends in good government; while some of the best blood in the colony,
even in the two houses of assembly, lawfully convened and duly acting,
have been openly charged with the unpardonable crime of oppugnation
against the royal authority. We have now only to inform your excellency,
that this house has voted not to rescind, as required, its resolution;
and that, in a division on the question, there were ninety-two nays, and
seventeen yeas. In all this we have been actuated by a conscientious,
and finally, by a clear and determined sense of duty to God, to our
king, our country, and our latest posterity; and we most ardently wish
and humbly pray, that in your future conduct, your excellency may be
influenced by the same privileges."

A letter to the same import was addressed, by the assembly, to Lord
Hillsborough. But this was its last act. When the governor had received
the above communication, he immediately dissolved it, and the
province was left for the remainder of the year without a legislature.
Opposition, however, was not checked by such a measure--rather it was
carried on with more spirit than ever. Riots took place at Boston and
Halifax, and arms and ammunition were provided, under the pretext of
anticipated war with France A meeting of delegates, from all the towns
of the province, was convened at Boston, which was attended by deputies
from every one except Hatfield. This convention sent a communication
to the governor, disclaiming all intention of performing any act of
government; professing to have met, in dark and distressing times,
to consult and advise measures for the peace and good order of his
majesty's subjects in the province; and praying that he would call
together the legislative assembly. The governor refused to receive any
communication from the meeting, warned it of the irregularity of its
proceedings, and assured it that his majesty was determined to maintain
his entire sovereignty over the province. A deputation was then sent to
the governor by the convention, but it was refused admission into his
presence, and a committee of nine persons were appointed to consult on
the best mode of promoting peace and good order in the province. This
committee sent in its report, and the meeting drew up a petition to the
king, which was transmitted to the agent in London, and it then
broke up. This was on the 29th of September, and on the same day, two
regiments and a detachment of artillery from Halifax inarched into
Boston. These were soon after joined by two more regiments from
Ireland, under General Gage; and thus awed, the province was restored to
comparative tranquillity. But underneath this show of quiet there
were heart-burnings, which nothing but the recognition of American
independence could allay. Associations formed throughout the whole
length and breadth of America, by the exertions of the assembly of
Massachusets Bay, stirred up and kept alive the flame of discord, and
occasion need but fan it, and it would kindle into a blaze; the lurid
glare of which would be seen burning brightly, and raging furiously
across the wide Atlantic. The proceedings in America were but as yet, in
truth, the warnings of a terrible commotion--the first intimations of
an irruption, more frightful in its nature, and more disastrous in its
consequences, than the bursting forth of the fire-streaming bowels of
Mounts Ætna and Vesuvius, or the devastations of an earthquake. For the
storms of human passion, when they burst forth in war and bloodshed, are
more desolating to the human family, than any outbreak of visible nature
recorded in the many-paged annals of history.




DOMESTIC TROUBLES AND COMMOTIONS.

While America threatened some fearful catastrophe, Great Britain was
scarcely less disturbed by internal troubles and commotions. Much as
he desired the happiness of the people, the jewels set in his majesty's
crown were intermixed with sharp, piercing thorns. This is plainly
observable in the previous pages, wherein the difficulties which had
beset his various administrations, and which chiefly arose from the
discordant passions of their members, are historically narrated. Burke
rightly observes:--"Our constitution stands on a nice equipoise, with
steep precipices and deep waters on all sides of it: in removing it from
a dangerous leaning toward one side, there may be a risk of oversetting
it on the other. Every project or a material change in a government so
complicated, combined, at the same time, with external circumstances
still more complicated, is a matter full of difficulties." This is not
the language of a casual observer of men and manners, but of a profound
politician. It is borne out by his majesty's early experience. The
scheme which he adopted soon after his accession of breaking the power
of the Whig aristocracy, and of calling men of different parties to the
service of the state, was not only surrounded with difficulties, but
fraught with clanger. Men looked with favour on the long-established
supremacy of these great families, and their influence and power were
therefore not easily broken. Bute sought to dissolve the spell; but the
hand of Bute was not that of a magician, and he signally failed in the
attempt. Broken, but not subdued, the aristocracy formed new parties,
and acted upon new principles, all calculated, when dictated by the
spirit of opposition, to annoy the sovereign, and disarrange the
machinery of the state. Cabinets, formed with nice art and care,
were unable to withstand their opponents; whence their frequent
disarrangements and dissolutions. The age became signalised by
ministerial revolutions and cabinet abortions; and why? because the
cabinets formed were not supported by public opinion. Parliament itself
had lost much of its credit with the people by reason of its indecisive
measures. It had forfeited their confidence, nor could the recall of
Pitt to the helm of state restore it to their favour, or rescue the
sovereign from the dilemma in which he had placed himself. Intractable
at all times, from the opposition he had met with, and from ill health,
he had become so imperious, that, like an old Roman consul, he would
fain have yoked the people, the cabinet, and the monarch to his
chariot-wheels. Moreover, since he had become an earl, he was a changed
man. He no longer sided with, but against, the people; sheltering
himself from their clamours in the stronghold of privilege. Hence it
was, that when he coalesced with others, he found no support on which
he could lean with safety, and by which he could assist the monarch. His
staff was but a reed on which, if he leant, it pierced his hand. This
Chatham felt; and though he clung tenaciously to office, from the fear
of displaying his weakness and incapacity, he only acted, when he did
act, behind the scenes. Ministerial exertions were also paralysed by
another cause. A prevalent notion existed that there was a mysterious
power about the court which worked to the detriment of the public good.
This was a constant theme of invective among the opposition, and, it
would seem, not without good reason. But there was another cause of
obstruction to the measures formed by government. This was found in
the democratical spirit, which now universally prevailed. Courted by the
aristocracy, who had till very recently

     "Held them dangling at arm's length in scorn,"

and grown comparatively wealthy since relieved from the pressure of
war, the population became restless, jealous, and insubordinate. The man
whose fortune was only made, as it were, yesterday, deemed himself as
great a man as the highest and noblest born aristocrat; while the man
who had squandered away his patrimony, sought to restore himself from
his fallen position in society, by assuming principles of patriotism
which in his heart he despised. Moreover, the conduct of their rulers,
which had been too frequently vacillating and manifestly corrupt,
taught the great body of the people to look upon them with suspicion and
distrust. Talk they as loud as they might of honesty of intention, of
unimpeachable integrity, and of pure patriotism, the people nevertheless
would not now believe them. Hence, political associations began to be
formed; taverns were made so many parliament houses; and the people
seemed as if they were resolved to take the government into their own
hands.

     But oh! ye Muses, keep your votary's feet
     From tavern-haunts where politicians meet
     Where rector, doctor, and attorney pause,
     First on each parish, then each public cause:
     Indited roads and rates that still increase;
     The murmuring poor, who will not fast in peace:
     Election zeal and friendship since declined,
     A tax commuted, or a tithe in kind;
     The Dutch and German? kindling into strife;
     Hull port and poachers vile!--the serious ills of life.




THE RETURN OF WILKES, ETC.

Such was the state of society when writs were issued for a new election.
Encouraged by it, John Wilkes once more stepped upon the stage, and
offered himself as a candidate for the suffrages of the people. And, as
it has been well said, Mephistopheles himself could not have chosen a
better time for mischief. For, at this time, the populace had no idol in
whom they could place their confidence, and they hailed his reappearance
with delight. By their aid, indeed, he soon became enabled to insult his
sovereign, and to trample on the legislature with impunity. Unprincipled
as he was, he became the man of their choice, and their "champion bold"
in the cause of what was called liberty.

Wilkes had made an attempt to return to England during the Rockingham
ministry, but that party would not receive his overtures. Recently he
had also sounded the Duke of Grafton, with whom he had formerly been on
terms of intimacy; but his application for his mediation with the
king was treated by that nobleman with neglect and disdain. Thus
disappointed, and finding his situation at Paris, from his accumulated
load of debt, disagreeable, he at length resolved to brave every danger.
During the elections, he boldly presented himself at Guildhall, as
a candidate to represent the metropolitan city in parliament. He was
received with rapturous applause by the populace; but his present views
were frustrated by some of the good citizens of London, who exerted all
their influence to insure his defeat. Nothing daunted, however, Wilkes
immediately offered himself for the county, and he was returned by the
freeholders of Middlesex, by a very large majority. The mob, on this
occasion, was in a transport of joy. The air rang with shouts of
"Wilkes and Liberty!" and by way of exhibiting their exultation at their
triumph, they demolished Bute's windows in the west, and the windows of
the mansion-house, in the east of the city.

Having secured his election for Middlesex, and confident of the support
of the people, Wilkes appeared, in the month of April, in the court of
king's bench, and declared himself ready to submit to the laws of his
country. Lord Mansfield, then on the bench, suggested that as he was not
before the court by any legal process, no notice could be taken of his
professed submission, and he was permitted to depart. On retiring,
he was received with loud acclamations by the mob, and the general
impression was, that Wilkes had conquered the government, and that
the arm of the people was stronger than the arm of the law. Wilkes,
likewise, may have flattered himself that he was secure from all further
process; but, if so, he soon found himself deceived. Within a week, a
writ of _capias ut legatum_ was issued against him, and he was taken
into custody. Sergeant Glynn, his counsel, pointed out several errors
in the outlawry, and offered bail; but the judges decided that no bail
could be taken, and he was at once committed to the king's bench
prison. But the populace was resolved to reverse this decree. As he was
proceeding over Westminster-bridge, they stopped the coach in which he
was conveyed, took out the horses, and dragged him in triumph through
the city, to a public-house in Spitalfields, where they retained him
till nearly midnight. Wilkes, however, thought proper, when the people
dispersed, to repair to the marshal of the king's bench, out of whose
hands the mob had rescued him, and surrender himself. But as soon as
it was known that the "patriot" was in prison, the mob showed signs of
rescuing him again. Crowds collected around his prison-house, pulled
down the outward fence, and made a bonfire with it on the spot. An order
was sent to the horse-guards, and a body of soldiers were stationed near
the prison, but this only tended to increase the popular excitement.
Every day, for nearly a fortnight, the mob abused the soldiers, and the
soldiers threatened the mob, so that the metropolis was one continued
scene of riot and confusion; Wilkes adding fuel to the flames from
within the doors of his prison.

Such was the public temper when parliament reassembled on the 10th of
May. The people supposed that neither strong walls, nor stronger laws,
could prevent Wilkes from taking his seat in the house of commons, as
member for Middlesex; and they assembled in great numbers round the
gates of his prison, in order to escort him to Westminster. But the
gates remained bolted and barred, and Wilkes continued secure within.
They waited patiently for awhile, but when doubts arose whether they
should be permitted to see then-idol, their patience at first grew
into uneasiness, until at length it gendered into a storm of furious
disappointment and passion. Demands were made for his appearance,
but they were unheeded and unanswered. Their violence grew with their
clamour, and it was in vain that they were urged to depart in peace.
Stones and brickbats were aimed at the heads of the magistrates who
attempted to read the riot act, and the military by whom they were
guarded. Self-defence compelled the order to fire, which was readily
obeyed by the soldiers; the more so, because the companies selected for
the service were nearly all Highlanders and Lowland Scots, whose strong
national feelings had been wounded by Wilkes, in his North Briton. Four
or five persons were killed, and many more wounded; and among those who
perished was a youth of the name of Allen, who had taken no part in the
riot. One of the soldiers gave chase to a young man who had been
pelting them, and by mistake shot Allen in a cow-house, near St.
George's-fields, while he was in the act of protesting his innocence.
This occurrence tended to increase the popular rage. At the coroner's
inquest, a verdict of wilful murder was brought in against the soldier
who shot Allen, and two others were charged with aiding and abetting.
Maclean--for that was the name of the soldier who shot Allen--was
committed to prison, and warrants were issued against the others
as accessories. At the same time, Mr. Gillam, one of the Surrey
magistrates, who had given the order to fire, was indicted for murder. On
the other hand, the parliament then sitting voted loyal addresses to his
majesty on the occasion, with assurances that every measure, which was
adopted for the maintenance of the authority of the laws, had their
hearty concurrence; and Lord Barrington returned thanks to the officers
and men employed in this service, and directed that the crown lawyers
should defend the soldiers under prosecution. This had the effect of
exasperating the populace still more. They saw that the soldiers would
be acquitted--which was actually the case, and rewarded likewise--and
the exploit was named by the unenviable denomination of "The Massacre of
St. George's-fields." Exciting papers were stuck up in every part of
the metropolis, and even on the very walls of St. James's-palace.
The mansion-house was assailed so frequently that a constant guard of
soldiers was necessary to defend it from demolition. The firm of civil
authority appeared too weak to control the unbridled passions of the
populace; and it was rendered still more impotent by other riots and
disturbances which broke out unconnected with politics. Coalheavers,
sailors, and watermen at this time complained of low wages, and of
frauds practised upon them by their employers; and Stepney-fields
likewise became a scene of combat which could only be quelled by the
military.

On the 8th of June, Wilkes's case was again heard in the king's bench.
His outlawry was reversed, because he had voluntarily surrendered: but
he was sentenced, for the seditious sentiments contained in the 'North
Briton', to be confined in prison ten calendar months, and to pay a fine
of £500; and for publishing the 'Essay on Woman', to pay a similar
fine, and to be imprisoned twelve calendar months, to commence at the
expiration of the term of the former imprisonment. He was, also, to find
security for his good behaviour for seven years--himself in the sum of
£1000, and two sureties in £500 each. On the trial, facts were divulged
very disgraceful to the temper of the people. In order to ensure
impunity for their idol, anonymous letters had been sent to
chief-justice Mansfield, threatening him, and insulting him by every
species of insult and intimidation. His lordship spoke feelingly and
wisely in delivering the judgment of the court on these unworthy and
unmanly proceedings:--"The last event," said he, "which can happen to a
man never comes too soon, if he falls in support of the law and liberty
of his country; for liberty is synonymous with law and government: as
for himself, the temper of his mind, and the colour and conduct of his
life, had given him a suit of armour against these arrows."

The sentence passed against Wilkes tended only to increase his
popularity. Though immured within the walls of a prison, he became now
in the very zenith of his fame. Subscriptions were raised to pay off his
debts; valuable presents were conferred on him; and his portrait met the
eyes of the passers-by, over the doors of the public-houses, in
every part of the kingdom. The popularity of Wilkes was, if possible,
augmented by the issue of the trials of the magistrate and soldiers
for the murder of Allen, and those who fell in "the massacre of St.
George's-fields." They were all acquitted; and instead of being censured
for a breach of discipline by the authorities, Maclean received from
government the sum of thirty guineas for his sufferings on a false
accusation. This was exceedingly impolitic; for it had the effect of
further exasperating that huge-chafed monster, the populace, whose power
is not to be provoked or despised with impunity.




RESIGNATION OF LORD CHATHAM.

A ministry so hetrogeneous in its composition as that which now
administered the affairs of Great Britain could hardly be expected to
act in union and with firmness at this critical season. The Earl of
Chatham gave proof that he was not disposed to act with the opponents
of Wilkes, by declaring to Sir William Beauchamp, who was contesting the
election of Middlesex with Sergeant Glynn, and who applied to him for
his assistance and countenance, that he constantly declined meddling in
elections. His disinclination to act at all was, also, elicited by the
Duke of Grafton, who sighed "after a life much more pleasing to his mind"
than that of presiding over the government. Grafton urged the Countess
of Chatham--for he dared not trouble his lordship--to state whether she
thought her lord would resign. The countess, in reply, assured the noble
duke that there was but little prospect of his ever being able to enter
much into business; and intimated, that he was privy to, and highly
disapproved of, an intention entertained of dismissing Lord Shelburne;
adding, that he would never consent nor concur in such a removal, his
services being of great importance to the administration. All the while
the Earl of Chatham knew that it was Lord Shelburne's intention of
resigning voluntarily, which he did immediately after, having for his
successor, as secretary for the southern department, Lord Weymouth from
the northern, in whose post the Earl of Rochford was placed. From this
cause, and being also displeased with the conduct of his colleagues
regarding America, Chatham at length resolved to tender his resignation.
He wrote to the Duke of Grafton, informing him that his health would
no longer permit him to be useful to his majesty, and begging that his
grace would lay him at his majesty's feet, with his utmost duty and
earnest request, that he would grant him his royal permission to resign
the privy seal. It was in vain that the Duke of Grafton endeavoured to
dissuade him from his purpose, on the grounds that his services were
at this moment indispensable. His request was repeated in more positive
terms, and a letter was sent also to the king to the same intent. His
majesty now tried whether the refractory lord could not be brought to a
proper sense of his duty. He wrote in reply:--"As you entered upon this
employment in August, 1766, at my own requisition, I think I have a
right to insist on your remaining in my service; for I with pleasure
look forward to the time of your recovery, when I may I have your
assistance in resisting the torrent of factions this country so much
labours under. This thought is the more frequent in my mind, as the lord
chancellor and the Duke of Grafton take every opportunity to declare
warmly their desire of seeing that: therefore I again repeat it, you
must not think of retiring, but of pursuing what may be most conducive
to your health, and to my seeing you take a public share in my affairs."
It is probable that the Earl of Chatham was not so sanguine as his
majesty concerning his ability to resist "the torrent of factions,"
for he shrunk from his task in coward fear. In his reply, affliction,
submission, gratitude, veneration, and despair was seen in almost every
line, and he insisted upon adhering to his purpose. Accordingly, he sent
the privy seal by Lord Camden, who delivered it into the king's hands,
and who, to increase the monarch's embarrassments, wished to resign
likewise. Overcome by his majesty's entreaties, however, Camden
consented to remain in office.

The resignation of Chatham did not excite greater interest than the
resignation of the meanest officer in the state. Even Thackeray, his
admiring biographer, was obliged to make this confession:--"A greater
contrast in the feelings of the cabinet and the nation upon the present
resignation of Lord Chatham to those which were evinced upon his
dismission from office in 1757, and upon his retirement in 1761, can
scarcely be imagined. His dismission in 1757 excited one common cry of
enthusiastic admiration towards himself, and of indignation towards his
political opponents. The attention, not only of Great Britain, but
of the whole of Europe, was attracted by his resignation in 1761; and
although the voices of his countrymen were not so universally united
in his favour as upon the former occasion, the event was considered as
affecting the interests of nations in the four quarters of the globe.
The resignation of Lord Chatham, in 1768, was, in fact, nothing more
than the relinquishment of an appointment in which he had long ceased
to exercise his authority, or to exert his abilities. It was expected by
the ministry--it was little regarded by the people of Great Britain--it
was almost unknown to the continent of Europe." So low had the Earl of
Chatham descended from his giddy height of popularity--so little to be
depended upon is the breath of the people.

On the contrary, the causes which led to the retirement of Lord
Shelburne, had the effect of increasing the reputation of that
ex-minister, and of endearing him to the public. The ancient republic
of Genoa had long been endeavouring to reduce the Corsicans to her
obedience, but was compelled to give up the contest in despair. She
resigned her right of sovereignty--real or pretended--to Louis XV.; and
the French fitted out an armament to take possession of Corsica by force
of arms. The Corsicans maintained that they were not to be bought and
sold like revolted subjects and rebels; and their chosen chief, General
Paoli, represented the cruelty of the case to all Europe, addressing
himself in a special manner to England. As islanders and freemen, the
English warmly sympathised with them. The Earl of Chatham and Lord
Shelburne, likewise, felt deeply interested in the cause of the
Corsicans; and the latter authorised Lord Rochford, the ambassador at
Paris, to address a spirited remonstrance to the French cabinet on the
subject. These orders, however, were not supported by the rest of the
administration; the French court took no notice of the remonstrance; and
Lord Shelburne was compelled to resign. Corsica was therefore abandoned
to France, who established her supremacy by shedding much blood. This
naturally created feelings of respect for Lord Shelburne in the breasts
of the English people; and, as naturally, the feelings of contempt for
his cold, calculating, official colleagues.




THE AFFAIRS OF WILKES.

By this time Sergeant Glynn had been elected for the county of
Middlesex. Glynn was the friend and companion of Wilkes, and it happened
that some of the chairmen of his opponent killed a man of the name
of Clarke in an affray. At this period, such events were by no means
uncommon, but as Sir William Beauchamp was a ministerial candidate, the
populace spread surmises abroad, and circulated accusations detrimental
to his character. He was charged with being an employer of assassins,
and two of his chairmen were tried at the Old Bailey for murder. They
were acquitted, but this only tended to increase the popular excitement
against the ministers. Wilkes still more inflamed it by his intemperate
conduct. Lord Weymouth sent a letter to the bench of magistrates for the
county of Surrey, expressing the warmest approbation of their conduct,
and recommending them to quell all tumults on their first rising by
the aid of the civil and military power. This letter, or a copy of it,
having fallen into the hands of Wilkes, it was published by him, with
an inflammatory preface, in which he called the affair in St. George's
Fields "a horrid massacre, and the consequence of a hellish project
deliberately planned." Irritated by his imprisonment, Wilkes, indeed,
seems now to have set his fortune on the cast of a die, and the only way
of playing the game successfully, seems to have been, considered by him,
that of inflaming the passions of the people, already enraged beyond
endurance, to the utmost. But the ministers resolved that he should
not act with impunity, and this last act determined them upon taking
effectual measures to overthrow his cause, finally and for ever. But the
determination taken by them only aided the "patriot" in his ambitious
projects, and tended to increase their own unpopularity.

{GEORGE III. 1765-1769}




MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

Parliament, with the Duke of Grafton at its head, assembled on the 8th
of November. In his speech his majesty alluded to the signs of commotion
among the continental powers which now existed; to the state of our
American colonies, especially to the proceedings at Boston, which he
denounced in strong terms; and to the late abundant harvest, which he
viewed with satisfaction, as having come opportunely to the relief of
his poorer subjects. In the house of lords the address was agreed to
unanimously, but the commons offered many objections, criticising
the conduct of government with reference to America, Corsica, and
its continental policy, whence it was not carried without much angry
feeling.

The first question debated was that of corn. To prevent the recurrence
of scarcity, a bill was prepared for enlarging the prohibition against
exportation, and for preventing distillation from wheat. A more
effectual mode of securing plenty would have been to have passed a bill
for the better cultivation of the lands already in use, and for the
enclosure of large tracts of land then uncultivated. But government
had no extended views at this period, and, moreover, its attention was
absorbed in the consideration of the one all-engrossing subject--civil
discord.




DEBATE ON WILKES.

Before the session was a week old, Wilkes and the parliament were at
open war. Determined upon keeping up the spirit of animosity among
his admirers, the great agitator presented a petition to the house
of commons, by means of Sir Joseph Mawbey, one of the members for
Southwark, which recited all the proceedings of government against him,
and claimed redress and liberty as a member of that house. A violent
debate took place, and it was agreed that Wilkes should have liberty
to attend the house to support his allegations, and that he should
be allowed the assistance of counsel. He was to appear on the 2nd of
December, but in the meantime a member moved for an Inquiry into the
occurrences in St. George's Fields, and of the conduct of the military
employed on that occasion. This motion was negatived, and when Burke,
who acted as leader of the Rockingham party, renewed it, it shared
the same fate: some observed because many members were afraid of
investigating the subject too closely.

{A.D. 1769}

The house postponed the hearing of Wilkes and his counsel, and this
postponement was several times repeated. They were unheard on the
23rd of January, when Mr. Martin, member for Gatton, moved, "That John
Wilkes, Esq., although he is convicted of publishing a seditious libel,
is entitled to privilege of parliament." An amendment was moved by Lord
North to the effect, "That John Wilkes, Esq., although he is convicted
of printing and publishing a malignant, seditious, and scandalous libel,
and of printing and publishing three obscene and impious libels, and now
stands committed to the king's-bench prison, by virtue of two several
judgments in the court of king's-bench, for the said offences, is
entitled, by privilege of parliament, to be discharged from his
imprisonment for the said offences." After a fiery debate, the amendment
was carried by a large majority; and Mr. Martin, feeling himself
disgraced by its making him the patron of sedition, obscenity, and
impiety, moved, "That, in entering in the votes of this day the
proceedings of the house upon the said question, the original motion
be stated, with the proceedings of the house in making the several
amendments thereto." This was reasonable, but when put to the vote it
was rejected.

By these proceedings the temper of the house towards Wilkes was fully
manifested, and it seemed morally certain that when his petition was
taken into consideration it would prove a failure. It was on the 27th of
January that this debate fairly commenced. On that day Lord North moved
that the petitioner's counsel should be confined to two specified points
only; namely, to prove the allegations in his petition, which asserted
that Lord Mansfield had altered the record of his indictment the day
before his trial in Westminster-hall; and that Mr. Carteret Webb,
solicitor to the treasury, had bribed one Curry, a man in Wilkes's
employment, to purloin the copy of the "Essay on Woman," for which
he was undergoing imprisonment. This motion was agreed to, though not
without fierce opposition, and Wilkes appeared at the bar of the house
on the 31st, to make good these allegations. He objected, that as a
member he could not legally appear there without taking the oaths, but
this was overruled, he then proceeded to support his allegations,
but all he could substantiate was, that Lord Mansfield had made an
alteration on the record, and as this was in accordance with ancient
custom, and had been sanctioned by all the judges, the house agreed,
without a division, that the petitioner had not made good the two
allegations upon which he had been heard, and that his petition was
frivolous.

The tables were now turned. Lord Weymouth made a complaint in the upper
house, regarding a breach of privilege, in publishing his letter sent
to the magistrates of Surrey, with an inflammatory preface. A conference
between the two houses had been held, and Wilkes was charged with this
misdemeanour before the bar of the commons. But at that bar Wilkes
not only avowed himself the author of the publication, but claimed the
thanks of his country for having exposed Weymouth's "bloody scroll."
It was immediately resolved by the commons that he was guilty of a
seditious libel, calculated "to inflame and stir up the minds of his
majesty's subjects to sedition, and to a total subversion of all good
order and legal government." This was on the 2nd of February, and on the
following day Lord Barrington moved, "That John Wilkes, Esq., a member
of this house, who hath at the bar of this house certified himself to
be the author and publisher of what this house has resolved to be an
insolent, scandalous, and seditious libel, and who has been convicted
in the court of king's-bench of having printed and published a seditious
libel, and three obscene and impious libels, and by the judgment of the
said court has been sentenced to undergo twenty-two months imprisonment,
and is now in execution under the said judgment, be expelled this
house." A long and vehement debate followed this motion, Burke,
Grenville, Beckford, and others taking the part of Wilkes, but the
motion was carried by a large majority at midnight, and a new writ was
issued for the election of another member for Middlesex.

Burke denominated the expulsion of Wilkes from the house as the fifth
act of the tragi-comedy acted by his majesty's servants, for the benefit
of the agitator, at the expense of the constitution. As for Wilkes
himself, he was nothing daunted by it, for after indulging in many
witticisms at the expense of his adversaries, he declared that he would
stand again for Middlesex, and expressed his conviction that he should
be returned. And the event answered his expectation. Liberty and Wilkes
were now synonymous terms, and no ministerial candidate had a chance
of obtaining the popular favour in preference to him. He was rechosen
representative for Middlesex free of all expense to himself, but
the house declared him incapable of being elected during the present
parliament. The popularity of Wilkes, however, increased in proportion
as the opposition to him in the house assumed a vindictive character.
The agitator, in fact, only laughed at his adversaries, and said he
would try again. Great efforts were made this time by the ministerial
party to ensure his defeat, but it was to no purpose. Assisted by the
public press, the mob, and many opulent merchants, who deemed him the
champion of liberty, Wilkes was again triumphantly returned member for
Middlesex: his opponent, Mr. Dingley, not being able to get himself
named for fear of the mob's violence. But again the house of commons
declared Wilkes's return null and void, and ordered a new writ.

The popular feeling was displayed on the occasion of this second
election in a very unequivocal manner. The partisans of Dingley met
at the King's-arms tavern, in Cornhill, for the purpose of proposing a
loyal address to his majesty, in contradiction of certain instructions
which had been prepared by the city. This was prevented by the Wilkites,
who mingled among them, and who created such an uproar, that nothing
could be agreed upon. At a second meeting, however, in another place,
the Dingleyans were more successful; but on the 22nd of March, when
they went to present the address, they were beset by a countless mob,
shouting, "Wilkes and liberty--liberty and Wilkes for ever!" They were
even pelted with dirt from the kennels, and assailed with every species
of violence and insult. A hearse was dragged before them, covered with
paintings, representing the death of Allen, in St. George's-fields, and
the murder at Brentford by Sir William Proctor's chairmen. So violent
was the conduct of the mob, that many of those who were going with the
address made off through by-streets, or ran into houses for protection.
Few remained when they arrived at the court of St. James's, and the mob
attempted to pass through the gates with their ominous vehicle. This was
resisted by the guard, and when the mob persevered, Lord Talbot rushed
out and seized two of them, while the soldiers on duty captured fifteen
more, and they were carried to prison.

In opposing the election of Wilkes, therefore, there was considerable
danger. Hence, when the third writ was issued, Colonel Henry Lawes
Luttrell, who was then sitting in the house as member for Bossiney,
conceived that he, as a military man, might assist ministers in their
dilemma by offering himself as a member for Middlesex. To this end he
vacated his seat for Bossiney, and the house ordered the sheriffs to be
in attendance with a large number of extra constables round the hustings
at Brentford, for the preservation of peace. Encouraged by this care,
and by the colonel's boldness, two other candidates appeared at the
hustings, to solicit the suffrages of the people. But all the care
of the government, and all the exertions of the candidates were vain.
Wilkes was a third time re-elected, and illuminations throughout the
whole city of London testified the triumph of the people. The house of
commons, however, was firm in its opposition to the popular idol and the
popular feeling. A motion was made, and carried by a large majority,
to alter this return, and to insert the name of Luttrell in place of
Wilkes. The freeholders of Middlesex, looking only at the poll-book,
exclaimed against the iniquity of this measure, as Luttrell had not
above a fourth part of the votes which were entered on behalf of Wilkes;
and they presented a petition to the commons, begging them to rescind
their motion. An animated discussion followed this petition, but
Luttrell was confirmed in his seat by a still greater majority. The
exertions of the people were, therefore, rendered null and void, but
Wilkes was as great a favourite with them as ever. Ten days after,
he was chosen alderman of the city of London; and he was represented
everywhere as a meritorious patriot, who was suffering for the cause
of the people. And it cannot be denied that the conduct of ministers
towards Wilkes assumed rather the aspect of vindictive persecution than
that of strict justice. It was this that gave to Wilkes the importance
he had obtained in the sight of the populace--an importance which his
merits and his talents could never have given him.




DEBATES ON AMERICA.

During this session, committees had been appointed by both houses to
examine and report upon papers relative to American affairs, which
were submitted to them by the crown. Measures of rigour were urged by
majorities in both houses. The lords voted strong-resolutions relative
to the unwarrantable and rebellious conduct of the legislature and
people of Massachusets-bay, and recommended, in an address to the king,
that the criminals should be brought over to England and tried by a
special commission, according to a statute of the thirty-fifth of Henry
the Eighth. It was moved in the commons that they should concur in this
measure; and, after a long and spirited debate, in which many warning
voices were lifted up against it, the motion was carried. This was on
the 26th of January, and a few days after the subject was again brought
before the house of commons, and the ministers were again warned of the
danger of driving matters to extremities. Mr. Rose Fuller moved that the
address should be recommitted, but no arguments which he, or any speaker
that took part with him adduced, could alter the disposition of
the house upon the subject, and his motion was negatived by a large
majority. On the 14th of March, the subject of American affairs was
resumed. This was occasioned by a petition, or remonstrance, from New
York, which denied the right of parliament to tax the Americans in any
way. Lord North proposed that such a paper should not be received. He
was opposed by Mr. Grenville, Mr. Burke, and Colonel Barre; but the
house had made up its mind to show no favour to the Americans, and Lord
North's motion was carried. Colonel Barre reminded the house that he
had predicted all that would happen on passing the Stamp Act, and he now
boldly asserted, that if ministers persisted in their present course,
the whole continent of North America would rise in arms, and these
colonies perhaps be lost to England for ever. But the ministers were
deaf to argument, remonstrance, and warning, and they still determined
upon rigorous measures. Later in the season, Governor Pownall moved,
in a long speech, that the revenue acts affecting America should be
forthwith repealed. This was the only mode of preserving the allegiance
of that country; but it was pleaded that the session was too far
advanced to enter upon the subject--all important as it was--and its
discussion was therefore deferred till the next meeting of parliament,
and then it was too late.




EAST INDIA AFFAIRS.

During this session the charter of the East India Company was prolonged
for the further term of five years, on conditions similar to those in
the last agreement. The company was to continue to pay £400,000 per
annum, and to continue to export British goods, at an average of equal
value with those sent to India during the last five years. The company,
however, was now allowed to increase its dividend to twelve and a half
per cent., provided it did not in any one year put on more than one per
cent. If any decrease of dividend was found to be necessary, then the
sum payable to government was to be reduced proportionately, and if the
dividend fell to six per cent., it was to cease altogether. This bargain
had scarcely been renewed when intelligence arrived from Hindostan, that
Hyder Ally had reduced the company, after an expensive war, to sue for a
dishonourable peace, and India stock fell rapidly.




PROROGATION OF PARLIAMENT.

Early in this session it was announced in a message from the king,
that, in consequence of a deficiency in some branches of the revenue
appropriated to the civil list, debts had been contracted to the amount
of £513,511, which his majesty trusted that house would enable him to
discharge. The opposition demanded the production of papers to account
for these arrears, which were promised by Lord North, if they would vote
the money first. This proposition was warmly opposed, but, in the end,
the house showed its loyalty by voting the money. On the 9th of May, the
king went down to prorogue parliament. This was the day after the last
vehement debate and division on the election of Wilkes; and as he was
passing from the palace to the house of lords, he was grossly insulted
by the populace. In his speech, his majesty exhorted the members, with
more than ordinary earnestness, to exert themselves in their several
counties to repress the efforts of the disaffected, and in maintaining
public peace and good order.




DISCONTENTS IN ENGLAND AND IRELAND.

There was great occasion for his majesty's advice to the members of
parliament, but they were powerless to effect that which he desired, and
which was a "consummation devoutly to be wished" by every lover of good
order. During this summer, discontent was more prevalent than at any
preceding period of this reign. The disputes with the Americans, and
the expulsion of Wilkes from his seat in parliament, had the effect of
keeping the public mind in a state of constant excitement. This latter
cause gave the greater umbrage to the people, because a man was sitting
in his place who was supported only by a minority. This involved a
constitutional right of great importance, and a question was mooted,
whether expulsion constituted disqualification during the current
parliament. The pen of Dr. Johnson was employed in proving
the affirmative; his chief argument being, that the power of
disqualification was necessary to the house of commons, for otherwise
expulsion would not be a real, but a nominal punishment. Other pens were
employed in proving the contrary; and among them was that of Junius,
whose argument rested on the axiom that political expediency does not
prove existing law, and who defied his opponents to produce any statute
applicable to the subject. Junius also argued that, although the
house of commons could expel, the concurrence of every branch of the
legislature was necessary to incapacitate. Junius, whose extraordinary
powers as a writer on politics have rarely, if ever, been surpassed,
was the most bitter antagonist of the present government. The Middlesex
election was eagerly embraced by him as an opportunity of advancing the
great object he had in view--namely, that of the restoration of the
Whig aristocracy to power. He dipped his pen in gall for this purpose,
attacking the Duke of Grafton's administration with virulent invective
and energetic eloquence, if haply he might effect its overthrow. He
marred his fame, however, by an exhibition of personal resentment
against individual members of the cabinet, and by putting forth foul
calumnies from his secret hiding-place against the highest characters
in the realm. Political writers may be bold in uttering truth, but when
they use slander as one of their most powerful weapons, then they sink
their characters as men, and forfeit their claim to be heard by society.
But this was not the opinion in those days of turbulent excitement.
Junius was heard and heeded by the mass, and though he did not break
up the administration, which was the main object he had in view, his
writings had the effect of confirming the people in their opposition to
government. Faction was so prevalent that ministers sought to counteract
it by procuring loyal addresses from various parts of the country. Only
four counties, a few corporations, and the two universities responded to
their call; while, on the other hand, numerous petitions of a contrary
tendency, were got up without any difficulty. Discontent ruled dominant
before the legislature reassembled, both in the city of London, and
throughout the whole country. With a view of embarrassing government,
Alderman Beckford was again elected to the mayoralty, although some
ancient by-laws forbade the same person to be chosen twice within
the space of seven years. This objection was urged, but overruled by
precedents. Ministerial troubles grew on every side. Ireland, as well
as England and America, was in a state of trouble and commotion. At
this time it was overrun by Levellers, White-boys, Oak-boys, and
Hearts-of-Steel--factions which were bound together by secret oaths
and a mutual detestation of tithes. Nor was the Irish parliament less
disorderly. In the month of October a bill was brought into the Irish
house of commons for increasing the military establishment in that
country, which was recommended by the lord-lieutenant, and although
it was carried, it was not till after it had encountered a violent
opposition. In the month of November, also, the Irish commons claimed
the right of framing all money-bills, which hitherto had been sent over
to them by the English cabinet. They rejected the one sent over this
year, and although they voted a more liberal supply of their own
freewill, the lord-lieutenant would not recognise the newly-claimed
right. He called it a violation of the law, and an encroachment upon
the king's prerogative. He entered his protest against it, and he then
suddenly prorogued parliament before it had done any business. Thus
his majesty was surrounded by troubles in almost every part of his
dominions. England, Ireland, and America were all arrayed against him,
and insubordination was the order of the day. What made his situation
more critical was, that he had not a minister of sufficient ability to
guide the helm of the state, so as to keep it clear from the rocks and
the shoals by which it was surrounded.




CHAPTER III.

{GEORGE III. 1769--1771}

     The Affairs of  America..... Meeting of  Parliament.....
     Dissolution of the Grafton Cabinet..... Debates on   the
     Middlesex   Election,  &c...... The Question of Controverted
     Elections..... Debates on America..... Release of
     Wilkes..... American Affairs..... Riots at Boston..... The
     Prorogation of Parliament..... Remonstrance of Beckford to
     the King..... Prosecution of Woodfall and Almon.....
     Disputes respecting  Falkland  Islands..... Affairs of
     America..... Meeting of Parliament..... Debate concerning
     the Falkland Islands..... Parliamentary Proceedings on the
     Law of Libel..... Quarrels between the Lords and
     Commons..... Convention with Spain...... Changes in the
     Ministry.




THE AFFAIRS OF AMERICA.

It has been seen how the Americans were affected by the Declaratory
Bill, which accompanied the repeal of the Stamp Act. Had government been
wise, their disaffection would have taught its members to have devised
some conciliatory measures in order to prevent the threatened outbreak.
The conduct of the government, however, was the very reverse from
this. Instead of allaying the discontents of our colonists, ministers
increased them by resolving to enforce what they called the Mutiny
Act. This was carried hurriedly through the house at the close of the
session; and though the consequences of such a course must have been as
clear as daylight, yet ministers resolved to put it into execution. For
the Mutiny Act was, more properly speaking, an act for quartering and
better providing for the troops at the expense of the colonies. It gave
power to the military to billet themselves on private houses, as was
done in the war, and therefore was naturally offensive to the whole
of the American population, whether friendly or adverse to the English
government. It was calculated to make foes of friends, and to confirm
those who were already foes, in their opposition to the mother country.
The design of this measure, doubtless, was to overawe the colonists;
but the spirit of freedom had taken too deep root in America thus to be
overawed. Matters, in truth, grew worse and worse daily in that country.
The minds of the Americans had been chafed to such a degree by their
original grievances, and the measures which had been adopted to enforce
their quiescence, that they became every day more and more disaffected
toward the English government. How full fraught the country was with
rebellion became manifest on the arrival of the newly-formed American
board of commissioners, at Boston, to enforce the payment of the duties
recently imposed upon them, and to put an end to smuggling. In the
preamble to Charles Townshend's Act, the colonists read, that these
duties were laid "for the better support of the government, and the
administration of the colonies;" and in the bill itself they found a
clause which seemed to empower the king, by sign manual, to establish
a general civil list in every province in North America, with salaries,
pensions, and everything that could be obnoxious to a free-thinking
people. This was instantly declared to be unnecessary, unjust, and
dangerous to the rights of Americans; while the establishment of a civil
list in America, independent of the assemblies, was pronounced illegal.
Measures were taken by the people of Boston for putting into effect the
non-importation agreements, which had been before suggested; the press
was employed to demonstrate the iniquity of the taxing acts; and the
assembly of Massachusets addressed a circular letter to all the other
colonies to invite them to combine in taking measures to defeat the
obnoxious act. Every assembly, except that of New Hampshire, adopted
the sentiments and the plan contained in the circular of the assembly
of Massachusets, and passed votes of thanks to the authors of it. How
effective it was in exciting opposition is manifest from the following
circumstance. Bernard, the governor of Massachusets, was instructed to
require the house of representatives to rescind the resolution which
gave birth to the letter, and to declare the king's disapprobation of
it. But instead of rescinding the resolution, it received the emphatic
confirmation of the assembly. This reply was sent to the governor:--"If
the votes of this house are to be controlled by the direction of a
minister, we have left us but a vain semblance of liberty. We have now
only to inform you that this house have voted not to rescind, and that,
on a division on the question, there were ninety-two nays, and seventeen
yeas."

The next day, Governor Bernard received positive instructions to
dissolve the assembly of Massachusets. But it was in vain that the arm
of power sought to quell the general disaffection: when employed it
had only the effect of making the colonists more resolute in their
opposition. Associations and committees were formed in most of the
provinces, and smuggling was carried on in the broad face of day. Some
months before, one Malcolm had fought with the custom-house officers,
and had landed sixty pipes of Madeira at Boston without paying duty.
In the month of June another cargo arrived at Boston, and when the
excise-officer stepped on board he was seized and confined below, while
the wine was sent on shore. The officer was afterwards liberated, and
on the following morning the skipper of the sloop entered four or five
pipes at the custom-house, declaring that this was the whole of his
cargo. Aware of the falsehood of this statement, the commissioners
ordered a comptroller to seize the sloop, and to fix the king's broad
arrow upon her. This was the signal for a riot. A mob, headed by
Malcolm, beat and nearly killed several of the revenue officers, and the
commissioners themselves were compelled to seek safety in flight. The
sloop was, however, seized; the excise being assisted by the captain of
the Romney man-of-war, then lying at anchor off Boston. This was on
a Friday, and the two following days were comparatively quiet, but on
Monday an immense mob gathered in the streets at Boston, and placards
were stuck up, calling upon the "sons of liberty" to meet on the
following morning. At this meeting a committee was appointed to wait
upon the governor, to inquire why the sloop had been seized? This
committee pretended that it was an affront offered to the town of Boston
to act thus arbitrarily, since the sloop might have been left in safety
at the wharf. The committee affected likewise to disapprove of the riot,
and some few of the ringleaders were sought for and found, under the
pretence of bringing them to condign punishment. But the whole was a
farce. Malcolm, the smuggler, and others of a similar stamp, sate upon
the grand jury, and quashed all prosecution.

It was these proceedings which seem to have persuaded the ministers at
home to revive the obsolete statute of Henry VIII. Before the news
of these Boston riots, however, had arrived in England, ministers had
resolved to employ force. In a secret and confidential letter, Lord
Hillsborough had told General Gage that it was his majesty's pleasure he
should send one regiment or more from Halifax to Boston, to be quartered
in that town, in order to assist the civil magistrates and the revenue
officers. This was on the 8th of June, and three days later Governor
Bernard was informed by his lordship that his majesty had directed
one regiment to be stationed at Boston, and had ordered a frigate, two
sloops, and two armed cutters to repair to and remain in the harbour of
that town for the above-mentioned purpose. It was not, however, till the
month of September that the people of Boston became fully aware of the
intention of government to send troops thither, and in the meantime they
had been busy in organizing resistance to the Mutiny Act. In the
month of August, the merchants and traders of Boston agreed upon a new
subscription paper, to this effect:--"We will not send for or import
from Great Britain, either upon our own account, or upon commission,
this fall, any other goods than what are already ordered for the fall
supply. We will not send for or import any kind of goods or merchandise
from Great Britain, &c, from the lat of January, 1769, to the 1st of
January, 1770; except salt, coals, fish-hooks and lines, hemp and duck,
bar-lead and shot, wool-cards and card wire. We will not purchase of
any factor or others any kind of goods imported from Great Britain, from
January, 1769, to January, 1770. We will not import on our own account,
or on commission, or purchase of any who shall import from any other
colony in America, from January, 1769, to January, 1770, any tea, paper,
glass, or any other goods commonly imported from Great Britain. We will
not, from and after the 1st of January, 1769, import into this province
any tea, paper, glass, or painters' colours, until the act imposing
duties on those articles shall be absolutely repealed." This paper was
generally subscribed by the merchants of Boston, and, soon after, the
merchants of Connecticut, New York, and Salem entered into similar
agreements.

In the month of September a committee waited upon Governor Bernard,
praying him to convene a general assembly. Then it was that they were
informed that a military force was coming; and that, consequently,
another assembly could not be convened till the governor had received
the commands of his majesty. The inhabitants of Boston now resolved,
at the peril of their lives and fortunes, to take all legal and
constitutional measures to defend the rights, liberties, privileges,
and immunities granted in their royal charter. They also agreed, that
a certain number of persons should be chosen to act for them as a
committee in convention, and to consult and advise with such as might be
sent from other towns in the province. Finally, they fixed a convention,
to be held in Faneuil-hall, on the 22nd of September, and voted that
all the inhabitants not provided with arms should be requested to obtain
some forthwith, as there was an apprehension in the minds of many of an
approaching war with France.

The convention met on the day appointed. It consisted of deputies from
eight districts and ninety-six towns, and its chief business was to
petition the governor, make sundry loyal professions, and express an
aversion to tumults and standing armies. Its deliberations were cut
short by the arrival of the troops, under Colonel Dalrymple, who
anchored in Nantasket Roads, near Boston. The governor requested the
town-council to provide quarters for these troops in Boston, but they
refused; stating, that by act of parliament all troops were to be
quartered in the barracks, and that it was illegal to bring them into
the town. Colonel Dalrymple led his soldiers to the common on the
outside of Boston, and the town-council was again requested to quarter
them in the town, which they again refused. He had two regiments under
his command, and one of these took possession of Faneuil-hall--the other
lay out on the cold common all night. On the evening of the next day,
however, the governor ordered the town or state-house to be opened to
the other regiment; and the soldiers took possession of every part of
it, except the great council-chamber. These proceedings excited deep
resentment, and when the governor and Colonel Dalrymple required the
council to provide barrack provisions, as regulated by the Mutiny
Act, the request was flatly refused. Still the inhabitants of Boston
repressed their vindictive feelings. Care was taken by them, however, to
make known their injuries, and the insults to which they were subjected
in every part of British America. The picture they drew was, doubtless,
exaggerated; but that they had grievances there can be no question. At
all events they found the sympathy they desired in the various states of
America. The Philadelphians, the Georgians, the Rhode-Islanders, and,
in short, all the other colonies and towns, with the single exception
of Portsmouth, the sole sea-port of New Hampshire, now followed their
example, as regards the non-importation of goods from Great Britain. The
very females of America partook of the general spirit of resistance; for
they entered into associations among themselves, proscribing the use
of tea. Some there were among the merchants who showed a reluctance to
comply with the terms of the agreement; but their houses were surrounded
by organised mobs, and they were compelled to give up trade rather
than risk the forfeiture of their property and lives by selling British
goods.

Thus encouraged, the Bostonians became more bold in their opposition to
government. The assembly being called together in May, 1769, a committee
from the house of representatives remonstrated with the governor,
complaining of an armament investing their city--of the military
guard--of cannon pointed at the door of their state-house--and
requesting him, as his majesty's representative, to order the removal of
the ships and the troops. The answer they received was, that he had no
authority over his majesty's ships, or over his troops, within the
town of Boston. A few days after the house declared that the use of a
military force in the execution of the laws was inconsistent with
the spirit of the constitution, and that they would not transact any
business while thus menaced by soldiers. In order to obviate this
objection to business, the governor adjourned the assembly to Cambridge,
a town separated from Boston by a narrow arm of the sea, but they were
not more disposed for business at Cambridge than at Boston. The only
vote passed by them was to this effect:--"That the establishment of a
standing army in this colony in time of peace is an invasion of natural
rights; that a standing army is not known as a part of the British
constitution; that sending an armed force into the colony, under a
pretence of assisting the civil authority, is highly dangerous to the
people, unprecedented, and unconstitutional." When requested by
the governor to make provision for the troops, after an indignant
denunciation of the Mutiny Act, and observing, that of all the
new regulations, not excepting the Stamp Act, this was the most
unreasonable, they thus declared their resolution:--"Your excellency
must excuse us in this express declaration--that as we cannot
consistently with our honour and our interest, and much less with the
duty we owe to our constituents, so we never will make provision for the
purposes in your several messages mentioned." Finding the assembly
thus refractory, the governor prorogued them, taking his leave in the
following terms:--"To his majesty, therefore, and if he pleases, to his
parliament, must be referred your invasion of the rights of the imperial
sovereignty: you need not be apprehensive of any misrepresentations, as
it is not in the power of your enemies, if you have any, to add to your
publications--they are plain and explicit and need no comment. It is my
duty, and I shall do it with regret, to transmit to the king true copies
of your proceedings: and that his majesty may have an opportunity to
signify his pleasure thereon before you meet again, I think it necessary
to prorogue this general court immediately, to the usual time of the
winter session."

Before governor Bernard prorogued the assembly, his majesty had
requested his presence in England for the purpose of ascertaining the
real state of the province; at the same time testifying his approbation
of his conduct, and as a mark of his favour, creating him baronet. Sir
Francis left the colony on the 1st of August, and at his departure,
the powers of government devolved on lieutenant-governor Hutchinson, a
native of the province; a man of great abilities, but influenced in his
conduct by a grasping ambition, and an inordinate love of office and
aggrandisement. On his return, Sir Francis had no very favourable report
to make of his province. Notwithstanding every precaution had been
adopted, smuggling was still carried on to a very great extent. The
Bostonians had even adopted the practice of tarring and feathering
all informers, or all who attempted to assist the government: a brutal
operation, which was often attended with a violence that destroyed
life. Nor was smuggling carried on in the province of Boston alone.
Associations against British commerce were organized to such an extent,
that the exports to America were found to fall short of those in the
preceding year by £740,000, and the revenue derived from that country
was reduced from £701,000 to £30,000. In this the Americans were aided
by other countries, who sent them their manufactures in great abundance,
so that the narrow views of ministers not only destroyed the resources
of Great Britain, but tended to enrich its commercial and political
rivals. This greatly alarmed the English merchants, and Lord
Hillsborough thought proper to issue a circular letter to the colonies,
stating that his majesty's ministers intended, during the next session,
to take off the duties upon glass, paper, and painters' colours, they
having been enacted contrary to the true principles of commerce. No
mention, however, was made of the duty upon tea, and the Americans
looked upon this omission as having been purposely and invidiously
made, as a mark of the legislative supremacy of Great Britain. Nothing,
moreover, was said about repealing the odious clauses in the Mutiny
Act, and the colonists likewise complained that the circular spoke
of commercial expediency, and not of the right which they claimed of
imposing taxes upon the colonies by their own act alone In truth, if
this circular was intended to conciliate the inhabitants of British
America, it was a total failure. The universal mind was too much
irritated to be soothed by such an impotent palliative.




MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

{A.D. 1770}

Although America was almost in a state of open rebellion, and England
itself, with Ireland, were rent with faction, yet the parliament did not
assemble till the 9th of January. This delay naturally excited surprise,
and this was still further heightened by the tenor of the king's speech.
Taking no notice of the public discontents, though it feelingly lamented
the general distress, it chiefly adverted to a general distemper which
had broken out among the horned cattle, which the king gravely assured
the lords and commons, he had, by the advice of his privy-council,
endeavoured to check. And this was solemnly uttered when wits and
scoffers abounded on every hand--when Junius had his pen in his hand
full fraught with gall, and Wilkes was bandying about his bon-mots and
sarcasms. "While the whole kingdom," says Junius, in a letter to the
Duke of Grafton, "was agitated with anxious expectation upon one great
point, you meanly evaded the question, and instead of the explicit
firmness of a king, gave us nothing but the misery of a ruined grazier."
Never was a speech from the throne more unfortunate, indeed, than this,
for though it slightly adverted to the disturbances in America, yet the
subject of the disease existing among horned cattle was its prominent
feature. It was no wonder, therefore, that it became the jest of the
whole nation. Newspapers, pamphlets, and periodicals teemed with biting
sarcasm on this most extraordinary circumstance. The king's love of
farming was bitterly descanted upon, and he was represented as attending
to cows, stalls, dairies, and farms, while his people were misgoverned
and discontented, and his empire, like a ship in a furious storm, in
danger every minute of being dashed to pieces. In fine, to show the most
profound contempt of such a speech from the mouth of the monarch, at
such a season, the session was nicknamed "the horned cattle session."

Before the opening of parliament, one day the Earl of Chatham stalked
into the drawing-room of St. James's, and after the levee had some
private conversation with the king. What passed between them is unknown,
but Horace Walpole says, that his reception was most flattering, and the
king all condescension and goodness. It does not appear, however, that
the interview satisfied Chatham, for it by no means tended to soften his
opposition. When parliament met, indeed, he took his place in the house
of lords, vigorous and more eloquent than ever, and the administration
was doomed to feel his power, like that of a giant refreshed with wine.

The address, which was moved in the upper house by the Duke of Ancaster,
and seconded by Lord Dun-more, was as general and unmeaning as the
king's speech. Chatham rose to reply, and after glancing at his age and
infirmities, he took a general review of measures since the year 1763.
There never was a period, he asserted, when the serious attention of the
house to public affairs was more imperatively demanded, and he boldly
maintained that it was the duty of their lordships to lay the true state
and condition of the country before his majesty. After indulging in a
quiet sneer at the care the council had bestowed upon horned cattle, he
remarked, that he was glad to hear that the king had reason to believe
the peace of the country would be preserved, since peace could never
be more desirable to a kingdom, than when it was torn to pieces by
divisions and distractions, as England was at the passing hour. He then
criticised the last treaty with France and Spain, asserting that England
had not obtained what she had a right to expect from the success of our
arms, and the feeble condition of our enemies. He also maintained, that
having deserted our ally the King of Prussia, we had left ourselves
without alliances on the continent, and, consequently, had been every
moment on the verge of a new war, during a seven years' peace. This war,
he said, might be unavoidable, and must be unfavourable to England,
as the princes of the house of Bourbon, while we stood in an isolated
position, had become closely united among themselves, and had formed the
closest connexion with the powers of Europe. He, however, lamented still
more the unhappy acts which had severed the affections of the American
colonists from Great Britain; and the internal discontents of the
country. To these he earnestly called the attention of their lordships,
since their privileges, however transcendent and appropriate in
themselves, stood in fact on the people as a basis. The rights of the
highest and the meanest subject, he said, had the same foundation, the
security of the law, which was common to all. He maintained that the
liberty of the subject was invaded both at home and in the colonies, and
that the people who were loud in their complaints, would not be pacified
without a redress of their grievances. Liberty, he observed, was a
plant that deserved to be cherished; that he loved the tree himself, and
wished well to all its branches; that, like the vine in scripture,
it had spread from east to west, had embraced whole nations with
its branches, and sheltered them under its leaves. Concerning the
discontents of the colonists, he conceived that they arose from the
measures of government. These had driven them into excesses which could
not be justified, but for which, he, for one, was inclined to make some
allowance. As to their combinations, and their success in supplying
themselves with goods, this, he said, had alarmed him for the commercial
interests of the mother country, but he could not conceive in what sense
they could be deemed illegal, or how the house by any declaration could
remove the evil. Other remedies must be looked for, as the discontents
of two millions of people could only be removed by a removal of their
causes. Finally, on the subject of discontent in England, he attributed
it to the proceedings of the house of commons in the matter of Mr.
Wilkes, and he concluded by submitting the following amendment:--"That
after the words, 'and which alone can render our deliberations
respectable and effectual,' be inserted these words, 'and for these
great and essential purposes, we will, with all convenient speed, take
into our most serious consideration the causes of the discontents which
prevail in so many parts of your majesty's dominions, and particularly
the late proceedings of the house of commons, touching the incapacity
of John Wilkes, Esq., expelled by that house, to be elected a member to
serve in this present parliament, thereby refusing, by a resolution of
one branch of the legislature only, to the subject his common right,
and depriving the electors of Middlesex of their free choice of a
representative."

This amendment was opposed by Lord Mansfield, he considering that it
was a gross attack on the privileges of the commons, and calculated to
create a quarrel between the two houses, or between the king and the
commons. A question, he said, relating to the seat of a member, could
only be determined by the house itself, whose judgment was final, and
must be received as the law of the land. The arguments which he used in
his speech to support his opinions were ably answered by Chatham. The
noble lord began his reply by extolling common sense above subtilty and
ingenious refinement. The constitution had been invaded, and he heard
with astonishment that invasion defended on principle. He denied that
the commons had a supreme jurisdiction, or that its decision must be
received as the law of the land; for why, he pertinently asked, were the
generous exertions of our ancestors made to secure and transmit to their
posterity a known law and a certain rule of living, if, instead of the
arbitrary power of a king, we must submit to that of a house of commons?
Tyranny was detestable in any shape, but especially when exercised by a
number of tyrants. But that, he triumphantly asserted, was not the fact
or the constitution of England, and he pointed out where the law of
parliament might be found by every honest man; namely, in Magna Charta,
in the statute-book, and in the Bill of Rights. The first principle of
the constitution is, he observed, that the subject shall not be governed
by the will of any man or body of men, but by the whole legislature, and
by certain laws to which he has given his assent: laws which were open
to him to examine, and not beyond his ability to understand. He then
denounced the late decision as destitute of every condition essential
to its legality, and as being unsupported by reason, precedent,
Magna Charta, or the Bill of Rights. Whether it be questioned by the
legislature, he continued, will depend on the resolution of the house;
but that it violates the constitution, no man who had listened to the
debate could deny. He then expressed his confidence in the wisdom and
constitutional authority of the house, and after praising the ancient
nobility as founders of the constitution, and invoking the house
to follow their brilliant example, he thus concluded:--"Those iron
barons--for so I may call them when compared with the silken barons of
modern days--were the guardians of the people; yet their virtues were
never engaged in a question of such importance as the present. A breach
has been made in the constitution--the battlements are dismantled--the
citadel is open to the first invader--the walls totter--the constitution
is not tenable. What remains, then, but for us to stand foremost in the
breach, to repair, or to perish in it?"

The lord chancellor Camden had declared, upon his patron's resignation
of the privy-seal, that Chatham should still be his polar star, and that
he reluctantly consented "to hold on a little while longer with this
crippled administration." The part which he took in this debate proved
him to be sincere in his declarations. The house was astonished to
hear, indeed, sentiments from his lips as strong as those delivered by
Chatham. "I accepted," said he, "the great seal without conditions: I
meant not therefore to be trammelled by his majesty--I beg pardon--by
his ministers. But I have suffered myself to be so too long. For some
time I have beheld with silent indignation the arbitrary measures of
the minister. I have often drooped and hung down my head in council, and
disapproved by my looks those steps which I knew my avowed opposition
could not prevent. I will do so no longer, but will openly and boldly
speak my sentiments." Lord Camden then agreed with his friend respecting
the incapacitating vote of the commons, and accused the ministry, by
implication, of having formed a conspiracy against the liberties of
the country. By their violent and tyrannical conduct, he said, they had
alienated the minds of the people from his majesty's government--he had
almost said from his majesty's person--and that in consequence a spirit
of discontent had spread itself into every nook of the kingdom, and was
daily increasing, so that it was to be feared, that, if some methods
were not devised to appease the clamours heard on every hand, the people
might in despair become their own avengers, and take the redress of
their grievances into their own hands. The address was negatived, and
Lord Pomfret then moved an adjournment for some days; chiefly, as
Lords Temple and Shelburne told the house in reply, for the purpose
of removing the untractable chancellor, Camden, from his seat in the
ministry. Lord Shelburne, however, expressed a conviction "that after
the dismissal of the present worthy chancellor the seals would go a
begging," and that "there would not be found in the kingdom a wretch so
base and mean-spirited as to accept of them on the conditions on which
they must be offered."

The address in the house of commons was moved by Sir George Osborne In
opposition, Mr. Dowdeswell moved for the insertion into the address
of words, intimating the necessity of inquiring into the causes of the
prevailing discontents in every part of his majesty's dominions. The
debate on this motion was most violent, and lasted many hours. Colonel
Barré observed, "that a great part of the king's subjects were alienated
from him; England was in opposition to its own representatives; in
Ireland the parliament was prorogued because it had supported the true
constitutional right of taxation; the colonies were in actual rebellion
on account of taxes confessedly imposed, not for gain, but as a mere
test of obedience; and, perhaps to crown the whole, France was on the
eve of a war with us." The Marquis of Granby expressed his regret for
having, in the preceding session, voted with ministers on the question
of the disqualification of Mr. Wilkes, and wished the house would
re-examine their resolution. General Conway opposed the amendment; and
Lord North, Sir Fletcher Norton, and Charles James Fox took the same
side of the question, and the amendment was rejected by a majority of
254 to 138. Another warm debate arose on the morrow, on the question
of receiving the report of the address. Sir William Meredith said, that
thanking the king for his approbation of their conduct would imply
an approval of the vote respecting the Middlesex election. Sir George
Sackville accused the house of betraying the rights of the people; and
being threatened with the tower by General Conway, he was defended by
Sergeant Glynn and Mr. Burke, the latter of whom dared ministers to
punish Sir George, and told them that they were abhorred by the people.
Thus supported, Sackville repeated the charge, and he was followed by
Fox, who deprecated the licentious language introduced in the house.
Burke replied, but there was no division.

{GEORGE III. 1769--1771}




DISSOLUTION OF THE GRAFTON CABINET.

Before the declarations made by Lord-chancellor Camden in the house of
lords, his conduct had been so displeasing to his colleagues that he was
not consulted in any of their measures, and he had not even a voice in
the preparation of the king's speech. When, therefore, he stood openly
forward as an opponent of the cabinet, it was not to be expected that
the seals would be long left in his possession. The opposition knew
this, and their only fear was that he would anticipate ministers by a
spontaneous resignation, and thereby free the ministers from the odium
which they would obtain from the public by his dismissal. Camden,
however, seems to have had no thoughts of taking such a step, and
the ministers had no alternative left but to remove him from office.
Accordingly he was dismissed, and Lord Shelburne's prediction was
literally verified--the great seals went a begging. The Honourable
Charles Yorke, indeed, reluctantly accepted them, but before his patent
of peerage could be completed, he committed suicide, and the government
had to seek another chancellor. The seals were successively offered to
Sir Eardley Wilmot and Lord Mansfield, who would not accept them, and
nothing remained but to put them in commission, and to appoint a speaker
in the house of lords in the interim. This latter office was accepted by
Lord Mansfield, and some time after, Sir Sidney Stafford Smythe, one of
the barons of the exchequer; the Honourable Henry Bathurst, one of the
justices of the common pleas; and Sir Richard Aston, one of the justices
of the king's bench, were appointed commissioners. But the embarrassment
of government did not end here. While business was suspended in the
house of lords by the want of a chancellor, it was also suspended in
the commons by the illness of the speaker, Sir John Cust. Moreover, the
removal of Lord Camden was followed by the resignation of his friend
Mr. Dunning, the solicitor-general; of the Marquess of Granby, as
master-general of the ordnance, and commander-in-chief of the forces; of
Mr. James Grenville, who held the office of one of the vice-treasurers
for Ireland; and of several noblemen who held offices in the household.
The greatest blow to the existence of the ministry seems to have been
the resignation of Granby--a blow which the king and the ministers
in vain sought to avert. Urged by some of the leading members of the
opposition, who as earnestly desired him to adopt this line of conduct,
as the king and his ministers entreated him not to resign, he gave up
everything except his regiment--the Blues. The ordnance was then offered
to General Conway, who refused to accept any of "Lord Granby's spoils,"
and the fragment of the ministry still left in office had to brave the
storm of opposition as they best could.

After the adjournment which had taken place during these changes, on the
22nd of January, the Marquess of Rockingham moved in the house of
lords, that the house should, on the 24th, take into consideration the
lamentable state of the nation. In reply, the Duke of Grafton remarked,
that he did not intend to oppose this inquiry, and that he was ready at
any time to enter into the question. The Earl of Chatham then rose,
and in a long and eloquent speech, complained of a breach made in
the constitution. There was a capital mischief fixed at home, which
corrupted the very foundation of our political existence, and preyed
upon the very vitals of the state. "The constitution," he exclaimed
vehemently, "has been grossly violated--the constitution at this moment
stands violated! Until that wound be healed, until the grievances be
redressed, it is in vain to recommend union to parliament--in vain to
promote concord among the people. If we mean seriously to unite the
nation within itself, we must convince them that their complaints are
regarded, that their injuries shall be redressed. On that foundation I
would take the lead in recommending peace and harmony to the people. On
any other I would never wish to see them united again. If the breach in
the constitution be effectually repaired, the people will of themselves
return to a state of tranquillity; if not, may discord prevail for
ever! I know to what point this doctrine and this language will appear
directed; but I feel the principles of an Englishman, and I utter them
without apprehension or reserve. The crisis is indeed alarming--so much
the more does it require a prudent relaxation on the part of government.
If the king's servants will not permit a constitutional question to
be decided on according to the forms, and on the principles of the
constitution, it must then be decided in some other manner; and rather
than it should be given up--rather than the nation should surrender
their birthright to a despotic minister, I hope, my lords, old as I am,
I shall see the question brought to issue, and fairly tried between the
people and the government." The Earl of Chatham next offered some severe
remarks on the surrender of Corsica, the augmentation of troops
in Ireland, the arrears of the civil list, the waste of the public
revenues, and the evils arising from the riches of Asia. "The importers
of foreign gold," said he, "have forced their way into parliament by
such a torrent of private corruption, as no private hereditary fortune
could resist." He then offered several suggestions on the propriety of
a reform in parliament--suggestions, he observed, not crude and
undigested, but ripe and well-considered, as the subject had long
occupied his attention. His scheme was, not that the rotten boroughs
should be disfranchised, though he considered them as the rotten part
of the constitution; nor that the unrepresented towns should be allowed
members, though he admitted that in them great part of the strength and
vigour of the constitution resided--but that each county should elect
three members instead of two, he considering that the knights of the
shires approached the nearest to the constitutional representation
of the country, because they represent the soil. At the same time, he
recommended that the city representatives should be augmented, and that
in increasing the number of representatives for the English counties,
the shires of Scotland should be allowed an equal privilege, in order to
prevent any jealousy which might arise from an apparent violation of the
union. In concluding his speech, he proclaimed his coalition with the
Marquess of Rockingham, whom, on a previous occasion he had overthrown
as an incapable statesman; justifying the union formed between them, on
the grounds that it was formed for the good of the country; or, in his
own words, "to save the state."

It must be admitted that the scheme of parliamentary reform divulged by
the Earl of Chatham was by no means enlightened or impartial. In it no
allowance was to be made for the growing importance of the commercial
and manufacturing interests, the landed interests alone were consulted,
and the country gentlemen, who had never been celebrated for liberal
measures in their legislation, were to crowd the house of commons, and
to decide upon the affairs of the nation. The Earl of Chatham himself,
at a later period, seems to have doubted the efficacy of his plan of
reform, for he admitted that the knights of the shires or the country
members of the house of commons, "were not the most enlightened or
spirited part of the house." All history, indeed, tends to prove that
such a plan of reform would have proved abortive, so far as regards
the liberty and well-being of the great body of the people, and the
perfecting of the theory of the English constitution, so far as to
make its political practice agree with its principles. There can be no
question, indeed, but that all other interests would have been secondary
to that of the agricultural in the consideration of a parliament thus
constituted; whereas the aim of an enlightened legislature should be
to secure the interests of every section of the community, whether
agricultural, commercial, or manufacturing.

The Earl of Chatham signified his intention of supporting the Marquess
of Rockingham on the 24th, when the great question mooted by him was to
be discussed. On that day, however, it was announced that he was too ill
to attend, and Rockingham also was distressed in mind by the melancholy
suicide of the Honourable Charles Yorke. Under these circumstances, he
moved the adjournment of the question to the 2nd of February, which was
granted by the house; but before that time the Duke of Grafton, harassed
by these commotions and scourged by the press, especially by the
writings of Junius, had resigned his office, and the king had committed
the charge of government to Lord North. At the same time, the state of
the health of Sir John Cust, having induced him to resign the speaker's
chair, Sir Fletcher Norton was elected his successor. The Earl of
Halifax, moreover, was appointed privy seal in the room of Lord Bristol;
Mr. Wellbore Ellis was selected to be a vice-treasurer in Ireland;
Charles Fox was made a lord of the admiralty; and Mr. Thurlow was
created solicitor-general instead of Mr. Dunning. There were a few minor
substitutions and interchanges of offices, but these were the
principal; and Lord North's ministry was, therefore, for the most part
a continuation of that of the Duke of Grafton. The Marquess of Gran by's
places of the ordnance and commander-in-chief were left vacant for
the present, and the great seal was left in commission, with the
commissioners already named.




DEBATES ON THE MIDDLESEX ELECTION, ETC.

Lord North, with whose administration commences a momentous era in the
annals of Great Britain, was eldest son to the Earl of Guildford. In
private life he was one of the most amiable and worthy of men, and he
was a man of elegant acquirements. In public life, also, he was scarcely
less honoured. Brought up amidst official duties, and aiming constantly
at legislatorial distinction, he had acquired eminent skill in managing
a debate, while his good humour and equanimity of temper secured to him
a greater share of esteem and affection than was perhaps ever possessed
by any other minister. Yet his estimable qualities and his political
skill had not sufficient potency to disarm opposition. In the very
outset of his administration, indeed, the opposition made him feel
that he had not taken possession of a bed of roses; or, at least, roses
without thorns. The principal object of the late debates in the house
of lords was to procure a vote in favour of the Middlesex electors: with
the same end in view, Mr. Dowdeswell now moved another resolution in the
commons; namely, "That by the law of the land, and the law and usage of
parliament, no person eligible of common right can be incapacitated by a
resolution of the house, but by an express act of parliament only." This
undeniable proposition placed ministers in a dilemma, for it was only
a prelude to others, and if they agreed to it and rejected those that
followed, they would seem to resist conclusions from premises they had
themselves conceded; while if they rejected it, it would appear as if
the house of commons was a capricious court; a court neither bound by
law nor by the usages of parliament. The debate on the question was one
of great violence; and in the course of it, Colonel Barre compared
the state to a vessel in a storm which had parted with her mainmast
(Grafton,) and was trying to sail under a jury-mast (North). The new
premier acknowledged that the storm was great, but asserted that the
ship was not compelled to hang out lights for pilots, as her own crew
were capable of conducting her safely into port. And so it proved. North
avoided the snare laid for him by moving as an amendment, "That the
judgment of the house on the Middlesex election is conformable to law
and the usage of parliament," which was eventually carried by a large
majority.

On the 2nd of February, pursuant to notice, the Marquess of Rockingham
made a similar motion to that of Mr. Dowdeswell in the house of lords.
He moved, "That the house of commons, in the exercise of its judicature
in matters of elections, is bound to judge according to the law of the
land, and the known and established law and custom of parliament, which
is part thereof" This was opposed by Lord Sandwich on the ground of
improper interference with the lower house, which, if aggrieved, had the
means of redress in its own power. Lord Sandwich was answered by Lord
Chatham. In the course of his speech, Sandwich had alluded to the
expulsion of Lionel, Earl of Middlesex, and the great Lord Bacon, "for
certain crimes and misdemeanours," from which he argued that the peers
now ought to take no more notice of the expulsion of Wilkes, than the
commons then had taken notice of the expulsion pronounced by their
lordships on the above-named noble offenders. To this point Chatham
replied: "Neither of these cases bear any analogy to the present case.
They affected only themselves: the rights of no constituent body were
affected by them. It is not the person of Mr. Wilkes we complain of;
as an individual he is personally out of the dispute. The cause of
complaint, the great cause is, that the inherent rights and franchises
of the people are in this case invaded, trampled upon, annihilated. Lord
Bacon and Lord Middlesex represented no county or city: the rights of
no freeholder, the franchises of no elector, were destroyed by their
expulsion!" In his speech, Chatham declaimed with great severity against
the gross dereliction of principle shown by the commons. They were,
indeed, he said, the proper protectors of their own rights and
privileges; but he lamented that they had, by their recent conduct,
forgotten those privileges, and had added to the long list of venality
from Esau to the present day. The vote of the commons which made Colonel
Luttrell representative for Middlesex, he maintained, was a gross
invasion of law and of the rights of election; a dangerous violation of
the constitution; a treacherous surrender of privileges; and a corrupt
sacrifice of honour. He added, that to gratify the resentment of certain
individuals, the laws had been despised and destroyed, and that
since the commons had slavishly obeyed the commands of his majesty's
ministers, and proved themselves corrupt, it was necessary for their
lordships to step forward and oppose themselves, on the one hand, to the
justly incensed and intemperate rage of the people, and, on the other
to the criminal and malignant conduct of his majesty's ministers:
their lordships were the constitutional barrier between the extremes
of liberty and prerogative. The house was excited, but the motion was
negatived by a large majority. On the ministerial side, the Earl of
March-mont then moved, "That any resolution of the lords directly or
indirectly impeaching a judgment of the house of commons, in a matter
where their jurisdiction is competent final, and conclusive, would be a
violation of the constitutional right of the commons, tend-, ing to make
a breach between the two houses of parliament, and leading to general
confusion." In his speech, the Earl lost his temper and his discretion,
imprudently hinting that if the opposition went one step further it
would be necessary to call in the aid of Foreign assistance. He was
called to order by the Duke of Richmond, and when he attempted to
explain, he found himself unable, and Lord Mansfield was compelled
to relieve him, by declaring as a lawyer and a statesman, that their
lordships had no right to interfere in any determination of the commons.
The Earl of Egmont pursued the same course, and declared that the people
were guilty of treason in offering such petitions as they had recently
offered to his majesty. The Earl of Chatham again rose, and after
thanking Lord Egmont in an ironical strain for his lenity in allowing
the petitioners to wear their heads, he defended the petitions as
praiseworthy and constitutional, and re-asserted that the house of
lords had a right to interfere, when either an invasion of the people's
liberty was attempted, or an unconstitutional determination made. This
was in reply to the statement of Lord Mansfield, and he then praised the
abilities of that nobleman at the expense of his honour, honesty, and
patriotism. Chatham next complained of the ministerial motion, and
of the late hour--for it was midnight--at which it had been made.
He proposed an adjournment for two days. "If," he exclaimed, "the
constitution must be wounded, let it not receive its mortal stab at
this dark hour, when honest men are asleep in their beds, and when only
felons and assassins are seeking for prey." Ministers, however, seem to
have acted upon the well-known adage, that "delays are dangerous." The
adjournment was rejected, and at two o'clock in the morning Marchmont's
motion was carried. Protests were entered against both decisions, the
former being signed by forty-two, and the latter by forty peers.

Similar discussions led to similar results in the house of commons.
On the 5th of February a debate was there entered upon, in which the
opposition urged that the expulsion of Wilkes had been determined by
ministers in council, and a motion was also made to bring in a bill to
regulate and define the consequences of expulsion from the house; but
the ministers in each instance were victorious. The exertions of the
opposition, however, were warmly supported by a large majority of the
liverymen of London, who busied themselves in getting up memorials and
remonstrances, and hence they were nothing daunted by their repeated
defeats. Ministers were, indeed, attacked upon other points of their
policy besides the matter of Wilkes Thus, on the 2nd of March, Lord
Craven, acting with the opposition, moved an address to the throne,
beseeching his majesty forthwith to take proper steps for such an
increase of seamen in the royal navy as should effectually preserve the
honour and security of his; majesty's kingdom and colonies. This was
made the medium of severe censures on the dismissal of able officers
for their votes in parliament, and also on the entire management of the
navy. Earl Chatham supported the motion, and condemned the conduct of
ministers in this particular branch of the national service, as base and
unworthy. In his speech he again adverted to his favourite topic;
that of the secret influence which was at work near the throne. This
influence he denounced as dangerous, base, unconstitutional, and wicked;
and maintained that it had occasioned all the unhappiness of the
nation, and created confusion in the government of the colonies. He then
asserted that this invisible influence was still working for evil, for
although the favourite (Bute) was gone to Turin, Mazarine absent was
Mazarine still; and his influence by means of agents was potent as ever.
Then, raising his voice, he exclaimed, "This country was sold at the
late peace! We were sold by the court of Turin to the court of France!"
Chatham then indirectly accused the king of insincerity and treachery
to himself, personally, during the time that he was minister; asserting
that after he had given his approbation to plans and measures one week,
he would let them vanish into air the next, and that all his promises
and assurances were broken through an in-invisible influence. The king
was defended by the Duke of Grafton, who hinted that the intellect
of Chatham was affected; but this only drew forth a repetition of the
accusation in stronger language. "I rise," said he, "neither to deny
nor retract, nor to explain away the words I have spoken. As for his
majesty, I have always found him everything gracious and amiable in
the closet; so amiably condescending as to promise, in every repeated
audience, not only to forgive, but to supply the defects of health by
his cheerful support, and by the ready assistance of all his immediate
dependents. Instead of this, all the obstacles and difficulties which
attended every great and public measure did not arise from those out of
government: they were suggested, nourished, and supported by that
secret influence I have mentioned, and by the industry of those very
dependents; first by secret treachery, then by official influence, and
afterwards in public councils. A long train of these practices has
at length unwillingly convinced me that there is something behind the
throne greater than the king himself."

It seems clear that when the Earl of Chatham made these assertions, the
councils of the king were no longer biassed by the influence of the Earl
of Bute; but, notwithstanding, the charges made all the impressions on
the public mind which he could have desired. Some even declared that
they knew the secret agents that went between the absent lord, the
princess dowager and the king, and Mr. Dyson, Mr. Bradshaw, both
placemen and members of parliament, and subsequently, Mr. Jenkinson
(afterwards Baron Hawkesbury and Earl of Liverpool,) were expressly
named as the principal of the parasites. The popular credulity on this
subject appeared to receive confirmation from the conduct of the king
towards the "good citizens" of London. Four days after this debate in
the house of lords the common hall of the city took into consideration
a memorial complaining that a petition which had been presented to his
majesty by the citizens remained unanswered. This memorial, after the
lord mayor Beckford had delivered an exciting harangue, was adopted
by acclamation, and with three rounds of applause. At first the king
refused to hear this memorial; but he at length consented, and it was
carried up to St. James's on the 14th of March by the lord mayor, and
more than two hundred common-councilmen, liverymen, and city officers.
It was read to the king as he sat upon his throne, and perhaps the ears
of royalty were never destined to hear stronger remonstrances than
this memorial contained. It told him that secret and evil counsellors,
combined with a corrupt parliament, robbed the people of their dearest
rights, and that they had done a deed more ruinous in its consequences
than the levying of ship-money by Charles I., or the dispensing power
assumed by James IL, and which deed must vitiate all the further
proceedings of the present parliament; it called God and man to witness
that the citizens would not be thus cheated of their liberties; and that
as they were gained by the stern virtues of their ancestors, so they
should be preserved by themselves; and it concluded by praying that the
king would dissolve the present parliament, and remove from him all
evil counsellors. With a clouded brow the king in reply pronounced the
contents of this memorial to be disrespectful to himself, injurious
to his parliament, and irreconcilable to the principles of the
constitution; and he asserted that he had ever made the law of the land
the rule of his conduct, that he esteemed it his chief glory to rule
over a free people, and that he had a right to expect from them a steady
and affectionate support. The city deputation withdrew, amidst the
manifest resentment of the courtiers, and the court instantly resolved
to bring the memorial before the notice of parliament. This was done on
the 19th of March, when it was moved by Sir Thomas Clavering, "That
to deny the legality of the present parliament, and to assert that the
proceedings thereof are not valid, is highly unwarrantable, and has a
manifest tendency to disturb the peace of the kingdom, by withdrawing
his majesty's subjects from then-obedience to the laws of the realm."
This motion was warmly opposed, but it was carried by a large majority,
and an address to the king was also agreed to in condemnation of the
city memorial, both by the lords and the commons. It is said that the
king graciously received this address, but that he thought the city
magistrates ought to have been proceeded against by parliament for their
conduct. On the other hand, the city and the people of Middlesex were
offended by the conduct of the opposition, and the smallness of
the minority that voted against the address, and they passed strong
resolutions, expressing their discontent. The blame was chiefly imputed
to the Rockingham party; and the Rev. Mr. Home--better known at a later
date by the name of Home Tooke--who had begun to rule the democracy at
the Mile-end and Brentford meetings, announced his intention of exposing
that party; but this was prevented chiefly through the influence of the
Earl of Chatham. Instead of this, indeed, the reverend orator employed
his talents in getting up a strong petition and remonstrance to the king
from the freeholders of Middlesex, and which was presented on the 31st
of March; the Earl of Chatham having previously thanked him for his able
exertions in the cause of freedom, and for abstaining from his proposed
attack on the Rockingham party.




THE QUESTION OF CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS, ETC.

Ever since the famous Aylesbury case, in 1704, the house of commons
had been sole judge of the qualification of electors, and of all other
matters regarding the election of their own members. All controverted
elections were tried before a committee of the whole house, the members
not being bound to impartiality, either by oath, promise, or pledge. On
the 2nd of April, Mr. George Grenville brought in a bill for regulating
the trial of controverted elections, which provided that, in every case,
the judicature should be transferred from the house to a sworn committee
of fifteen members, whereof thirteen were to be chosen by the contesting
claimants for the seat, out of a list of forty-five chosen by ballot
by the whole house, and the other two named by the contesting parties
themselves; one for each. The committee were to have full power to
examine witnesses, papers, and records, and their oath bound them to
a strict impartiality. This bill met with stern opposition from the
ministers, and at one stage it was moved by Mr. Welbore Ellis, that it
should be rejected, which was seconded by Mr. Charles Fox; but the
bill was eloquently defended by Burke, and it passed into a law. It was
carried up to the lords by Mr. Grenville on the 5th of April, where,
as Lord Mansfield had expressed his approbation of it, and promised its
support, no opposition was feared. It passed unanimously, and it seems
to have had a very beneficial effect on the legislature.

Previously to the passing of this act, a bill was proposed by Mr.
Dowdeswell to disqualify officers of the excise and customs from
voting at elections The mover stated, that both classes were under the
influence of the crown, and that the departments of the revenue were
becoming so numerous as to render that influence incompatible with a
free constitution. There was no attempt, however, to prove corruption,
and the motion was rejected, as unfair in its attempt to deprive
individuals of the rights of British subjects, on the mere presumption
of venality. An act at the same time was passed for altering the law
of privilege, so far as it extended to the effects and domestics of
the members of either house. In the house of lords this bill was warmly
supported by Lord Mansfield, and as warmly opposed by Lord Sandwich, who
argued, that it was an encroachment upon the privileges of the peers. An
inquiry into the accounts of the civil list, during the year 1769, was a
popular subject in both houses about the same time. The expenses having
greatly increased, it was inferred that the money was employed in the
corruption of electors. Ministers opposed this inquiry, arguing, that
as the civil list was solely the revenue of the crown, the crown had a
right to expend it as it pleased; and that if an additional grant had
been asked, then, and not till then, the expenditure might have been
investigated, for the purpose of ascertaining the necessity of the
grant, and how the money was spent. The motion was negatived, and other
attempts to interfere with the management of the king's revenue met with
a similar fate.

The debate in the house of lords on this question is rendered remarkable
by the eloquent speech uttered by the Earl of Chatham. In the course of
this speech he asserted that the minister who was bold enough to spend
the money of the people before it was granted, though it might not
be used for the purpose of corrupting their representatives, deserved
death. Fie was reminded that he, too, when in office, had granted
pensions, to which he replied, "It is true, and here is a list of them:
you will find there the names of General Amherst, Sir Edward Hawke, and
several others of the same nature--they were given as rewards for real
services, and as encouragements to other gallant heroes. They were
honourably earned in a different sort of campaign than those at
Westminster; they were gained by actions full of danger to themselves,
of glory and of benefit to this nation--not by corrupt votes of baseness
and of destruction to their country. You will find no secret service
there; and you will find that, when the warrior was recompensed, the
member of parliament was left free. You will likewise find a pension
of £1,500 a year to Lord Camden. I recommended his lordship to be
chancellor; his public and private virtues were acknowledged by all;
they made his station more precarious. I could not reasonably expect
from him that he would quit the chief-justiceship of the common pleas,
which he held for life, and put himself in the power of those who were
not to be trusted, to be dismissed from the chancery perhaps the day
after his appointment. The public has not been deceived by his conduct.
My suspicions have been justified. His integrity has made him once more
a poor and private man; he was dismissed for the opinion he gave in
favour of the right of election in the people." Here the noble orator
was interrupted by loud cries of "To the bar, to the bar," and Lord
Marchmont moved that his words should be taken down. Chatham himself
seconded this motion: "My words," he thundered forth in an indignant
tone, "My words remain unretracted, unexplained, and reaffirmed. I
desire to know whether I am condemned or acquitted, and whether I may
still presume to hold up my head as high as the noble lord who moved to
have my words taken down." Chatham paused for a reply, and none being
given, he continued, "I will trust no sovereign in the world with the
means of purchasing the liberties of the people. When I had the honour
of being the confidential keeper of the king's intention, he assured
me that he never intended to exceed the allowance which was made by
parliament, and therefore, my lords, at a time when there are no marks
of personal dissipation in the king--at a time when there are no marks
of any considerable sums having been expended to procure the secrets of
our enemies--that a request of an inquiry into the expenditure of the
civil list should be refused, is to me most extraordinary. Does the King
of England want to build a palace equal to his rank and dignity? Does he
want to encourage the polite and useful arts? Does he mean to reward
the hardy veteran who has defended his quarrel in many a rough campaign,
whose salary does not equal that of some of your servants? Or does he
mean, by drawing the purse-strings of his subjects, to spread corruption
through the people, to procure a parliament, like a packed jury, ready
to acquit his ministers at all adventures? I do not say, my lords,
that corruption lies here, or that corruption lies there; but if any
gentleman in England were to ask me whether I thought both houses of
parliament were bribed, I should laugh in his face and say, 'Sir it is
not so.'" Chatham concluded by saying that an inquiry into the state and
expenditure of the civil list was proper, just, and expedient; and that
a refusal of it would elicit ridicule and exhibit folly. Nevertheless
the motion was negatived.




DEBATES ON AMERICA.

A petition was presented to parliament by the English merchants trading
with America, representing that, in consequence of the duties and taxes,
the discontents of the Americans, and their combinations to prevent the
importation of goods from England, their trade had gone to ruin; and
praying for the intervention of the legislature. In consequence of this,
a bill was proposed by Lord North, to repeal all the American taxes and
duties except tea. In proposing this repeal he censured the Revenue Act
only as an inexpedient or unproductive impost, and not as an illegal or
impolitic claim. The duty on tea, he said, was continued to maintain
the right of taxing the Americans, and it could not be supposed that an
impost of three pence per pound on an article from which one shilling
was deducted when exported to America, would offend the colonists,
unless they were determined upon a rebellion. Mr. Grenville, the parent
of the Stamp Act, argued that he had at least acted systematically, and
that in imposing the stamp duties he had reason to think that they would
be paid. The succeeding ministry, he said, had repealed that act, but
had re-affirmed the right of parliament to tax the colonies, by laying
duties upon unwise and anti-commercial principles: duties which were
far more odious to the colonies than his Stamp Act. His opinion was,
therefore, that the ministers must now give up, or stand by the whole.
A partial repeal, he added, will not do: the Americans would not rest
satisfied with any thing short of the renunciation by parliament of the
right to tax them in any way, either externally or internally. In this
General Pownall coincided, and he proposed as an amendment, that the
repeal should be extended to all articles, as the only way of quieting
the colonies. This amendment was supported by General Conway, Colonel
Barre, and Sir William Meredith, but it was rejected, and leave was
given to bring in North's bill. A subsequent motion to repeal the duty
on tea was also lost, and the act passed according to North's first
proposal.




RELEASE OF WILKES.

On the 12th of April, the term of Wilkes's imprisonment having expired,
he was set at liberty. He was no sooner freed from confinement than
he recommenced his system of agitation. Everywhere he harangued on
his sufferings, and declared that he was ready to die in the cause of
liberty. He was considered a martyr by the populace, and in both houses
he had his friends. On the 1st of May, the Earl of Chatham, after
arranging his plan of attack with Temple, Rockingham, Shelburn,
and others, stood up in the house of lords and presented a bill for
reversing the adjudications of the house of commons, whereby John
Wilkes, Esq. had been adjudged incapable of being elected a member to
serve in this present parliament, and the freeholders of the county of
Middlesex, had been deprived of one of their legal representatives. In
descanting on this, Chatham declared that a violent outrage had been
committed against everything dear and sacred to Englishmen. He then made
some observations on the new state arithmetic by which Colonel Luttrel's
296 votes had been held to be a greater number than Wilkes's 1143! This,
he said, was flying in the face of all law and freedom: a robbery of the
liberty of freeholders; and making the birthrights of Englishmen a mere
farce. He then represented Colonel Luttrell as sitting in the lap of
John Wilkes, and the majority of the house as being turned into a state
engine. He added, in conclusion, "I am afraid this measure originated
too near the throne. I am sorry for it; but I hope his majesty will soon
open his eyes, and see it in all its deformity." Lord Mansfield opposed
the Earl of Chatham. He contended that the house had no right to
interfere with the decisions of the commons; that those decisions were
legal; that in consequence of previous votes and sentences, Wilkes was
nobody in the eye of the law; and that, though the freeholders gave
their votes, it was for the house of commons to judge as to the point of
qualification. Lord Camden replied, that Lord Mansfield was delivering
unconstitutional doctrines, and that Wilkes had been expelled in
consequence of a secret influence which had said, "Mr. Wilkes shall not
sit." He also asserted that the judgment of the commons on the Middlesex
election was a worse wound in the constitution than any of those
inflicted in the reign of Charles I., when the nation had no parliament;
and he expressed a hope that if this bill should be rejected, the good
sense and spirit of the people would persevere session after session,
till the judgment of parliament should be revoked. The bill was
rejected, and thirty-eight peers signed a protest.

When this bill was lost, the Earl of Chatham demanded that the house
should be summoned on the 4th, as he had a motion to make of great
importance relative to the king. On the day appointed, his lordship
moved, "That the advice inducing his majesty to give the answer to the
late address, remonstrance, and petition of the lord mayor, aldermen,
and livery of London, was of a most dangerous tendency, inasmuch as
thereby the exercise of the rights of the subject to petition the king
for redress of grievances, to complain of violations of the freedom
of election, to pray dissolution of parliament, and to point out
malpractices in administration, to urge the removal of evil ministers,
etc., had been indiscriminately checked with reprimand; and the
afflicted citizens of London had heard from the throne itself, that the
contents of their humble addresses could not but be considered by his
majesty as disrespectful, injurious, etc." The noble lord said that an
answer so harsh as this exceeded all precedent in the history of this
country; that the very essence of the constitution not only permitted,
but required petitioning; and that the Stuarts themselves never dared to
prevent the practice. He then eulogized the lord mayor and the liverymen
of London, and in conclusion, pronounced Colonel Luttrell as a mere
nominee thrust in by the enemies of the law and constitution. The motion
was negatived by a large majority.

{GEORGE II. 1769-1771}




AMERICAN AFFAIRS.

On the 1st of May, the opposition in the house of commons called for
the correspondence of the American colonies, and subsequently Mr. Burke
moved eight resolutions relating to the troubles in those colonies, and
censuring the plan ministers were pursuing. The previous question was
carried against the first of these resolutions, the second, third, and
fourth were negatived, and the previous question was carried against the
remainder. Similar resolutions were moved in the house of lords by the
Duke of Richmond; but they were all negatived by a large majority. On
the 14th, however, nothing daunted, the Earl of Chatham coupled the
discontents of America with those in England and Ireland, and founded
a motion on them for an address to dissolve the parliament. He moved,
"That an humble address be presented to his majesty, most dutifully
and earnestly beseeching him, that in the dangerous state wherein
his kingdoms are involved, from the high dissatisfactions generally
prevailing at home, and from the most alarming disorders which have
unhappily manifested themselves in his American dominions, his majesty
will, in his great wisdom and necessary care, to prevent more fatal
mischiefs, be graciously pleased to take the recent and genuine sense of
his people, by dissolving this present parliament, and calling, with all
convenient dispatch, a new parliament." In his speech he declared
that the house of commons had not the confidence of the people; and in
speaking of the mode of reforming that assembly, he said, "Instead of
depriving a county of its representatives, one or more members ought to
be added to its representation, in order to counter-balance the weight
of corrupt and venal boroughs." The house, however, would not listen to
his arguments: a loud cry of "Question, question," was raised, and
the motion was rudely negatived. But if Chatham was not listened to in
parliament, he was venerated for his recent opposition to the measures
of government by the people. On the same day, the common council of
London carried a vote of thanks to him, for the zeal he had exhibited in
support of their sacred privileges and the right of election; and also
for his declaration that he would use his best endeavours to restore the
house of commons to its purity, by shortening the duration of its term,
and introducing a more equal representation.




RIOTS AT BOSTON.

While both houses of parliament were carrying on a wordy war, matters
had assumed a more serious aspect in America. Committees had been
appointed in nearly all the principal sea-ports of the colonies, to
examine cargoes arriving from Great Britain, and to report to their
constituents how far the act of association was carried into effect,
or how far infringed Meetings of the association were regularly held
at Faneuil Hall, Boston, and votes of censure were passed upon all
who introduced or sold any of the prohibited goods. The names of such
offenders were, indeed, regularly published in the newspapers, with
comments appended to them, holding them up to the public as selfish
slaves and traitors. A few, however, it would appear, were permitted to
make a market, by selling the prohibited articles, which could only be
purchased from their shops; and this becoming notorious, one Theophius
Lillie, a tradesman at Boston, resolved to sell what was thus sold by
others. In order to point him out as one whose shop was to be shunned,
the mob placed a rude figure at his door, and a person named Richardson,
either a friend or a servant of Lillies, attempted to remove the
nuisance, and being defeated in his design by the mob, who pelted him
with stones, he took up a loaded gun and fired upon his assailants from
within doors. The shot killed a boy, who was forthwith recorded in
the newspapers as the first martyr in the cause of liberty. He was, in
truth, the first that was sacrificed, but the blow proceeded from the
hand of a persecuted American, and not from the hand of an Englishman.
It was not long, however, before the English were involved in quarrels
with the Americans, which resulted in the loss of life. The boldness of
the Bostonians seems daily to have increased after the above-mentioned
incident. It was in vain that merchants implored even to keep the goods
they had imported in store, as if bonded, until the duties in England
should be repealed: they were compelled to send them back to those
who had shipped them. At the same time, it was shrewdly suspected that
several of the Bostonian leaders still imported and sold goods largely;
or, at least, permitted goods to be imported in their vessels. The
people of New York, indeed, taxed the Bostonians with unfair and selfish
dealings, and renounced the non-importation agreement. This gave rise
to mutual recrimination between these two states: the New Yorkers called
the Bostonians pedlars, and the Bostonians said that the New Yorkers
were no patriots. At the same time, the Bostonians were fierce in their
hatred of the English government and its measures. If they acted with
duplicity in the matter of trade, they were at least consistent in
their denunciations against all connection with England. The soldiers
quartered in Boston were subject to constant insults from them, and were
continually interrupted in their duty. All classes conceived that as
they had not been called in by the civil magistrates of the place, that
their presence was illegal, and that every means employed to hasten
their departure, or make their stay uncomfortable was laudable. Hence,
no sentinel could stand in his place without being insulted; and it was
too much to expect from human nature, that the soldiers should suffer
continual insult without retorting upon theis adversaries. Some alleged
that Colonel Dalrymple and his officers should have kept their men
separate from the inhabitants; but this could not have been done, except
by keeping them prisoners in their quarters, and by discontinuing the
practice of mounting guard at the government offices. It was easy to
foresee, therefore, that sooner or later disastrous consequences would
ensue. And this was rendered more certain, because government had not
sent a sufficient number of troops to keep the populace of Boston in
awe. As soon as the arrival of troops at Boston was known at home,
General Pownal had pointed out the error, stating that if they intended
to govern the country by military force, they had not sent sufficient
troops; and that if they did not intend this, they had sent too many.
The people of Boston, he said, were set in array against the military;
that though the sword was not drawn, it was ready to leap from the
scabbard; and that though the word for action was not yet given,
mischief was on tip-toe, and the slightest circumstance would set it on
foot. These remarks were founded in truth. The Boston newspapers gave
insertion to a fictitious narrative of a defeat of a body of soldiers
by the people of New York, and to a series of fictions which represented
the English troops as a set of poltroons who would quail before the
sons of liberty. While these reflections were fresh in the minds of
the soldiers, one of them was involved in a quarrel, and was beaten by
several Bostonians, who were rope-makers belonging to the establishment
of Mr. John Gray. Incensed at the ill-treatment he had received,
twelve of his comrades returned with him to the spot and fell upon the
rope-makers, and compelled them to take refuge in flight. This served as
a prelude to a more serious conflict. Meetings were held by the mob, who
decided upon attacking the soldiers, and driving them out of Boston. The
day appointed for this was the 5th of March, and on the evening of that
day parties from all quarters assembled, armed with sticks and clubs,
and made an attack upon some of the troops in Dock-square. An officer
appeared, who ordered the men to their bai--racks, and they with
difficulty escaped thither. They were followed by the mob, who dared
them to come out; and their rage increasing, the mob began to tear up
the stalls of the market-place in Dock-square, and swore that they would
attack the main-guard. Some peaceable citizens exerted themselves to
allay their fury, and they had well nigh succeeded in persuading many
of them to retire, when a tall man in a red cloak and white wig appeared
among them, and incited them by a brief harangue to carry out their
design. His discourse was followed by shouts of "To the main guard! To
the main guard! We will destroy the soldiers!" The mob then separated
into three divisions, each of which took separate roads. One of these
divisions in their route passed by the Custom-house, and a boy pointing
to the sentinel on duty there, asserted that he was the man who had
knocked him down. A loud cry was instantly raised to kill him, and the
sentinel loaded his gun by way of intimidating them. Nothing daunted,
however, they first pelted him with every thing that came to hand, and
then, seeing his reluctance to fire, closed upon him, and compelled him
to retreat to the door of the Custom-house. He sought admittance, but
those within were afraid of opening the door, and the sentinel then
shouted for assistance to the main guard which was within hearing. A
corporal and six privates were sent by Captain Preston to his rescue,
while he followed at a short distance. Their guns were unloaded; but
as they advanced, they found the mob increasing, and were pelted so
pitilessly by them on every hand, and so grossly insulted by opprobrious
language, that they loaded them and fixed on their bayonets. Still they
were reluctant to fire; and when the mob pressed in upon them, they
merely used their weapons to keep them off. At length a certain mulatto
named Crispus Attucks, with others dressed like sailors, gave three
cheers, hemmed in the soldiers, and struck at their muskets with clubs,
exclaiming to those behind, "Come forward, they dare not fire; let
us kill them, etc." Attucks aimed a blow at Captain Preston, who was
begging the rioters to desist, and keeping his men quiet, and in doing
so he not only hit the Captain on his arm, but struck down one of the
men's muskets, and then seized his bayonet. Some persons behind Captain
Preston now urged the soldiers to fire, and the private whose musket had
been knocked out of his hand having recovered it, fired at the mulatto,
who fell mortally wounded. The other soldiers now successively fired off
their pieces, and three persons were killed, while others were wounded
more or less dangerously. The mob retreated, but they re-collected in
an adjoining street, with dreadful yells, and the drums beat to arms. It
seemed as if a combat of the fiercest kind was about to take place; but
certain persons who had been gliding about the mob, urging them on to
acts of violence, now thought proper to persuade them to retire. The
storm was hushed for that night; but early in the morning the mob again
collected in large numbers. At the same time, the lieutenant-governor
held a council, and the magistrates and chief citizens met in full
assembly, and chose a committee. The committee soon waited upon the
governor and council, and declared that nothing could restore peace
to the town but the immediate removal of the troops. Colonel Dalrymple
proposed that the 29th regiment, whose men had been engaged in the
riot, should remove to Castle William, and that the 14th regiment
should remain. This was reported to the assembly; but another deputation
demanded the total and immediate removal of all the troops, as the only
means of tranquillizing the town. The governor was told that he must not
think the demand proceeded from a set of vagabonds, for that people
of the best character were determined, that if the troops were not
voluntarily removed, they should be expelled by force. A force of
ten thousand men, it was stated, were at their beck, and these were
determined to destroy the troops if not removed, albeit it might be
called rebellion. The governor first flatly refused to accede to this
demand; he then wavered in his determination, and finally he agreeded
to divide the responsibility of removing them with Colonel Dalrymple
and the members of the council, and the troops were ordered to march to
Castle William. Thus successful the Bostonians grew more bold in their
opposition to the English government. The newspapers represented the
affair of the 5th of March as a deliberate murder on the part of the
troops, and nothing was neglected to exasperate the public mind and
perpetuate the memory of "the bloody and inhuman massacre." Yet when
Captain Preston and his men were put upon their trials, American judges
and a jury from among the citizens of Boston, were compelled to admit
that they had acted only in self-defence. Their verdict was, that
Captain Preston and six of the solders were not guilty, and that two,
Montgomery, who shot Crispus Attucks, and Killroy, who was proved to
have shot another man, were not guilty of murder but of manslaughter
only. These two prayed the benefit of clergy, which was allowed, and
each being burnt in the hand in open court, they were discharged like
their comrades. In the course of the trial, Judge Lynde declared that
the affair turned out to the disgrace of every person concerned against
Captain Preston, and to the shame of the people of Boston in general.




THE PROROGATION OF PARLIAMENT.

News of the disturbances in Boston arrived before the close of this
session; but hopes being entertained that the late bill would have the
effect of conciliating the Americans, it was deemed proper to abstain
from any investigation, lest it should relight the torch of discord. The
session terminated on the 19th of May.




REMONSTRANCE OF BECKFORD TO THE KING.

The answer which the king had given to the good citizens of London at
the presentation of their recent memorial had given them great umbrage,
and on the 23rd of May, the lord mayor and some aldermen, with a
numerous train, went again to St. James's with another petition,
complaining of this answer. The address stated that it was, as well as
the general acts of government, "against the clearest principles of
the constitution, and the result of insidious attempts made by evil
counsellors, to perplex, confound and shake the rights of the people."
It concluded with a renewed demand for the dissolution of parliament,
and the removal of the present ministers. The king replied that it was
his duty to express dissatisfaction at their last address, and that his
sentiments on the subject were still the same. It was anticipated that
the deputation would not be very graciously received, and that the king
would not retract his former sentiments. Hence a remonstrance had been
prepared in the shape of a reply, and to the astonishment of the court,
Beckford, instead of retiring with the usual etiquette from the royal
presence, approached the throne, and thus addressed the king: "Most
gracious sovereign, will your majesty be pleased so far to condescend,
as to permit the mayor of your loyal city of London to declare in your
royal presence, in behalf of his fellow-citizens, how much the bare
apprehension of your majesty's displeasure would at all times affect
their minds. The declaration of that displeasure has already filled them
with inexpressible anxiety and with the deepest affliction. Permit me to
assure your majesty, that your majesty has not in all your dominions any
subjects more faithful, more dutiful, or more ready to sacrifice their
lives and fortunes in the maintenance of the true honour and dignity of
your crown. We do therefore, with the greatest humility and submission,
most earnestly supplicate your majesty that you will not dismiss us
from your presence, without expressing a more favourable opinion of your
faithful citizens, and without some comfort, or at least some prospect
of redress." Had the remonstrance stopped here, Beckford might have
obtained the smiles of the king; but he continued: "Permit me, sire, to
observe, that whoever has already dared, or shall hereafter endeavour by
false insinuations and suggestions to alienate your majesty's affections
from your loyal subjects in general, and from the city of London in
particular, is an enemy to your majesty's person and family; a violator
of the public peace, and a betrayer of our happy constitution, as it was
established at the glorious Revolution." Beckford prayed for a reply,
but none being given, the deputation withdrew. The king appears, indeed,
to have been too angry to reply with courtesy, for he immediately issued
orders, through the medium of the lord chamberlain, that lord mayors
should in future confine themselves to delivering their papers, and not
presume to make speeches. But if Beckford did not please the king, he
gained great credit with the people for his conduct. The Earl of Chatham
warmly applauded him for asserting the rights of the city with weight
and spirit. On the other hand, the king increased his unpopularity by
his conduct towards the deputation. The common council were so incensed,
that they demurred about voting an address of congratulation on the
birth of the Princess Elizabeth, which happened about this time. Wilkes
in particular, who was made an alderman even while in the King's Bench,
and who now wore the civic gown, opposed such an address, and when the
good feelings of the citizens prevailed over their anger, and they voted
an address, he did what he could to render it unpopular. The address,
however, was presented in the usual form, and his majesty observed in
reply, "that the city of London, entertaining such loyal sentiments,
might always feel assured of his protection." A few days after this
Beckford died, and the city voted that he should be honoured with a
statue in Guildhall, and that the speech he had delivered to the king
should be engraved on the pedestal. His death was considered a serious
blow to the opposition, as no one could be found possessing the weight
which he derived from his wealth and munificence, or who could supply
his ardour and fearlessness.




PROSECUTION OF WOODFALL AND ALMON.

Almost every act which the government now committed tended only to
excite the public clamour and indignation. During this summer it
involved itself in new troubles, and exposed itself to fiercer attacks,
by prosecuting the printers and publishers of Junius's Letters. In the
month of June Woodfall was tried for printing in his newspaper, the
"Public Advertiser," one of these letters, which was addressed to his
majesty, and was considered a scandalous libel; and Almon was tried for
selling a re-publication of it in the "London Museum." Almon was found
guilty of publishing, and was sentenced to pay a fine of ten marks, and
find security for his good behaviour for two years. Wood-fall was found
"guilty of printing and publishing only" and in his case, the defendant
moved to stay the entering of judgment on the verdict, while the
attorney-general moved for a rule on the defendant, to show cause why
the verdict should not be entered according to the legal import of the
words. The attorney-general's motion was attended to first; and when the
matter came to be argued in the court of King's Bench, Lord Mansfield,
before whom both cases had been tried, went regularly through the whole
evidence, as well as his own charge to the jury. After recapitulating
the defence on the trial, his lordship remarked: "I directed the jury,
that if they believed the innuendoes, as to persons and things, to have
been properly filled up in the information, and to be the true meaning
of the paper, and if they gave credit to the witnesses, they must find
the defendant guilty. If the jury were obliged to determine whether the
paper was in law a libel or not, or to judge whether it was criminal,
or to what degree; or if they were to require proofs of a criminal
intention--then this direction was wrong. I told them, as I have always
told them before, that whether a libel or not, was a mere question of
law arising out of the record, and that all the epithets inserted in the
information were formal inferences of law. A general verdict of the
jury finds only what the law implies from the fact, for that is scarcely
possible to be produced: the law implies from the act of publication,
a criminal intent." After some further remarks of minor importance his
lordship continued: "The motion of the attorney-general divides itself
into two parts; first, to fill up the finding of the jury with the usual
words of reference, so as to connect the verdict with the information:
the omission of these words, we are of opinion, is a technical mistake
of the clerk, and may be now supplied. The second head of the argument
is to omit the word 'only' in the entry of the verdict: this we are all
of opinion cannot be done. The word 'only' must stand in the verdict; if
this word was omitted, the verdict would then be, 'guilty of printing
and publishing,' which is a general verdict of guilty; for there is no
other charge in the information but printing and publishing, and that
alone the jury had to inquire. We are all of opinion, that my direction
to the jury is right and according to law; the positions contained in
it never were doubted; it never has been, nor is it now complained of in
this court. There clearly can be no judgment of acquittal, because the
fact found by the jury is the only question they had to try; the single
doubt that remains, is concerning the meaning of the word 'only.'" The
court considering that the word "only" had been used in an ambiguous
sense, ordered Woodfall a new trial on that ground; but when it came on,
the attorney-general remarked that he had not the original newspaper by
which he could prove the publication Thus terminated the second trial:
the want of this was fatal to the cause.




DISPUTES RESPECTING FALKLAND ISLANDS.

During the summer and autumn of the present year the attention of
government was absorbed by a subject, which at one time threatened a new
war with France and Spain--this was the affair of the Falkland Islands.

The Falkland Islands are situate in the Southern Atlantic Ocean, off the
extremity of the South American continent, and the eastern entrance to
the Straits of Magellan. They consist of two larger islands called East
and West Falkland, and a great number of isles and islets. By right,
they certainly belonged to England. The discovery of them was made by
Captain Hawkins in the reign of Elizabeth, who called them "Hawkins'
Maiden Islands," and they were afterwards visited by Strong in 1689,
who gave them their present name. Subsequently they were visited by the
French, who in 1764 formed a settlement at Berkeley Sound, an excellent
harbour on West Falkland. In the next year, Commodore Byron formed a
counter settlement at Port Egmont on East Falkland. The Spaniards, who
had neglected these islands and their resources, now took the alarm, and
demanded their evacuation both from France and England, as territories
belonging to them both by right of papal bulls, and degrees of latitude
and longitude. The French abandoned their settlement, but the English
refused to accede to the demand. Spain, dreading the power of England,
was for the time compelled to give up the claim; but at length, in 1769,
the domestic distractions of Great Britain, her ready acquiescence in
the transfer of Corsica to France, and the encouragement of the
French minister Choiseul, emboldened the Spanish court to revive its
pretensions to these islands. An armament, consisting of several ships
of war, provided with apparatus for a siege, sailed from Buenos Ayres,
and in the month of June suddenly appeared off Port Egmont. The British
commandant, Captain Farmer, knowing that the place could not sustain a
siege, after a few shots, submitted to terms of capitulation. Contrary
to all the rules of war, however, the Spanish commodore, in order to
prevent the intelligence from arriving in England on an early day, or
from being first related by English lips, enjoined Captain Farmer not to
sail without his permission, and to ensure compliance, he even unshipped
the rudder of his vessel, and kept it on shore for three weeks. This
was an insult to the British flag not to be endured. As soon as
the proceedings were known in England, all ranks were inflamed with
resentment, and eagerly desired that the national honour, thus grossly
violated should be avenged. Lord North prepared for the worst, by
putting ships in commission ready for war. It was thought expedient,
however, to avert war, if possible, by negociations, and Spain was
ultimately induced to disavow the enterprise of the governor of Buenos
Ayres, and to restore the island. At the same time it was either
stipulated or understood, that the settlement should at a future period
be abandoned by the English: an arrangement which, as will be seen,
formed a subject of complaint in parliament against the ministry.




AFFAIRS OF AMERICA.

When the news arrived of the repeal of the taxes by the British
parliament, the people of Boston were by no means thankful for that act.
The retention of the duty on tea, it was said, did away with all
its merits, as it proved the unalterable resolution of asserting the
disputed right. As, however, they could not hope to keep up the whole
of the non-importation agreement, it was resolved, in a meeting of
merchants, to import every thing but tea. This resolve was also entered
into by the Philadelphian merchants, and great efforts were made by the
leaders of the movement, to induce the people to adhere strictly to
this agreement, until the tea duty should be repealed. But most of
the provinces were not desirous of persevering in the quarrel, and
consequently renewed their commercial intercourse with the mother
country: orders came over to England, indeed, to such an extent, that
our exports to the colonies in this and the following year exceeded
in amount what they had ever been before. Still the progress of a
revolution was not impeded. There were many zealots in America, who
could not rest satisfied while a connexion subsisted between England
and her colonies, and who were still busied in sowing the seeds of
discontent. Some such zealots existed in every colony, but it was in New
England and in Virginia that that they were chiefly to be found. In the
great southern province they were headed by Patrick Henry and Thomas
Jefferson, and by their means the popular party in Virginia were led to
deplore the massacre at Boston, and to uphold that city as a new Sparta
and the seat of liberty. The assembly of Virginia, in a petition
or remonstrance to his majesty, ventured to express their strong
dissatisfaction at Lord North's imperfect Repeal Act, and their deep
affliction at seeing that the pretension of the mother country to the
right of taxing the colonies was persevered in by the retention of duty
upon tea. They also criticised the conduct of Lord Bottetourt, their
governor, and represented that no alliance was to be placed upon the
good-will or moderation of those who managed the affairs of the mother
country. All the houses of assembly, now re-opened, were, in truth,
scarcely less difficult to manage than they had been the year before,
and in almost every instance they were prorogued by the governors. In
the assembly of Massachusets, especially, there were great commotions,
arising partly from communications received from England, which
represented that the state and conduct of the colony was likely to be
submitted to the consideration of parliament in the present session, and
partly from the dismissal of the provincial forces from Castle William,
and the establishment of the royal troops in that fortress. It was
suspected that measures were in train to reduce the province to a state
of utter dependence on Great Britain, and they proceeded to prepare
instructions for their agent in London, in order to prevent the blow.
But before they proceeded to business the house made another attempt to
obtain a removal of the seat of government to Boston; and having failed
in this, they made a strong protest against their conduct being drawn
into a precedent. Soon after this Mr. Hutchinson was appointed governor
of the province; but the subject of the assembly's removal afforded
matter of dispute in the remonstrances of the house at the opening of
every session.




MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

The king opened parliament on the 13th of November. The prominent part
of his speech related to the Falkland Islands, a question that was still
in abeyance. His majesty informed the lords and commons, that by an act
of the governor of Buenos Ayres, in seizing one of his possessions by
force, the honour of the crown and the rights of the people were deeply
affected; and he called on them for advice and assistance. The addresses
of both houses approved of the steps taken by his majesty, and
assured him of their effectual support: to this end, supplies for the
augmentation of the army and navy were cheerfully voted,--and in order
to defray any extraordinary expenses, the land-tax was increased from
three to four shillings in the pound.




DEBATE CONCERNING THE FALKLAND ISLANDS.

In the debate on the address, Lord North had said, that as the Spanish
ambassador had thrown the responsibility upon the Governor of Buenos
Ayres, it was proper that his Spanish majesty should be allowed time
to disavow these proceedings. He had also endeavoured to show that the
Falkland Islands were of little value to anybody, and not of sufficient
importance to justify a war if it could be avoided. These sentiments ill
accorded with the views of some in the lower house, in which they were
uttered, and several, as Dowdeswell, Barré, Burke, Sir William Meredith,
and Sir Charles Saunders, blamed the minister for putting forward the
Governor of Buenos Ayres, instead of complaining of his master, the
King of Spain; who must, they contended, have previously authorised his
expedition against Port Egmont. Similar opinions appear to have been
entertained in the house of lords, although the address passed there
without any show of dissatisfaction. On the 20th of November, however,
the Duke of Richmond gave notice that he would make a motion on the
22nd, on which day, therefore, the house was summoned. That day arrived,
Richmond moved for an address, praying that the king would order that
all papers received by the ministry between the 12th of September, 1769,
and the 12th of September, 1770, touching hostilities commenced, or
designed to be commenced, by the crown of Spain, or any of his officers,
should be laid before parliament. In urging this demand, the duke said,
that the affairs of the Falkland Islands was only one among many acts of
aggression, and he asserted that while we were in want of seamen, three
thousand, captured in trading ships by the Guarda-Costas, under pretence
of smuggling, were rotting in Spanish prisons, or pining away in
hopeless slavery in South America. The motion was opposed by Lords
Weymouth and Hillsborough, who contended that the production of the
papers called for, would embarrass a negociations now in good train that
the Spanish government was entitled to respect and delicate management;
and that the ministers were not wanting either in vigilance or vigour.
The Duke of Richmond was supported by the Earl of Chatham, who, in a
long and eloquent speech, showed the necessity of firmness on the part
of the British cabinet;--accused the Spaniards of want of faith, and of
being as mean and crafty as they are proud and insolent; and predicted
that if ministers patched up an accommodation for the present, they
would still have a Spanish war in six months. He concluded by charging
the ministers with having destroyed all content and unanimity at home
by a series of oppressive and unconstitutional measures; and with having
delivered up the nation, defenceless, to a foreign enemy. He added this
warning:--"Let me warn them of their danger. If they are forced into a
war, they stand it at the hazard of their heads; if, by an ignominious
compromise, they should stain the honour of the crown, or sacrifice the
rights of the people, let them look to the consequences, and consider
whether they will be able to walk the streets in safety."--The Duke of
Manchester, the Marquess of Rockingham, the Earl of Shelburne, and
Lord Lyttleton also supported the Duke of Richmond's motion, but it was
nevertheless negatived by a large majority. On the same day, also, a
similar motion was made and negatived in the house of commons; moreover,
a few days later the Earl of Chatham moved that Captain Hunt, who had
driven off a Spanish schooner from Port Egmont, before the armament
arrived, should be ordered to attend the house; and when this was
negatived, he moved an address to his majesty, praying that the house
might be acquainted at what time reparation was first demanded from
Spain, which likewise received a negation.




PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS OF THE LAW OF LIBEL.

The sentiments promulgated by Lord Mansfield on the law of libel, in
the case of Woodfall, had created much discussion among the legal
profession, and had met with much obloquy among the people. They were
represented as an attempt to infringe the rights and powers of juries,
and to reduce their verdicts to a mere echo of the opinions of judges,
inasmuch as they were merely to inquire into the fact of printing and
publishing, and not allowed to judge whether the matter in question was
a libel or not On the 28th of November, Lord Chatham denounced this mode
of directing juries from the bench, but Lord Mansfield justified it, and
laid it down as an axiom, "that a libel, or not a libel, was a matter
of law to be decided by the bench, and the question to be left to the
jury was only the fact of printing and publishing." Mansfield demanded
a call of the house for the 10th of December, and when that day arrived,
he laid on the table a paper, drawn up with great care and precision,
containing the unanimous opinion of the court of king's bench in
Woodfall's case, in order that their lordships might, read or copy it as
they pleased. Lord Camden inquired whether this paper was intended to be
entered on the journals, and submitted to debate. Mansfield replied it
was merely intended for the information of members, and he then suddenly
moved an adjournment and quitted the house. On the next day, Camden
considering the paper as a challenge to himself, endeavoured to provoke
a discussion, by addressing six queries to the chief-justice, but Lord
Mansfield declared that he would not answer interrogations, and the
matter dropped.

In the house of commons, the power of filing _ex-officio_ informations
by the attorney-general in cases like Almon's, elicited the praises of
Burke, on Junius as a writer, in these terms:--"How comes this Junius
to have broken through the cobwebs of the law, and to have ranged
uncontrolled, unpunished through the land? The myrmidons of the court
have been long, and are still, pursuing him in vain. They will not spend
their time upon me, or upon you, when the mighty boar of the forest,
that has broke through all their toils, is before them. But what will
all their efforts avail? No sooner has he wounded one than he strikes
down another dead at his feet. For my own part, when I saw his attack
upon the king, I own my blood ran cold. Not that he has not asserted
many bold truths: yes, sir, there are in that composition many bold
truths, by which a wise prince might profit. It was the rancour and
venom with which I was struck. But while I expected from this daring
flight his final ruin and fall, behold him rising still higher, and
coming down souse upon both houses of parliament;--not content with
carrying away our royal eagle in his pounces, and dashing him against
a rock, he has laid you prostrate, and kings, lords, and commons, thus
become but the sport of his fury." Soon after this Sergeant Glynn moved
for a committee to inquire "into the constitutional power and duty
of juries." His motion was opposed by Fox, and supported by Dunning,
Wedderbume, Burke, and others. Fox opposed it because it was said that
"the people complained of the perversion of law," and he laid himself
open to the following severe remarks from the lips of Burke:--"That
there should be found, he said, gentlemen who would annihilate the
people, and acknowledge no other voice than that of this house, is
to me, not at all surprising, because the conduct of the most violent
sticklers for this doctrine has not deserved much applause or favour
from them; but that they should have renounced reason and common sense
so far as to maintain that the majority of this assembly is the only
organ by which their sentiments can be expressed, is, to me, truly
surprising. For where, in the name of wonder, should the house acquire
the necessary knowledge or intelligence? Is it by turning these musty
old volumes, or by rummaging these gaudy boxes which lie on your table?
No! they contain none of these mysteries. How then are they to be
explored? Is there any virtue or inspiration in these benches or
cushions, by which they are to be communicated, or does the echo of
these walls whisper the secret in your ears? No! but the echo of every
other wall, the murmur of every stream, aye! the hoots and hisses of
every street in the nation, ring it in your ears, and deafen you with
their din. The people have a voice of their own, and it must, it will
be, sooner or later heard: and I, as in duty bound, will always
exert every nerve and every power of which I am master, to hasten the
completion of so desirable an event." The motion was negatived.




QUARRELS BETWEEN THE LORDS AND COMMONS.

Ministers were still pressed by the opposition concerning the lingering
negociations with Spain, and the incompleteness of their preparations
for war. In the house of lords, the Duke of Manchester descanted in
strong terms on the defenceless condition of Gibraltar, Minorca, and
Jamaica. In the midst of his harangue Lord Gower desired that the house
might be cleared of all persons except those who had a right to sit
there. When motions like this, he said, were brought on by surprise, no
one should be allowed to hear the debate except peers, inasmuch as in a
crowded house, emissaries from the court of Spain and other powers might
be present. He added that there was another reason why the house should
be cleared. Persons, he said, had been admitted who took note of what
was said, for he had in his pocket a paper which contained a speech
recently made by a noble lord! This, he asserted, was contrary to a
standing order, which standing order, No. 112, was produced and read.
The Duke of Richmond and the Earl of Chatham warmly opposed such a step,
but their voices were drowned by shouts of "Clear the house! Clear the
house!" The Earl of Chatham, with eighteen peers, indignantly left the
house, and the party who remained then insisted that all the members
of the house of commons present should be turned out _sans cérémonie_!
These members represented that they were there in the discharge of
their duty, for that they were there attending with a bill. The bill was
demanded, and they had no sooner delivered it, than they were hooted
out of the house. A strong protest was made against these proceedings by
members of both houses;--and on the same day, Mr. George Onslow moved in
the lower house that it should be cleared--"peers and all." This motion
was made merely from pique at the treatment of the commons by the lords,
and not with a view of encouraging the notion that debates ought to be
open, reported, and published. A better motion was made by Mr. Dunning,
who moved for a committee "to inspect the journals of the house of lords
of that day, as to what proceedings and resolutions were therein, with
relation to the not permitting any persons to be present in any part of
the said house during the sitting thereof." This motion was negatived;
but no vote passed either in the house of lords or that of the commons
could remove the stain which the ministers had brought upon their
characters by these tumultuous proceedings, or allay the desire which
the people entertained for the publication of parliamentary debates; and
the opposition did what they could to render their conduct more odious
than it really was The Earl of Chatham recommended that search should
be made by the commons in the journals, and that a conference should be
demanded with the lords. Acting upon this advice, Lord George Germaine
moved in the house of commons for such a conference, but though he was
ably supported by Lord George Cavendish, Burke, Dunning, and Barré, all
of whom dealt in humour as well as argument, the motion was negatived.
Lord Germaine then moved that the speaker should write to such eldest
sons and heirs apparent of peers, king's sergeants, and masters in
chancery, as were members, and to the attorney and solicitor-general,
and request them to be in their places every day at two o'clock, to
assist in carrying bills to the house of lords; but the only result
of this motion was a duel between the mover and Governor Johnstone, in
Hyde-park, in consequence of some remarks which the latter had made in
the course of the debate.




CONVENTION WITH SPAIN.

As the sincerity of the Spanish government was doubted by the ministry
before Christmas, it was deemed advisable to adjourn parliament to the
latter end of January, in order to afford time for the development of
circumstances, and to enable the cabinet to decide upon peace or war.
Ministers seem, indeed, to have learned of late that the plan of paying
deference to the Spanish court was not founded in wisdom, and they
changed their policy. On the 21st of December a messenger was despatched
to Spain to recall our ambassador, and to intimate to the English
merchants and commanders of ships, that it would probably be expedient
for them to leave that country. This conduct alarmed the Spanish court,
but it is probable that the King of Spain would have decided upon war,
had not his views been disappointed in another quarter. He had invited
the King of France to co-operate with him, and the Duc de Choiseul, his
minister, was favourable to the cause of Spain, but during the month
of December Choiseul was disgraced and exiled, through the influence of
Madame du Barry, the king's mistress, and he was succeeded by the Duke
d'Aiguillon, who advocated peace. This had the effect of bringing the
negociations to a close: Louis XV. wrote to the Spanish monarch with his
own hand, that he would not have war, and instructions were immediately
sent to London to Prince Masserano, the Spanish envoy, to accept the
propositions offered by the British Cabinet.




CHANGES IN THE MINISTRY.

During the Christmas recess, ministers were employed in gaining converts
from the ranks of the opposition, and in making arrangements to complete
and strengthen the administration. Lord Weymouth having resigned the
seals of secretary of state, they were given to Lord Sandwich, who was
succeeded in his office of postmaster-general by the Honourable H. F.
Thynne. Mr. Wedderburne, the pet of Chatham and the city, abandoned his
friends, and became solicitor-general to the queen; while Thurlow was
made attorney-general in the place of Mr. de Grey, who was created
chief-justice of the common pleas. A chancellor was now also found in
the person of the Hon. Henry Bathurst, who took the title of Baron
Apsley. Lord Sandwich held the seals of secretary of state but for a few
days. Having expressed a wish to be transferred to the admiralty, he was
placed at the head of that board, instead of Sir Edward Hawke, and Lord
Halifax succeeded him as secretary of state, giving up the privy seal
to the Earl of Suffolk; Lord Rochford was removed to the southern
department. Mr. Grenville had recently paid the great debt of
nature, or he would have probably again come into office, but several
of his friends were introduced into the ministry, by which it gained a
considerable accession of talent.




CHAPTER IV.

{GEORGE III. 1771-1773}

     Re-opening of Parliament..... Proceedings against
     Shoreham..... Resolutions respecting the Publication of
     Debates..... Committal of the Lord Mayor and Alderman Oliver
     to the Tower..... Contest between the City  and
     Legislature..... The question of the Middlesex Election.....
     The question of the Dissolution of Parliament..... The
     Session closed..... Release of the Lord Mayor and Alderman
     Oliver..... Education of the Prince of Wales..... City
     Petition to the King..... Disputes in the City..... Meeting
     of Parliament..... Debates on Subscription to the Thirty-
     nine Articles..... ecclesiastical _Nullum Tempus_ Bill.....
     The case of Dr.  Nowell..... Test and Corporation Acts.....
     The Royal Marriage Act..... East India Affairs..... The
     Session closed..... Fate of the Queen of Denmark..... Death
     of the Princess Dowager of Wales..... Revolution in
     Sweden..... Partition of Poland..... Investigation of the
     Middlesex Election..... Changes in the Ministry..... The
     Meeting of Parliament..... East India Affairs.

{A.D. 1771}




RE-OPENING OF PARLIAMENT.

When the commons assembled on the 22nd of January, Lord North announced
the happy termination of the dispute with Spain, and the intention
of government to lay the convention which had just been signed before
parliament. Lord Rochford imparted similar information to the lords:
in both houses the question gave rise to warm discussion. In the
lords the Duke of Manchester moved for all the information received by
government touching the designs of Spain upon Falkland Island, and
for all the papers passed during the negociations. Rochford moved an
amendment, limiting the inquiry to the subject of Falkland Island, and
Lord Sandwich moved another amendment, which the Duke of Richmond said
would so narrow the motion as to deprive the house of all necessary
information. These amendments were withdrawn, and the original motion
of the Duke of Manchester agreed to; but even this did not satisfy the
opposition. The Duke of Richmond next moved, in order to recommend this
ignominious affair to further censure, that all the memorials or
other papers which had passed between his majesty's ministers and the
ministers of the King of France, relating to the seizure of Falkland
Island by the Spaniards, should be laid before the house. Rochford said
that he knew of no such papers, which assertion was questioned by the
Earl of Chatham, inasmuch as the interference of France in the matter
was a fact that could not be denied. The house, he said, ought never to
take the word of a minister, and that the refusal of this motion showed
that some transaction with France had passed, though perhaps not papers
or memorials. The motion was negatived; but the question gave rise to
still further discussion in both houses, of which little is known; as on
the great field-day in the lords, all strangers were rigidly excluded.
The Earl of Chatham moved on that day, that the following two questions
should be referred to the judges:--1. Whether, in law, the imperial
crown of the realm can hold any territories or possessions otherwise
than in sovereignty? 2. Whether the declaration or instrument for
restitution of Port Egmont, to be made by the Catholic king to his
majesty, under a reservation of a disputed right of sovereignty,
expressed in the very declaration or instrument stipulating such
restitution, can be accepted or carried into execution, without
derogating from the maxim of law touching the inherent and essential
dignity of the crown of Great Britain? This motion was negatived; and
subsequently the Duke of Newcastle moved for an address to the king,
in approbation of the convention, and of the wise and moderate measures
which had been employed to procure it; which was carried by a large
majority. So far as parliament was concerned, the question of Falkland
Island was, by this motion, set at rest; but out of doors it long
continued to be a matter of dispute. One party maintained that the
possession of Port Egmont was of the utmost importance to England, and
that by the secret article, which it was said existed in the convention,
implying that after all we were to give it up, the national honour had
been meanly sacrificed. The caustic Junius and other writers took this
side of the question. Another party, however, at the head of whom Dr.
Johnson may be reckoned, endeavoured to demonstrate that the whole group
was worth little or nothing, and that it would have been absurd to go to
war about them. Both parties adopted exaggerated language to prove their
propositions; but whether they were of any real value or not, it behoved
England, according to state maxims, to resent the conduct of Spain, in
treacherously falling upon her colony at Port Egmont in times of peace.
No argument, indeed, could justify such an invasion of the dignity of
England's crown and the rights of her subjects. But one thing seems
certain arose from this affair; namely, that if the interests of the
country were sacrificed by this convention, private individuals, at
least, reaped great advantage therefrom. The sudden signing of it,
when war was well nigh pronounced by the prime minister, gave rise to
stockjobbing, and in the course of a few days large fortunes were made
in Change-alley. This formed one of the most weighty charges brought by
the opposition against ministers in the course of the debate. Colonel
Barré, indeed, directly accused them of being implicated in these
unworthy transactions. "A Frenchman," said he, "being in your secrets,
has made nearly half a million of money by jobbing in your funds; and
some of the highest among yourselves have been deeply concerned in the
same scandalous traffic." In the course of the session this led to a
bill for the more effectual prevention of stock-jobbing; but though it
passed the commons, it does not appear to have obtained the notice of
the lords.




PROCEEDINGS AGAINST SHOREHAM.

In consequence of a petition lodged against one Hugh Roberts, the
returning officer of Shoreham, the public were at this time startled by
strange disclosures of corruption in the elections for that borough.
A select committee was appointed, according to Grenville's act, to
determine a contested election, in which a candidate who had only
thirty-seven votes had been declared duly elected, to the prejudice of a
rival who had more than double that number. It appeared from the inquiry
that the majority of the freeholders of this insignificant borough had
formed themselves into an association, called "The Christian Club,"
for the ostensible purpose of promoting the cause of piety and charity.
This, however, only served as a cloak for venality and corruption. These
associated "Christians," sometimes performed a charitable act, in order
to accredit their professions, but the bulk of the money which they
received from their representatives found its way into their own
pockets;--and this was no trifling sum. The borough was offered at
elections to the highest bidder, and he who offered most was successful.
In order to escape detection, the members of this club were bound to
secrecy by solemn oaths, and by bonds with large penalties attached to
them; and negociations with candidates were carried on by means of a
select committee, who, under pretence of scruples of conscience, never
voted themselves, but having sold the borough and received the money,
directed the suffrages of the rest, and afterwards shared in the booty.
Their hypocrisy, however, was brought to light by one in their own camp.
At this election five candidates had offered themselves, and the secret
committee were sent to treat with the bidders. The best offers were made
by General Smith and Mr. Rumbold: the former offering £3000 in cash,
and to build six hundred tons of shipping at Shoreham; and the latter
offering £35 a man to all the freemen. The secret committee preferred
Rumbold, but Roberts, the returning officer, preferred the General, and
knowing that a large sum of money had been distributed among eighty-one
of the majority, he considered them disqualified, and omitted them in
his return. This formed the subject of the petition, and the facts being
proved, a bill was brought in and carried, by which eighty-one freemen
of Shoreham were disfranchised; and the Shoreham franchise was extended
to all the freeholders of the neighbouring district, called the Rape of
Bramber, who occupied tenements of the annual value of forty shillings.
At the same time Roberts was reprimanded at the bar of the house by the
speaker, for his assumption of illegal authority.




RESOLUTIONS RESPECTING THE PUBLICATION OF DEBATES.

Up to this period it had been held that to publish the debates of
either house of parliament was a breach of privilege. The editors
of periodicals had, indeed, endeavoured to evade the prohibition by
publishing mutilated and occasionally invented speeches of honourable
and noble lords, under fictitious names; but the people did not even
obtain this doubtful information till after the discussion was over,
and the matter in debate settled. The public, however, were now becoming
more enlightened, and withal more curious, and these garbled and stale
speeches did not satisfy them;--they longed for a full reporting
newspaper, and the printers were encouraged by the general feeling to
venture upon giving the proceedings in parliament from week to week, or
from day to day, as they occurred. They were the more induced to take
this step because the extent of the power of parliament to enforce this
question of privilege had never been accurately defined. The letters of
Junius, also, had a great effect in confirming them in their resolution:
accordingly, during the Middlesex elections and the debates on the
affairs of the Falkland Islands, the public were gratified with certain
and immediate intelligence of what their representatives were doing. But
this was not likely to be allowed by parliament without a struggle. The
members of both houses had been strenuous in their endeavours to
shut their doors in the face of the nation--to choke all attempts
at publicity, and to seclude themselves as rigorously as a jury, and
therefore the proprietors of these newly established papers, must have
expected, sooner or later, to be disturbed in their occupations. On
the 5th of February their anticipations were realized. Colonel George
Onslow, now one of the lords of the treasury, denounced the insolence
and wickedness of these proceedings, as tending to the destruction of
all things to be venerated in our constitution; and, on the 26th of
the same month, he moved:--"That it is an indignity to, and a breach of
privilege of this house, for any person to presume to give in written
or printed newspapers any account or minutes of debate, or other
proceedings of this house, or any part thereof; and that upon discovery
of the authors, printers, or publishers of any such written or printed
newspaper, this house will proceed against the offenders with the utmost
severity." The motion was opposed by Alderman Trecothick, who wished
every man to hear what passed in the house; and by Burke, who in the
course of his speech declared, that so long as an interest existed out
of doors to examine the proceedings of parliament, so long would men
be found to do what these printers had already done. It was also argued
that the privilege enjoyed by constituents of knowing what is said and
done by their representatives, is founded on the true principles of
the constitution, and that falsehood and misrepresentation ought to be
punished in a different manner from that proposed, inasmuch as it
went to make the house of commons a secret tribunal. Onslow's motion,
however, was carried, and two of the printers, Thompson and Wheble, were
ordered to attend at the bar of the house. This order was not noticed,
and the sergeant-at-arms was directed to take them into custody: they
were not to be found; and another printer, Evans, who was ordered on
the 1st of March to attend the house, treated the order with the same
contempt. Colonel Onslow then moved for an address to the king, to
issue a proclamation, offering a reward of fifty pounds for their
apprehension, which was agreed to; and subsequently he denounced six
more printers as guilty of the same enormities. Wheble was at length
taken by another printer, and carried before Alderman Wilkes,
who discharged him from custody, and made him enter into his own
recognisance to prosecute the man who captured him at the Old Bailey
sessions for false imprisonment or an illegal arrest. On the same day
Thompson was also carried before Alderman Oliver, who followed the
example of Wilkes, and discharged him. Four printers, out of the six
last denounced by Onslow, attended at the bar of the house; a fifth
[Woodfall] was already in custody in Newgate, by order of the house
of lords, and the sixth, named Millar, refused to obey the summons.
A messenger was sent to apprehend him, but Millar had a constable in
readiness, and he gave the messenger into custody, and he was carried to
Guildhall to answer for the assault. Wilkes, the sitting alderman, said
he had finished the business of the day, and would not enter upon the
case, and the messenger was then conveyed to the mansion-house. The lord
mayor being indisposed, he was kept there for three hours, but in the
evening, being attended by Wilkes and Oliver, he admitted the parties:
the deputy sergeant-at-arms being also present. The printer having
stated his complaint, the messenger was asked by what authority he
had presumed to commit the assault? He produced his warrant, and the
sergeant-at-arms then intimated that he was there by the speaker's
order, not only to release the messenger, but to take Millar into
custody. The magistrates, however, represented that by the city charters
no caption could be made, east of Temple-bar, without the authority
of the lord mayor; and while they released Millar, they would have
committed the messenger to prison, had not bail been given for his
appearance to answer for the alleged assault.




COMMITTAL OF THE LORD MAYOR AND ALDERMAN OLIVER TO THE TOWER.

The above transactions were reported to the commons by the
sergeant-at-arms, and orders were issued for the lord mayor to attend in
his place, and his clerk to bring up the mansion-house minute-book, in
which the proceedings had been entered. Alderman Oliver was likewise
ordered to attend in his place, while Wilkes was directed to appear at
the bar of the house. The two members obeyed the summons, and boldly
justified their conduct; but though they were ably supported by many
members in the house, and though the public emphatically displayed their
approbation of their conduct, they were committed to the Tower. As for
Wilkes he defied the government, refusing to attend unless in his seat
as member for Middlesex. Three several times he was summoned to attend,
but he would not listen to it under any other conditions, and nothing
remained but compulsion, which the ministers were afraid of using. His
majesty, indeed, is expressly said to have asserted, that he would
have nothing to do with him, and he was left to act with impunity. This
confessed weakness brought the cabinet into utter contempt, for though
ministers resorted to the trick of adjournment with regard to his
non-appearance, all men saw that it was fear alone which prevented them
from taking him into custody. And that they had reason to fear there can
be no question, for had any attempt been made to compel his appearance,
it would have revived all the uproar of the election questions, and
brought him forward with tenfold powers of mischief, as the champion of
the mob: and, even as it was, ministers had brought themselves, by the
proceedings against the printers, into no very enviable position. Riots
and tumults in the avenues of the house were the order of the day, and
the life of Lord North was on one occasion brought into imminent danger.
On the day that the lord mayor was committed, indeed, the tumult was so
violent that the house was obliged to stop business for some hours, and
it was in vain that magistrates and constables endeavoured to restore
peace: it was only through the speeches of some of the more popular
members, who left the house on purpose to address them, that the minds
of the chafed multitude became tranquil. It was thought that Lord North
would now resign, and a report had been made to that effect, but he
declared that though he wished for retirement, he entertained no such
design; that nothing but the king or the mob, who were near destroying
him, could remove him; and that he was determined to weather out the
storm. He ungraciously charged the minority with hiring the mob to
destroy him; upon which Burke's brother, William, indignantly exclaimed,
--"It is a falsehood, a most egregious falsehood; the minority are to
a man persons of honour, who scorn such a resource. Such a charge could
only emanate from a man hackneyed in indirect measures."




CONTEST BETWEEN THE CITY AND LEGISLATURE.

Another occasion of contest between the city and legislature arose from
the introduction of a bill for enclosing and embanking a part of the
river Thames, adjoining to Durham-yard. The city considering that their
rights were about to be invaded were heard by counsel. They produced a
grant by Henry VII. of all the soil and bed of the river, from Staines
bridge to a spot near the Medway, and likewise a lease granted by them
of a nook of the river near Vauxhall, for which they had received rent
upwards of sixty years. On the part of the legislature, a charter of
Charles II. was produced, in which he had reserved the bed of the river,
by the acceptation of which, it was argued, that the city had forfeited
that granted by Henry VII. It was also contended that the charter of
Henry only extended to that part of the river which was within the
city, and the lease at Vauxhall was, therefore, an encroachment. These
arguments prevailed, the bill was passed, and a pile of buildings,
called the Adelphi, was erected on the site, and disposed of by lottery.
The disposal of them in this manner was to eke out the ways and
means, and this mode of procuring money called forth the indignant
denunciations of Mr. Burke and Colonel Barré, who stigmatized it as an
iniquitous project to bribe the servants of the public; a use to which
lotteries had been previously applied.




THE QUESTION OF THE MIDDLESEX ELECTION.

The question of the Middlesex election was again brought forward in
the lords on the 30th of April, when; the Duke of Richmond moved for
expunging the resolution adopted on the subject. The Earl of Chatham
delivered a long speech on that occasion, which was forthwith published
in the Public Advertiser. The orator appears to have been unanswered,
but the motion was negatived.




THE QUESTION OF THE DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT.

On the 1st of May, the Earl of Chatham moved for an address to the king
to dissolve the present parliament at the end of the session, and
to call a new one with all convenient dispatch. The speech, which he
delivered in making this motion first drew a sad contrast between the
state of the country at the time it was uttered, and the condition
it was in only a few years before. He then descanted on the treaty of
Fontainbleau; the late convention with Spain; the occurrences in St.
George's Fields, which he called "murders;" on the affairs of America;
and on the immense private debt contracted by the crown. "All these
circumstances," he observed, "have justly alarmed the nation, and made
them attentive to the operations of parliament. Hence the publication of
the parliamentary debates. And where is the injury, if the members act
upon honest principles? For a public assembly to be afraid of having
their deliberations published is monstrous, and speaks for itself.
No mortal can construe such a procedure to their advantage; and the
practice of locking the doors is sufficient to open the eyes of the
blind;--they must see that all is not well within. Not satisfied,
however, with shutting the doors, the commons would overturn the liberty
of the press. The printers had spirit and resisted. The irritated
commons exalted their privilege above the laws of the land, and their
servants acted illegally in the execution of their illegal orders.
The magistrates of London undertook the cause of the printers, and the
protection of the laws and of the city's franchises. The commons still
proceeded with the same outrageous violence;--they called upon the
magistrates to justify their conduct, and would not suffer them to
be heard by counsel. These men, who had allowed the prostituted electors
of Shoreham counsel to defend a bargain to sell their borough by
auction, would not grant the same indulgence to the lord mayor of
London, pleading for the laws of England, and the conscientious
discharge of his duty. Accordingly they committed him to the tower
for not violating his oath. The most sacred obligation of morality and
religion they voted criminal, when it happened to stand in competition
with their assumed privileges. Their next step was the act of a mob, and
not of a parliament; I mean the expunging of the recognisance entered at
Guildhall. We have heard of such violence committed by the French King;
and it seems much better calculated for the latitude of Paris than of
London. The people of this kingdom will never submit to such barefaced
tyranny. They must see that it is time to rouse, when their own
creatures dare to assume a power of stopping prosecutions by their vote,
and consequently of resolving the law of the land into their will and
pleasure. The imprudence, and indeed the absolute madness of these
measures, demonstrates not the result of that assembly's calm, unbiassed
deliberations, but the dictates of weak uninformed ministers, influenced
by those who mislead their sovereign." Chatham then told the ministers
that it was through their misconduct that Wilkes had become a person of
consequence in the state, and twitted them with acknowledging him to
be their lord and master, since while they had punished the chief
magistrate of the city, they were compelled to allow him to act with
impunity. On all these grounds, he said, it was that he moved for an
address to the throne for the dissolution of parliament; a step which
he considered might have the effect of restoring good humour and
tranquillity on the one hand, and good government on the other. At the
same time he expressed his doubts whether this would prove any thing
more than a temporary and partial remedy, as the influence of the crown
had become so enormous, that some stronger bulwark ought to be erected
for the defence of the constitution. He concluded by stating that the
act for septennial parliaments must be repealed, and by proclaiming
himself a convert to triennial parliaments. The motion was negatived
by seventy-two against twenty-three. In the house of commons,
Alderman Sawbridge made a direct motion for shortening the duration of
parliaments; a motion which, in spite of the large majorities against
him, he renewed every session till his death. Out or doors, at this
time, the question was very popular; the Rev. John Home, and Junius
advocating it as the surest road to political perfection, and as the
only means of preserving the substantial freedom of the constitution. It
is probable, however, that Chatham only advocated this measure for the
purpose of alarming ministers and increasing his popularity, for his
views of parliamentary reform were never definite: he never had a fixed
and settled purpose in the matter.




THE SESSION CLOSED.

This session ended on the eighth of May. In his speech from the throne,
the king congratulated the houses on those exertions which had averted
a war, and which enabled him to hope for the blessings of peace. He
alluded to disturbances and groundless suspicions at home, and exhorted
the members of both houses to use their best endeavours to repress
them. It is manifest that ministers had lost much reputation during the
session, but it seems clear that they were never firmer in their seats
than they were at its close. The defection of Mr. Grenville's party
added greatly to their strength, while it as greatly weakened the
efforts of the opposition. In June the death of Lord Halifax made a
vacancy in the cabinet, which was occupied by the Earl of Suffolk, while
his place of lord privy seal was taken by the Duke of Grafton, whose
restoration caused a great stir in the political world, and called forth
the atrabilious rancour of Junius, who had prided himself on having
driven the noble duke from office.




RELEASE OF THE LORD MAYOR AND ALDERMAN OLIVER.

All honour was paid to these captives during their confinement in the
Tower. They were visited by nobles and members of the house of commons;
the sheriffs waited upon them to express their disapprobation of all the
proceedings against them; and at a meeting of the common-council the day
after their commitment, a vote of thanks was passed to such members of
the house of commons as had given them their support. The common-council
also agreed to pay any law expenses that might occur, and to defray all
the expenses of their tables while in confinement. On the 5th of
March, they were brought by _habeas corpus_ from the Tower, to Lord
Chief-Justice de Gray's chambers, attended by a host of friends; but
after hearing Sergeant Glynn and Mr Lee, he said that he could neither
bail nor discharge them. They were then taken to Lord Mansfield's
chambers, who expressed the same sentiments; stating that he could
neither take bail nor discharge them while parliament was sitting. They
were, therefore, carried back to the Tower, where they remained till the
day the session closed, when they regained their liberty. In the
mean time the printers remained unscathed. They had, indeed, obtained
advantages almost equal to a victory, and there was little more to fear
from the publication of the speeches of members of parliament. In the
course of the debate Mr. Welbore Ellis moved that a secret committee
of twenty-one members should be chosen by ballot, "to examine into the
several facts and circumstances relative to the late obstructions to
the executions of the order of the house, and to consider what further
proceedings may be requisite to enforce a due obedience thereto." This
was agreed to, and on the 30th of April the secret committee produced
their report. The document consisted of a tedious deduction of facts and
cases, which concluded with a recommendation to the house to consider
whether it might not yet be expedient that Millar should be taken
into custody by the sergeant-at-arms. Roars of laughter followed this
impotent conclusion, and Burke increased the merriment of the house, by
observing that the secret committee might be compared to an assembly of
mice, who came to a resolution that their old enemy the cat should be
tied up, to prevent her doing any further mischief, but forgot to say
how this was to be effected. Nothing, therefore, was done, and from
that period the parliamentary debates have been published without any
disguise or obstruction: a practice which is considered to be essential
to the effective working of the representative system, and one of the
best safeguards of the constitution, inasmuch as it brings the opinions
and acts of representatives under the notice of the lynx-eyed public,
who regard their rights and liberties with too severe a jealousy to
admit of their being invaded with impunity.




EDUCATION OF THE PRINCE OF WALES.

Before the rising of parliament there was much speculation afloat
concerning the appointment of a governor and preceptors for the king's
eldest son, Prince George. It was said that the king was at length
"convinced of the error of his ways;" that is, he had become suspicious
of the Tories, and was inclined to favour the Whigs. When the
appointments were made, however, there was no display of any decided
Whig tendency at court. The Earl of Holderness was made the young
prince's governor, and Lord Mansfield's friend, Dr. Markham, Bishop
of Chester, and the Rev. Cyril Jackson, were appointed preceptor and
sub-preceptor. The plan of private education was severely censured at
the time, as too narrow for the future sovereign of a free country: and
it was argued that an education at one of the public schools would have
proved more beneficial to the mind of the royal pupil, and to his
future subjects. Lord Holderness, after a few years, resigned his trust,
complaining that a secret and dangerous influence existed which was
injurious to his authority. He was succeeded by Lord Bruce, who retained
his office only a few days, and the next governor was the Duke of
Montague, with Hurd, afterwards Bishop of Worcester, and the Rev. Mr.
Arnold, as preceptor and sub-preceptor. During his education, common
report spoke highly of the prince's quickness of apprehension, retentive
memory, and general aptitude for acquiring the elegances of literature.




CITY PETITION TO THE KING.

During the recess, inflamed by the imprisonment of the lord mayor, the
harangues of Wilkes, and other circumstances, the city drew up another
strong petition and remonstrance. This petition, which was presented
by order of the lord chamberlain, without the procession of liverymen,
complained of the abitrary, illegal, and wicked proceedings of the
house of commons in imprisoning the city magistrates and members, and
in passing the Durham-yard Act: it concluded by praying the king to
dissolve parliament, and to dismiss his present despotic ministers from
his councils for ever His majesty replied, that he was always willing
to lend an ear to well-founded complaints, and expressed his concern
at seeing the citizens of London so misled and deluded as to renew a
request with which he had already declared he would not comply.




DISPUTES IN THE CITY.

At this time, Wilkes, not satisfied with the alderman's gown, aspired
to be sheriff. In this he was supported by Farringdon ward, and by other
parts of the city, and the court taking alarm at the circumstance made
use of all its influence to prevent his election. Their efforts were
encouraged by dissensions among the city patriots, and by reports that
Wilkes had offended, the lord mayor and several of the aldermen, and
had involved himself in a quarrel with the Rev. John Home, one of the
principal leaders of the people. Aldermen Plumbe and Kirkman, were
opposed by the government party to Wilkes and Alderman Bull, and every
thing was done to secure their election. An awkward mistake, however,
frustrated all their endeavours. A letter was written by the celebrated
ministerial manager, Mr. John Robinson, to Mr. Benjamin Smith of
Cannon-street, informing him that Mr. Harley was to meet his ward in
the course of the day, to urge them to support Plumbe and Kirkman, and
entreating him to second the efforts of government by active exertions.
This letter was sent by a messenger, but by a mistake he carried it to
Mr. B. Smith, of Budge-row, who was friendly to the cause of Wilkes,
and he instantly published it, together with an affidavit as to its
authenticity: this had such an effect on the poll, that Wilkes and Bull
were elected. Alderman Oliver had been induced to offer himself, and
he was supported by the Rev. John Home. This led to a correspondence
between the Rev. orator and Junius, in the course of which the frailties
of Wilkes were laid before the public eye in all their deformity. Home
accused him of having commissioned Sir Thomas Walpole to procure a
pension of £1000 upon the Irish establishment; of having accepted a
clandestine pension from the Rockingham administration; of not having
commenced patriot until his wife's fortune was consumed; and of various
other delinquencies committed both in England and France, which were
very derogatory to his moral character. These accusations, however,
came too late, and were, moreover, made in too bad a spirit to have any
immediate effect on his popularity:--this he had now the means in his
hands of increasing, and he turned his power to good account in this
particular. Together with his colleague, he declared that as long as
they were sheriffs, the military, which had been the custom, should not
be allowed to attend the execution of criminals; and they gratified the
people at the beginning of the session, by throwing open the doors and
galleries of the Old Bailey, and forbidding the doorkeepers to receive
money.

{A.D. 1772}




MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

Parliament, contrary to usual custom did not meet till after the
Christmas holidays. It met on the 21st of January, when the king opened
it with a speech which afforded no subject for debate. Addresses were
passed in both houses without a division. On the same day Sir John
Mawbey obtained leave to bring in a bill for preventing "clandestine
outlawries," of which nothing more is known. On the next day Alderman
Sawbridge gave notice of moving for leave during the session to bring
in a bill for shortening the duration of parliaments; and on the day
following there was a debate about the prevailing scarcity, and the
necessity of continuing the prohibition against the exportation of corn.
Sir William Meredith moved on the same day, that no bill or clause
of any bill should be permitted to pass the house, whereby capital
punishments were decreed, unless the same should previously be referred
to a committee of the whole house: a motion which passed unanimously,
and was made a standing order. The first debate of consequence in the
house took place on the 29th of January, when Mr. Buller informed the
house, in a committee of supply, that his majesty expected they would
vote a considerable augmentation to our naval force, as additional ships
were required in the Levant, where Russia was carrying on a maritime
war against Turkey; in the East Indies, where France began to manifest
hostility; and in Jamaica and the West Indies. He moved that 25,000 men
including 6664 marines should be maintained, and the motion was seconded
by Captain Harvey. The augmentation was opposed by several members as
too small if war was expected, and too large to be kept up in peace, and
hints were thrown out by the opposition that ministers or the lords of
the admiralty, either wanted more patronage at their disposal, or that
something was concealed that made this great armament necessary. Mr.
Buller's motion, however, was carried without a division.




DEBATES ON SUBSCRIPTION TO THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES.

The important subject of subscription to the thirty-nine articles of
religion had long been discussed at public meetings, in the newspapers,
and in pamphlets and other works, and during this session, on the 6th of
February, a petition from about 240 of the clergy and many professors of
civil law and physic, was presented to parliament, praying relief from
subscription to these articles The document was thus worded:--"Your
petitioners apprehend themselves to have certain rights and privileges
which they hold of God alone, and of this kind is the exercise of their
own reason and judgment. They conceive they are also warranted by those
original principles of reformation from popery on which the church of
England is constituted, to judge, in searching the scriptures, each
man for himself, what may or may not be proved thereby. They find
themselves, however, in a great measure precluded the enjoyment of this
invaluable privilege, by the laws relative to subscription, whereby your
petitioners are required to acknowledge certain articles and confessions
of faith and doctrine, drawn up by fallible men, to be all and every
one of them agreeable to the said scriptures. Your petitioners therefore
pray that they may be relieved from such an imposition upon their
judgment, and be restored to their undoubted right as Protestants, of
interpreting scripture for themselves, without being bound by any human
explanations thereof--holy scripture alone being acknowledged certain
and sufficient for salvation." This petition was presented by Sir
William Meredith, who said that he considered it as meriting the most
serious attention of the house, as the grievance which affects the minds
and consciences of men was more burtdensome than that which affects
their property. It was inconsistent, he observed; with the liberality
of the present age to oblige men to subscribe to the truth of articles
which they could not believe; and he urged that such injunctions tended
to establish, under religious authority, habits of prevarication and
irreligion; were productive of great licentiousness in the church; and
operated to the destruction of Christian charity. He affirmed that
the removal of these shackles would give a strength to the established
church which nothing could shake, and that no danger could arise from
such a reformation while the hierarchy existed. He concluded with
remarking that the oaths of allegiance and supremacy were quite enough
for the security of the church and state.

The champion of the church on this occasion was Sir Robert Newdigate,
member for the University of Oxford. Sir Robert considered the petition
as praying to overturn the church of England, which he argued was only
to be found in the thirty-nine articles and the Book of Common
Prayer. He accused those clergymen who had signed it with possessing
accomodating consciences; such consciences as had subverted the church
in the last century. As for the house of commons, he maintained that
it had no power to dispense with oaths, or to relieve those who had
subscribed. Nay, it could not, he said, even receive the petition, since
to comply with it would be a breach of the articles of union between
England and Scotland, and since the king is bound by oath never to admit
any alteration either in the liturgy or the articles. Mr. Hans Stanley,
Mr. Fitzmorris, and Mr. Jenkinson were all of opinion that the house
ought to show no countenance to such a petition, and other members
were either facetious at the expense of the tender consciences of the
dissenters, or furious against every section of that body. Mr. Charles
Fox spoke for the church as by law established, and said that he
considered that all the laws and statutes by which it had been guarded
were very necessary for its preservation: at the same time he deprecated
the practice of exacting subscription to the articles from mere boys.
Soame Jenyns said that at Cambridge no subscription was required except
upon taking a degree, when the parties might be supposed to have arrived
at an age when they might think for themselves. Other members opposed
the petition, on the ground that it would give a mortal wound to the
church, and through the church to the state, since they were so closely
united that if one perished the other must share its fate. It was also
argued that the church had long been and was still in danger; that the
parliament could not grant relief to the petitioners, it having no
power to release from oaths once taken; and that even the king could not
afford relief, he being bound by oath to preserve the church as by
law established. Burke, who opposed the opposition, took a more
comprehensive and enlightened view of the subject than most of the
preceding speakers. He remarked, "If the dissenters, as an honourable
gentleman has described them, have formerly risen from a 'whining,
canting, snarling generation,' to be a body dreadful and ruinous to our
establishments, let him call to mind the follies, the violences, the
outrages, and persecutions that conjured up, very blamably, but very
naturally, that same spirit ol retaliation. Let him recollect, along
with the injuries, the services which dissenters have done to our church
and to our state. If they have once destroyed, more than once they have
saved them." Burke next observed that the church of England might alter
her laws without changing her identity. He said that she professed
no infallibility, and had always exercised the right of reforming her
doctrine, discipline, and ceremonies, instancing as examples the change
which she had made in the liturgy in the reign of Edward VI. and the
reduction of her articles from forty-two to thirty-nine. The act of
union, he maintained, had not rendered any further change possible.
At the same time he contended that there was no great occasion for the
change sought by the petitioners. "I will not enter," he said, "into
the abstract merits of our articles and liturgy; perhaps there are some
things in them which one would wish had not been there; and they are not
without the marks and character of human frailty. But," he added, "it
is not human frailty and imperfection, or even a considerable degree of
them, that becomes a ground for alteration; for by no alteration
will you get rid of those errors, however you may vary them." He then
adverted to the inexpediency of these alterations, and the temper of the
times. "If," said he, "you make this a season of religious alterations,
depend upon it you will soon find it a season of religious tumults and
wars.... These gentlemen complain of hardships. No considerable number
shows discontent; but in order to give satisfaction to any considerable
number of men, who come in so decent and constitutional a mode before
us, let us examine a little what that hardship is. They want to be
preferred clergymen of the church of England as by law established, but
their consciences will not suffer them to conform to the doctrines and
practices of that church; that is, they want to be teachers in a church
to which they do not belong; it is an odd sort of hardship. They want to
receive the emoluments appropriated for teaching one set of doctrines,
whilst they are teaching another. A church in any legal sense is only
a certain system of religious doctrines and practices, fixed and
ascertained by some law; by the difference of which laws different
churches, as different commonwealths, are made in various parts of
the world; and the establishment is a tax laid by the same sovereign
authority for payment of those who so teach and practise, For no
legislature was ever so absurd as to tax its people to support men, but
by some prescribed rule." Burke then warned the house against making a
new door into the church for such gentlemen, as ten times their number
might be driven out of it, and as it would be inexpedient to displease
the clergy of England as a body, for the chance of obliging a few who
were, or wanted to be, beneficed clergymen, and who probably were not
agreed among themselves as to what required alteration. He concluded
by showing, from the different opinions of churches on the canon of
scripture itself, that men are as little likely to be unanimous on that
point as on any other. He remarked, "The Bible is a vast collection of
different treatises: a man who holds the divine authority of one may
consider the other as merely human. What is his canon? The Jewish? St.
Jerome's? that of the thirty-nine articles? Luther's? There are some
who reject the Canticles; others six of the Epistles; the Apocalypse has
even been suspected as heretical, and was doubted of for many ages, and
by many great men. As these narrow the canon, others have enlarged it,
by admitting St. Barnabas's Epistles, the Apostolic Constitutions, to
say nothing of many other Gospels. Therefore to ascertain scripture you
must have one article more; and you must define what that scripture
is which you mean to teach. There are, I believe, very few who, when
scripture is to be ascertained, do not see the absolute necessity of
knowing what general doctrine a man draws from it, before he is sent
down authorised by the state to teach it as pure doctrine, and receive
a tenth of the produce of our lands. The scripture is not one summary of
doctrine regularly digested, in which a man cannot mistake his way; it
is a most venerable but multivarious collection of the records of divine
economy; a collection of an infinite variety of cosmogony, theology,
history, prophecy, psalmody, morality, apologue, allegory, legislation,
ethics, carried through different books by different authors at
different ages, for different ends and purposes. It is necessary to sort
out what is intended for example, what only as narrative, what to be
understood literally, what figuratively--where one precept is to be
controlled and modified by another--what is used directly and what only
as an argument _ad hominem_--what is temporary and what of perpetual
obligation--what appropriated to our state, and to one set of men, and
what the general duty of all Christians. If we do not get some security
for this, we not only permit, but we actually pay for, all the dangerous
fanaticism which can be produced to corrupt our people and to derange
the public worship of the country." Lord North said that he hoped to
have seen nothing in the petition to prevent him from recommending that
it should be laid on the table. He, however, saw that it was repugnant
to the act of union, and that if such indulgences were allowed, there
would then be nothing to exclude a man from the church of England
but popery. Any innovations in the forms prescribed, he added, would
occasion such contentions in the nation, that neither poppy nor
mandragora could restore it to its former repose. Mr. Dunning replied,
and he argued that every good subject ought to be entitled to a chance
of obtaining posts of profit and honour. It was by no means a principle
of sound policy, he said, to narrow the means of access to emoluments.
As to the quiet of the nation being disturbed by innovation, he could
not see such could be the result from granting the prayer of the
petition. He added, if the repose of the nation partook at all of the
torpid state of insensibility which Lord North's mandragora had diffused
through the house, the sooner it was broken the better; it was
an alarming symptom, which, instead of betokening health, was the
forerunner of destruction. The house divided at midnight, when the
petition was rejected by a large majority.

{GEORGE III. 1771-1773}




ECCLESIASTICAL NULLUM TEMPUS BILL.

Another debate in which the clergy were concerned arose from a motion
made by Mr. Henry Seymour, for leave to bring in a bill for securing
estates against dormant claims of the church. It was argued that as the
_nullum tempus_ of the crown had been conceded in favour of the people,
no reason existed why some limitation in this respect should not be set
to ecclesiastical power. On the other hand it was contended that the
power of reviving claims was necessary to protect the church from
encroachments; and that while in the case of the crown it was an
instrument in the hands of the strong to oppress the weak, in that of
the church, it was a defence of the weak against the strong. The motion
was rejected by 141 to 117.




THE CASE OF DR. NOWELL.

On the anniversary of the execution of King Charles, the 30th of
January, Dr. Nowell preached a sermon before the house of commons. The
speaker and four members only were present, and a motion of thanks and
for printing the sermon was carried as a matter of course. When the
sermon was printed, however, it was found to savour of the doctrines
of passive obedience and the divine right of kings, and to contain
principles in direct opposition to those which had placed the reigning
family on the throne. This brought down a storm on the head of the
preacher. Mr. Thomas Townshend moved that the sermon should be burned
by the common hangman; and another member moved that all future sermons
should be printed before the preachers received the thanks of the house.
These motions were not carried, but on the motion of the Honourable
Boyle Walsingham, it was voted that the thanks of the house to Dr.
Nowell should be erased. In the course of the debate severe strictures
were made upon the character of Charles I., and of that part of the
liturgy which describes him as a blessed martyr; and this seems to have
encouraged Mr. Montague soon afterwards to make a motion to repeal the
act for observing the 30th of January as a holiday, or a day of prayer
and fasting. Mr. Montague attacked the appointed form of prayer as
blasphemous, inasmuch as it contains a parallel between Charles I. and
our Saviour. But the motion was negatived by a majority of an 125 to 97.




TEST AND CORPORATION ACTS.

During the debates on the anti-subscription petition, many members on
both sides of the house had acknowledged, that though it was just and
reasonable to require subscription from persons entering the established
church, it was nevertheless hard to demand it from dissenters and
schoolmasters. Later in the season Sir Henry Houghton made a motion to
relieve these from subscription, and from the operation of penal laws:
in other words, for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. This
was strongly opposed by the high church party, who argued that such an
exemption would open a road to heresy and infidelity, encourage schism,
and tend to the overthrow of the church of England. The bill, however,
was carried in the house of commons by a large majority; but it
was thrown out in the lords, where it encountered the most violent
opposition of the bench of bishops and the ministry.




THE ROYAL MARRIAGE ACT.

In the year 1771, the Duke of Cumberland had contracted a private
marriage with Mrs. Horton, widow of Christopher Horton, Esq., a daughter
of Lord Irnham, and sister of Colonel Luttrell. It was also generally
believed, that his majesty's other brother, the Duke of Gloucester, had
married the widow of the Earl of Waldegrave. This gave offence to
their majesties, who prided themselves on the antiquity of the House
of Brunswick, on the family of Guelph, and the "antique blood" of Este,
from which they were equally descended. The blood of princes, they
thought, would be contaminated by any admixture with less precious
blood, and especially with that which could not substantiate its claim
to pure nobility. Such blood, they imagined, could not be found in all
England, but the families out of which the royal dukes had chosen
their wives were especially deficient in aristocratic pretensions; the
Luttrells being an undistinguished stock of Irish Protestants, and the
Countess Dowager Waldegrave, the natural daughter of Sir Edward Walpole.
Under these circumstances, the royal dukes were forbidden the court, and
his majesty sent a message to both houses of parliament, importing that
he thought it would be wise and expedient to render effectual, by some
new provision, the right of the sovereign to approve all marriages in
the royal family. In consequence of this message, a bill was brought
into the house of lords, by which it was declared that no member of the
royal family, being under twenty-five years of age, should marry without
the king's consent; and that after attaining that age, they were at
liberty, if the king refused his consent, to apply to the privy council,
by announcing the name of the person they wished to espouse, and if,
within a year, neither house of parliament should address the king
against it, then the marriage might be legally solemnised. The bill
further declared that all persons assisting in, or knowing of any
intention in any member of the royal family to marry without fulfilling
these ceremonies, and not disclosing it, incurred the penalties of a
premunire. The bill encountered a violent opposition in the house of
lords, but it was carried by a large majority, and then sent down to the
commons. In the commons it was opposed with still greater violence: it
being denounced by Burke and various speakers as cruel and oppressive,
and as being calculated to extend the dangerous power of ministers and
the limits of prerogative. The bill was, however, carried by a majority
of forty members. In the house of lords, nineteen peers entered a
long protest, declaring that if the bill passed into a law, it would,
nevertheless, be void. The excitement out of doors on the subject was
scarcely less violent than that within the house. It was said there,
that the bill should be entitled "an act for encouraging fornication
and adultery in the descendants of George, II." As for the Duke of
Gloucester, in the course of the spring, he openly avowed his marriage
with the widow of the late Earl of Waldegrave, and both brothers
abstained from going to court for ten years, and lived as strangers to
his majesty.




EAST INDIA AFFAIRS.

During the month of February, Lord North had called the attention of
the house to the affairs of the East India Company, which were every day
increasing in importance, and involving greater interests. In March, Mr.
Sullivan, deputy chairman of the company, moved for leave to bring in a
bill for the better regulation of its officers and concerns in India.
The bill was brought in and read a second time, but it was then laid
aside. In the course of the debates upon it--many charges and defences
passed between certain members of the house and others that had acquired
vast fortunes in India, and these accusations led to a secret committee
of inquiry, which forthwith commenced its task: a task that was not
completed during this session.




THE SESSION CLOSED.

This session closed on the 10th of June, when the king expressed his
satisfaction at the temper and moderation displayed by the members
during their sitting, and thanked them for the additional security which
they had provided for the honour and welfare of his family: thanks which
chiefly referred to the royal marriage act. The supplies voted for this
year were £7,860,250; and the national debt amounted to £127,500,000.
In the course of the session, it may be remarked, that the ancient and
barbarous custom of _peine forte et dure_, by which felons refusing
to plead, were stretched on their backs and pressed to death by heavy
weights, was abolished by an act, which declared that all who acted thus
contumaciously were to be adjudged guilty of the crimes laid to their
charge. At the close of the session Lord North seemed firmly seated in
office, and this conviction brought over many waverers, and time-servers
to his side. Nevertheless, he was soon after doomed to lose the support
of one of the best of his debaters, in the person of Charles Fox, who
was suddenly converted to Whig principles, and who consequently resigned
the admiralty.




FATE OF THE QUEEN OF DENMARK.

Carolina Matilda, the king's youngest sister, was married in her
sixteenth year to Christian VII., king of Denmark. This monarch was
addicted to licentious and degrading pleasures, and was a prince of
weak intellect, irritable and capricious, open to flattery, and easily
deceived by the crafty. Soon after his marriage he visited England,
France, and Germany, where he might, if he had possessed intellect,
have obtained such knowledge as would have made him a better man. He
returned, however, to his dominions the same character as when he left
it--vicious in his private life, and despotic in his rule. During his
travels he had been accompanied by a physician named Struensee, and
this man had acquired such an absolute ascendency over his mind, that
he obtained the supreme direction of affairs, with a title of nobility.
Struensee was endowed with considerable abilities, and was possessed of
a handsome person and engaging manners. He appears to have ingratiated
himself as much in the favour of the queen, as of the king, being
allowed to converse with her in very familiar terms. Apart from this,
however, there appears to have been no connection between the queen
and the favourite. But Matilda was watched by unfriendly eyes. Juliana
Maria, the queen-dowager, had from her first arrival taken a dislike
to her, and this aversion was increased when she saw that Matilda,
Struensee, and Brandt, a young nobleman, exercised complete authority
over the imbecile monarch, and directed the affairs of government at
their pleasure. The queen-dowager had numerous and powerful friends,
and these were likewise incensed at seeing Struensee at the head of the
government, and a strong party was formed against him; Juliana Maria
being at the head of the faction. The queen, also, was an object
of their malice from her supposed influence over the king, and her
encouragement of a man who thus lorded it over the old nobility. By
their intrigues they soon obtained an order from the king for her
removal from Copenhagen, and for the apprehension of Struensee and
Brandt: it being represented that they had plotted together and were
about to depose him. It was on the night of the 16th of January that the
faction put their conspiracy into execution. Struensee and Brandt were
suddenly seized, cast into prison, and after undergoing the greatest
indignities, were beheaded. At an early hour, also, the queen, who had
just retired to rest from a masked ball, received a written order to
remove instantly from Copenhagen. It was in vain that Matilda sought to
see her husband: she was dragged half naked into a carriage, and driven
to Cronborg castle, where she was immured with an English lady of her
suite, and her infant daughter, the princess Louisa, whom she was then
suckling. A project was set on foot to try her on a capital charge of
adultery, for the purpose of rendering her offspring illegitimate,
in order that Prince Frederic, son of the queen-dowager, might become
presumptive heir to the throne. A secret commission had, indeed, found
her guilty, and had pronounced a divorce, as a preparatory step to her
trial on a capital charge. Matilda, however, was the sister of one of
the greatest sovereigns of Europe, whose arm was to be dreaded, and the
Danish court was compelled to agree that she should quit the kingdom,
and live under the protection of his majesty of England. An English
squadron repaired to Cronborg to receive her, but she was not allowed
the consolation of bringing her infant daughter away with her. She was
conveyed to the vessel in an agony of despair, and she sat on the deck
with her eyes fixed on the walls of the castle where she had left her
only earthly solace, till the darkness of night concealed them from her
view. She was conveyed to the castle of Zell, in Hanover, where a cheap
little court was provided for her; the expenses being paid out of the
Hanoverian revenue, or out of the English privy purse. But her days of
light-heartedness were over: her heart was stricken with grief which
weighed her down. Portraits of her infant-son and daughter were
procured, and these she hung in her chamber, where she would frequently
talk to them, as though the images had been the originals--the shadows,
the substance. She did not, however, long survive her misfortunes. She
died at the age of twenty-four in the month of May 1775; less than three
years after her release from Cronborg. Yet after all the machinations of
the queen-dowager of Denmark, the son of the ill-fated queen afterwards
ascended the throne: being first associated with his father Christian
VII. as a sort of joint monarch. This, at least, proves that the king
himself was convinced of the innocence of his unhappy consort.




DEATH OF THE PRINCESS DOWAGER OF WALES.

Before her daughter was hurled from the throne of Denmark, her mother,
the Princess-dowager of Wales, was no more. She died suddenly on the
8th of February, in the fifty-fourth year of her age. Although she had
endured much popular clamour, the accusations of her enemies were
never satisfactorily substantiated. At all events she appears to have
possessed many good qualities. It tends greatly to her honour that she
gradually liquidated her husband's debts out of her own private income.




REVOLUTION IN SWEDEN.

In the beginning of this year a sudden revolution took place at
Stockholm. About half a century before, the nobility of Sweden had
limited the prerogative of the crown, and had erected themselves into an
absolute and oppressive oligarchy. Since then the country had been split
into two factions, which were called the Hats and Caps. Encouraged by
this division, as well as by the venality of the aristocratical senate,
Gustavus III. resolved to erect the old monarchical despotism. His plans
were matured with extreme secrecy and precaution. The mass of the army
was gained over to his cause; the affections of the brave people of
Dalecarlia, who had established the dynasty of Gustavus Vasa, were
secured; and the services of the citizens and burgher-guard of the
capital were enlisted. All were ready, and the king, having assembled
the troops within the walls of Stockholm, under the pretext of providing
against an insurrection, then threw off the mask. He harangued
the troops; telling them that he was about to save the nation from
degradation and misery, to put an end to the insolence and venality
of the nobles, and to restore the crown to its ancient splendour. The
soldiers applauded; the senators were made prisoners; the obnoxious
members of the secret committee of the states fled for their lives; the
army, colleges, and citizens took the oath of allegiance in the absolute
form; and the revolution was achieved. It was achieved gloriously; for
not one drop of blood was shed. The states of the kingdom underwent
no change--the council only was overturned, and the factions of the
aristocracy, led on by family interests and supported by foreign
influence, repressed.




PARTITION OF POLAND.

Sweden was more fortunate than Poland. At this time that country
presented a melancholy aspect. It was torn by civil wars, harassed by
religious discord, and wasted by the famine and the plague. But these
were only the accessories to still greater misfortunes. Crippled by
them, Poland had no power of resisting the spoilers who were now casting
their eyes upon her as their prey. These spoilers were the rulers of
Russia, Prussia, and Austria, whose armies entered the country under
false pretences, in order to appropriate the fairest portion to
themselves. And what made the condition of that unhappy country the
more deplorable was, that she had not a single friend who could lend
a willing ear to her call for aid. Turkey was at this period almost
prostrate at the feet of Russia; Sweden and Denmark were engaged in
revolutions of their own; Choiseul no longer directed the affairs of
France, or was able to advocate war; and England was embarrassed by
domestic commotions and the violent remonstrances of her rebellious
colonies. It was in vain that the King of Poland published refutations
to the claims of the co-partitioners, and in vain that they made an
appeal to all the states that had ever guaranteed the integrity of the
country. Before the spirit of Europe could be roused, violent hands were
laid upon the kingdom, and the work was done. The three powers, indeed,
proceeded to the dismemberment of Poland, with no other check or
impediment than such as arose from their own clashing interests, where
each one strove to obtain as much as they could. But the agreement was
made marvellously quick. The treaty of partition was signed between the
spoliators on the 2nd of August, in 1772, and it was followed in the
month of September by declarations, manifestoes, and specifications
of the territories which each of he powers was to possess Austria and
Prussia claimed their portions as their rights; Russia represented that
she was entitled to hers for expenses incurred in keeping Poland in
order. All the powers agreed that it was to put an end to anarchy, and
the frequent troubles of Poland, that induced them to take this step;
and they asserted that it was their intention of placing the ancient
constitution of Poland and the national liberties upon a sure
foundation. But their assertions ill agreed with their actions: all the
world knew their motives, and that it was self alone which made them
take such deep interest in the affairs of Poland. Nay, their very
manifestoes declared their real designs. Cities, towns, provinces,
rivers, and Mountains were to be taken from her, and placed under their
own fostering care. But then it was stated by them, this was only done
out of mercy to the nation. Having limited their kingdom thus, they
promised that they would discharge the Poles from all other debts, dues,
and demands, and for ever respect the integrity of the remnant of their
dominions. Thus preaching peace, though war was in their hearts, the
three powers invited the Poles of all ranks and orders to put up their
swords, and to banish the spirit of discord and delusion, in order that
a diet legally assembled might co-operate with their imperial majesties
and the King of Prussia in re-establishing tranquillity, and at the same
time ratify, by public acts, the titles, pretensions, and claims of the
three powers; and the partition agreed upon and effected. The diet
met, and although for a long time they opposed the dismemberment of the
country, yet they were overcome by large presents and larger promises.
The king was more firm, but he was menaced with deposition, his family
with ruin, and his capital with pillage, and he signed the fatal
instrument. The territory taken and divided among them was almost the
third part of Poland, and it comprised some of the richest provinces in
the kingdom. Thus to Russia was assigned the greater part of Lithuania,
with all the vast country between the livers Dwina and Dneister; to
Prussia the whole of Pomeralia, part of Great Poland, the bishopric of
Warmia, and the palatinates of Marienberg and Culm, with the complete
command of the lower part of the Vistula; and to Austria the country
along the left bank of the Vistula, from Vielicza down to the confluence
of the river Viroz, the whole of the country called Red Russia, the
palatinate of Belz, and a portion of the province of Volhynia. But even
this did not satisfy the spoliators. The treaty was scarcely signed when
Frederick extended the limits of his acquisitions in the neighbourhood
of Thorn, and to the east of the Devenza, while Austria seized on
Casimir, part of the palatinate of Lublin, and some lands lying on the
right bank of the Bog. Were not these three powers actuated by a
spirit of revenge and envy, as well as by a spirit of cupidity, in this
spoliation of Poland? Prussia was formerly in a state of vassalage to
that country; Russia once saw its capital and throne possessed by
Poles; and Austria was indebted to a sovereign of this country for
the preservation of its metropolis, if not for its very existence.
Stanislaus could scarcely be persuaded that this dismemberment was
intended to be perpetual; and when he was convinced of it, he addressed
prayers and protests to France, Spain, and England, and to all the
powers of Europe. These prayers and protests were useless; and yet it
was the wisdom of the powers to vindicate his cause. Professor Heeren
remarks:--"What were the consequences to Poland, in comparison with
those which threatened the political system of Europe? The potentates
themselves had begun its subversion. Politicians flatter ed themselves,
indeed, and so did Frederick, that the balance of power would be upheld
in the north by the nearly equal division; so fearfully had the error
taken root, that this balance is to be sought in the material power of
the state, and not in preserving the maxims of international law. What
dismemberment could be illegal if this should be regarded as lawful? and
what state could be more interested in maintaining the law of nations
than Prussia--a state which was established by conquests piecemeal, and
brought together by compacts and treaties of peace?" The dismemberment
of Poland was in truth an outrage committed upon the law of nations.
And this outrage was rendered tenfold more iniquitous by the new
constitution imposed upon Poland. This constitution excluded all
reform; perpetuated the elective monarchy with the _liberum veto_, the
exorbitant privileges of the nobles, and every other inherent defect;
and contracted the regal power, by appointing a co-operative council,
and depriving the sovereign of more than half his patronage.
The delegates who had been appointed to adjust the claims of the
partitioning powers, and to settle this new constitution, long resisted
these regulations, but their consent was finally extorted by threats,
and a general diet was assembled which formally confirmed their
acts. All things, therefore, were put into a proper train for future
spoliation; nor did a long time elapse before another opportunity
occurred of making inroads into the law of nations, and dissolving those
ties which connect governing powers among themselves. The ambassadors of
the three powers, indeed, continued to dictate to the council in which
the executive power was vested, as they had done to the diet, and the
king was only king in name. Some there were in the nation who dared to
resist the spoliators, but they were soon compelled to leave the country
with no fortune but their swords. Some of these afterwards fought under
George Washington, in America, when the English colonies raised the
standard of independence.




INVESTIGATION OF THE MIDDLESEX ELECTION.

During this year the dispute concerning the Middlesex election was
revived in a new mode of investigation. An action was brought by Mr.
Alderman Townshend against the collector of the land-tax for distraint
in default of payment, which was refused, on the plea that Middlesex
was not represented in parliament. Sergeant Glynn was retained for the
plaintiff, and Mr. Wallace was employed for the defendant--the former of
whom argued, that the county was not represented, and the latter of whom
contented himself with producing the act of parliament under which the
collector had acted. Lord Mansfield, in his charge to the jury, said,
that the sole question for them to consider was, whether at the present
time there was any legislative power in the county or not--if they
thought there was, they must find for the defendant. The jury thought
there was, and gave a verdict accordingly.




CHANGES IN THE MINISTRY.

During the month of August several changes occurred in the ministry
which had a tendency to strengthen the administration. Lord Hillsborough
resigned his post of secretary for the colonies and first lord of trade;
the Earl of Harcourt succeeded Lord Townshend in Ireland, the latter
being appointed master-general of the ordnance; General Conway obtained
the government of Jersey, and was succeeded as lieutenant-general of
the ordnance by Sir Jeffery Amherst; and Lord Stormont was sent as
ambassador to Paris. Moreover, later in the year, Charles Fox, whose
services were of value to the ministers, and who was in want of
ministerial pay, again changed sides, and was made a lord of the
treasury; while Mr. Jenkinson was created vice-treasurer of Ireland.




THE MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

Parliament reassembled on the 26th of November. The speech of his
majesty contained no topic of importance, and the addresses of both
houses did little more than echo the speech. It was expected that some
allusion would have been made in it to the partition of Poland, but not
a word was said about that flagrant act, and the members who spoke on
the addresses were equally silent upon the subject. Mr. Burke appears
to have felt deeply concerning it, but he reserved his eloquence for a
future period.




EAST INDIA AFFAIRS.

On the first clay of the session hostile language was uttered by the
retainers of government in the commons against the East India Company,
and Lord North moved for a secret committee of thirteen to examine
certain points, independently of the committee appointed last session,
which was carried. In the course of seven days a report was made by
this secret committee, recommending a bill to prevent the company from
sending out certain supervisors whom it had selected to settle matters
in India. It was at once seen that such a bill was only a preparatory
measure for the interference of government in the administration of
India, and therefore it excited the warmest opposition of many members.
Several of the directors, sitting in parliament, declared that the
report was hurried, irregular, and unconstitutional; and Burke, who was
a holder of East India stock, maintained that the proposed bill would
be a violation of the company's charter, and the law of the land. "If,"
said he, "we suffer this bill to pass we shall become the East India
Company; the treasury bench will be the buyers, and on this side we
shall be the sellers. The senate will become an auction-room, and the
speaker an auctioneer." The recommendation of the secret committee was,
notwithstanding, adopted, and the bill was introduced.

During the progress of this bill, the East India directors petitioned
against it, representing it as subversive of those rights and privileges
which they held under their charter, which were purchased by their
predecessors for a valuable consideration, and were confirmed to them
by acts of parliament. The petition also complained of an erroneous
calculation of expenses made by the committee, and stated that those
of the commission would be defrayed by savings meditated, to the great
benefit of the creditors. The petitioners, moreover, suggested that
injurious consequences would arise from their being prohibited to
transact their own affairs, in the want of means to fulfil their
engagements with the public; claimed the benefit of the law; appealed
to the faith of the nation for their chartered rights; and prayed to be
heard by counsel. This latter prayer was granted, and it appeared from
evidence that government had received nearly £2,000,000 annually from
the company, while the company had received little more than six per
cent, on their capital. The evidence given at the bar also served to
establish the great delinquency of the company's servants, and the need
that existed of their being subject to supervision. At the same time it
did not show that the company of itself was competent to redress these
abuses, and the question was, whether the incompetency of the company
warranted the interposition of parliament. Ministers acknowledged it to
be a stretch of authority, but they justified it on the plea of cogent
necessity--a necessity which took precedence of all other law. The
company's battle was fought in the commons by Burke, whose speech on
this occasion attracted great attention. After observing that parliament
took the state of the company's trade into consideration, in 1767 for
the maintenance of the public faith and public credit; for the
increase of its commerce and revenues, and for the security of
its stockholders--a bargain with which the eyes of the house were
dazzled--he thus descanted on the distress of the company and the
iniquity of the bill:--"The distress of the company," said he, "arises
from the improvidence of administration and the short-sightedness of
parliament, in not forming for it a system of government suitable to its
form and constitution. Or am I mistaken? Were the directors left without
any effectual control over delinquent servants? Was the collection
of the revenue left without any check? Was the tyranny of a double
government, like our double cabinet, tolerated with a view of seeing
the concerns of the company become an absolute chaos of disorder, and
of giving to government a handle for seizing the territorial revenue?
I know that this was the original scheme of administration, and I
violently suspect that it never has been relinquished. If the ministry
have no sinister view, if they do not mean by this unconstitutional
step to extend the influence of the crown, they will now speak out,
and explicitly declare their intentions: their silence may be justly
construed into a confession of such a design, and they will thenceforth
be considered as the determined enemies of the liberty of their country.
God knows, that the places and pensions, and expectancies, furnished
by the British establishment, are too powerful for the small remains of
patriotism and public spirit that remain in our island. What then
will become of us, if Bengal, if the Ganges, pour in a new tide of
corruption? Should the evil genius of British liberty so ordain it, I
fear this house will be so far from removing the corruption of the East,
that it will be corrupted by it: I dread more from the infection of that
place than I hope from the virtue of this house. Was it not the sudden
plunder of the East that gave the final blow to the freedom of
Borne? What reason have we to expect a better fate? I conjure you, by
everything which man ought to hold sacred--I conjure you by the spirits
of your forefathers, who so nobly fought and bled for the cause for
which I now plead--I conjure you by what includes everything, by your
country, not to yield to the temptations which the East, in the hands
of the crown, holds out: not to sink into the gulf of corruption, and
to drag after you your posterity and your country. I obtest heaven and
earth, that in all places, and at all times, I have hitherto shoved by
the gilded hand of corruption, and endeavoured to stem the torrent which
threatens to overwhelm this land. On the whole, the bill is dangerous
in itself, as being the first step towards the total invasion of the
company's territories in Bengal; and should we admit the motives which
lead to it to be good, yet such a step is dangerous as a precedent. I do
not, however, deny that the house has power to pass it, but you have
not the right. There is a perpetual confusion in gentlemen's ideas
from inattention to this material distinction, from which, properly
considered, it will appear that this bill is contrary to the eternal
laws of right and wrong--laws that ought to bind all men, and, above all
men, legislative assemblies." Notwithstanding Burke's eloquence, the
bill was carried in the commons by an overwhelming majority, and it was
also carried through the lords with little or no opposition. The two
houses then adjourned for the Christmas recess.




CHAPTER V.

{GEORGE III. 1773-1775}

     The Caribbs of St. Vincents..... Petition of Naval
     Officers..... Subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles.....
     Debates on  East  India   Measures..... The Session
     closed..... Proceedings in the City..... Continental
     Politics-Irish Affairs..... Disputes with the American
     Colonies..... Meeting of Parliament..... Early Measures in
     this Session..... The Bostonian Petition..... Parliamentary
     Proceedings against America..... Bill for the Administration
     of Canada..... Prorogation of Parliament..... Proceedings at
     Boston..... General Election..... Meeting of the New
     Parliament.

{A.D. 1773}




THE CARIBBS OF ST. VINCENTS.

Before the Christmas holidays, Alderman Trecothick mentioned in the
house that the island of St. Vincent had been made a scene of iniquity
and cruelty: our troops having committed against the Caribbs, a
defenceless and innocent people, the most shocking barbarities. Other
members spoke on the same subject, and said that the troops had been
barbarously made to suffer even more evils than those they inflicted on
the Indians. Papers were produced which seemed to prove that proper care
had been taken of the troops, but on the re-assembling of parliament,
a further inquiry was set on foot upon the subject. It appears that the
Caribbs, who were in possession of the most fertile parts of the island,
had not been mentioned when it was ceded to Great Britain; and that
the British settlers wished them to exchange their districts for tracts
which were said to be more appropriate to their occupations of hunting
and fishing. This proposal was received by the Caribbs with indignation.
They replied that they had held their lands independent of the King of
France, and would still hold them independent of the King of England.
The planters then submitted a plan to government for transporting this
brave people to Africa, which plan met with approbation. The Caribbs,
however, were passionately attached to their native plains, and hence
determined on resistance. Two regiments were then dispatched from North
America, to join others in the island, for the purpose of reducing them
to subjection. Several skirmishes took place, but the rainy season and
sickness, added to the difficulties of the country, prevented our troops
from completing their subjugation. Such was the state of the island
when Parliament met, and the account of these hostilities, in which
detestable cruelties had been committed on both sides, was made the
subject of animadversion. Motions concerning the cause of the war and
the state of our troops were made by the opposition, but ministers
negatived them with their usual majorities; and before the discussions
were over, intelligence arrived, that the Caribbs had acknowledged
themselves subject to the British crown, retaining their ancient customs
in their intercourse with each other, and ceding certain districts to
the British settlers. This put an end to all further debates on the
question.




PETITION OF NAVAL OFFICERS.

On the 9th of February, a petition was presented by Lord Howe, from the
captains of the navy, praying for a trifling increase of their half-pay.
This was opposed by Lord North, who stated that the present state of
the public finances put it out of his power to be liberal, and that by
granting this petition a door would be open to similar claims. It was,
however, so warmly defended by Lord Howe, and other members--some of
whom ridiculed the idea that the finances of this great and opulent
country were in so wretched a state as not to be able to afford the
pittance of £6000 a year, for the relief of men to whom her power
and glory were so much indebted--that the prayer of the petition was
granted. A motion was carried by which the half-pay of naval officers
was increased by the addition of two shillings a day.




SUBSCRIPTION TO THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES.

This subject again occupied the attention of parliament in this session.
A bill, more generally conceived than the last, was brought into the
commons for the relief of Protestant Dissenters. Upon this occasion the
Wesleyan methodists, now a numerous and powerful body, made common cause
with the church, and denounced any change or innovation in the Act of
Toleration, as dangerous. Petitions were sent up to parliament by them
against the relief prayed for by the dissenting body, although they
were, in point of fact, themselves dissenters. Burke supported the bill,
and his eloquence and powerful reasoning had a great effect upon the
house. But his exertions this time were scarcely needed, for Lord North
himself, and other ministers gave the bill their warmest support, and
it passed the commons by large majorities. In the house of lords, it was
strongly opposed, and rejected by a majority of 102 against 29. In the
debate upon it, the bill was defended by the Earl of Chatham, who in his
speech did not even spare the right reverend bench. In the debate, Dr.
Drummond, Archbishop of York, had called the dissenting ministers
"men of close ambition." In reply to this, Chatham observed:--"Whoever
brought such a charge against them defamed them. The dissenting
ministers are represented as men of close ambition. They are so in some
respects. Their ambition is to keep close to the college of fishermen,
not of cardinals; and to the doctrine of the inspired apostles, not
to the decrees of interested and aspiring bishops. They contend for a
spiritual creed and a spiritual worship: we have a Calvinistic creed,
a Popish liturgy, and an Arminian clergy." At a later period of the
session a motion was made in the commons by Sir William Meredith, for
abolishing the subscription to the thirty-nine articles at the time of
matriculation, but this was rejected.




DEBATES ON EAST INDIA MEASURES.

During the recess, the East India directors reduced their dividend to
six per cent. This palliative, however, was of no avail, and they were
obliged to pass a vote for applying to government for the loan of one
million and a half to relieve them from their pecuniary difficulties.
A petition to this effect was presented to parliament, and Lord North,
after exculpating government from various insinuations regarding the
annual payment of the company, moved a series of resolutions, tending to
establish the grant of a loan as a matter of necessary policy, but not
as a claim of right or justice. He proposed that £1,400,000 should be
advanced, and that their dividends should be restricted to six per cent,
till the whole was repaid, and afterwards to seven per cent, until their
bond debt was reduced to £1,500,000. This passed without a division.
At the same time, Lord North suggested some regulations as proper to
prevent the recurrence of similar embarrassments, and to reform all
abuses in the government of India. On a future day he moved that the
company should be permitted to export tea to America free of all duty,
which was accepted by the company as a great boon: they having at that
time seventeen millions of pounds of tea in their warehouses in England.
Finally, he proposed his grand plan for the regulation of their affairs,
as well in India as in Europe. This plan provided that six directors
should be elected annually, none holding their seats more than four
years; that the stock for the qualification of an elector should be
raised from five hundred to one thousand pounds, and possessed twelve
months previous to an election; and that in lieu of the mayor's court
at Calcutta, a new tribunal should be established, consisting of a chief
justice and three puisne judges appointed by the crown, a superiority
being also given to Bengal over all the other presidencies. These latter
resolutions occasioned warm debates, and met with vehement opposition,
but they were all eventually carried, and a bill framed on them passed
through both houses with overwhelming majorities. From this time the
affairs of India are generally regarded as being lodged securely in the
hands of government.




THE SESSION CLOSED.

During this session, ministers seem to have carried their motions and
plans with great facility. The opposition for the most part was tame
and spiritless, whence Burke calls it,--"a tedious session." On one
occasion, however, the harmony which prevailed in the cabinet, and
between the two houses, was momentarily interrupted. The lords having
taken upon themselves to make some amendments in a money bill, sent it
again down to the commons, and they resenting this as an infringement of
their rights, tossed it over the table, and kicked it out of the house
as though it had been a foot-ball. This matter, however, was soon
forgotten; and when his majesty put an end to the session, he expressed
his satisfaction at the harmony which had subsisted during their
deliberations, as well as at the zeal, assiduity, and perseverance which
had been displayed. In his speech he regretted the continuance of the
war between the Porte and Russia; declared he had a close friendship
both with the czarina and sultan, but no engagements with either;
applauded the relief and support given to the East India Company; and
stated that the national debt had been somewhat reduced. But not one
word was said about the fate of Poland.




PROCEEDINGS IN THE CITY.

During the month of May the Duke of Gloucester's wife was delivered of
a daughter, and on this occasion, Wilkes moved at a court of
common-council, that an humble address of congratulation should be
presented to his majesty on the safe delivery, and the birth of a
princess. This motion was supported by Sir Watkin Lewes, but other
aldermen opposed it, not only on the ground that the king had never
acknowledged the lady for his sister, but because it was unusual for the
city to address the king, except for the issue of his immediate heir.
Earlier in the year, indeed, the queen had been delivered of another
son, Augustus Frederic, the late duke of Sussex, and no mention had then
been made of an address, and therefore to have presented one on this
occasion, would have been invidious, if not indelicate. This motion,
therefore, proved abortive. Wilkes, however, with his friend Oliver,
succeeded in obtaining from the court of alderman a resolution "that a
frequent appeal to the people by short parliaments was their undoubted
right, as well as the only means of obtaining a real representation;"
and the livery not only passed a similar resolution, but proposed it
as a test for the city candidates at a future election. Another strong
petition and remonstrance on the old grievances, the Middlesex election,
the imprisonment of the lord mayor, etc., and praying for a dissolution
of parliament, and a change of ministers, was got up in the city and
presented to the king, by the lord mayor, Sergeant Glynn, Alderman
Bull, and others of the city officers, on the 26th of March. Before the
citizens were introduced to his majesty, they were given to understand
that they would not be allowed the honour of kissing his hand, and when
it was presented, the king sternly told them, that their petition was so
void of foundation, and conceived in such disrespectful terms, that he
felt convinced the petitioners did not seriously imagine that its prayer
could be complied with.




CONTINENTAL POLITICS.

While the cabinets of Petersburg, Vienna, and Berlin were occupied in
dismembering Poland, and aggrandizing their dominions at the expense
of that ill-fated country, France was making preparations to send a
powerful fleet into the Baltic. This was evidently the forerunner of
some ulterior design, although D'Aigullon, the prime minister of France,
endeavoured to keep those designs from the public view. He was, however,
unable to elude the vigilance, or to baffle the penetration of the
British cabinet. After expatiating on the ambition of Russia, as well
as the ties of honour and interest by which France was bound to
assist Sweden, D'Aigullon was informed by Lord Stormont, the British
ambassador, that, if France sent her ships into the Baltic, they would
be followed by a British fleet. The presence of two fleets, he said,
would have no more effect than a neutrality, and that, however the
British cabinet might desire peace between England and France, it was
impossible to foresee the consequences that might arise from accidental
collision. This had some effect, for the squadron at Brest was
countermanded; but soon after the French minister, in hopes of eluding
observation, gave orders for the equipment of an armament at Toulon,
under pretence of exercising the sailors of France in naval tactics.
Discovering this, the British cabinet made vigorous demonstrations of
resistance. The English ambassador was directed to declare that the
objections made against a fleet of France occupying the Baltic, applied
equally to the Mediterranean, and a memorial was presented to the French
minister, accompanied by a demand that it should be laid before the
king, and council. This was sufficient: the armament was countermanded
and the sailors discharged.




IRISH AFFAIRS.

The spirit of disaffection was still rife in Ireland. The Earl of
Harcourt having been appointed to the government, was at first received
with great joy, but he soon found that his popularity was not sufficient
to ensure obedience to the dictates of the British cabinet, or to
repress the overflowings of human passion. The White Boys, and the
Hearts of Steel, still exhibited a turbulent spirit, which nothing could
allay or soothe. Nor was it among the populace alone that ill-feeling
was displayed. When the Irish parliament met, the spirit of liberty
was discerned in that assembly likewise. The speaker of the house of
commons, in a speech to his excellency before the lords, expressed the
inability of the country to endure any additional taxation, by reason
of those commercial restrictions, which, he said, had fettered all its
energies. The claim of commercial freedom was, indeed, warmly repeated
in the official addresses of the speaker during the continuance of the
government of this viceroy, and a spirit of jealousy also appeared in
a refusal to admit foreign mercenaries, when the British troops were
withdrawn to America, although the English government offered to defray
all the expenses. A relaxation of the penal code, however, by which
the condition of the Roman Catholics was improved, had the effect
of lowering the angry feelings of the nation, and on the whole the
government of the Earl of Harcourt is looked upon as having produced
beneficial results to the country. Dr. Miller says, "The government of
Lord Townshend had termininated the oligarchical administration: that of
Lord Harcourt unfolded those germs of political energy, which were soon
to expand themselves into national prosperity and importance."




DISPUTES WITH THE AMERICAN COLONIES.

The storm which had long been gathering in the horizon, was now
gathering thick over our American colonies, and threatened ere long
to pour out its fury throughout the whole length and breadth of the
conn-try. It was now increased by the attempt of Lord North at taking
the payment of the colonial judges and governors out of the hands of the
houses of assembly. This the Americans declared was an attempt of the
British government to impose its own arbitrary instruments upon them; to
destroy the very essence of their charters and liberties, by making the
judges and governors wholly independent of the people, and dependent on
the crown. Resistance was therefore resolved upon. A series of protests
were issued from the assembly of Boston, and the example was followed
by all the assemblies throughout the colonies. For the purpose of
making the opposition more effectual, a corresponding committee was
established, with branches and ramifications, which reached nearly to
every town and village throughout the colonies, and the effect of this
great lever of the revolution was soon seen in a general combination
of measures, a unanimity of language, and a general persecution of all
those who were in favour of the British government. The movement, which
had hitherto been slow in its progress, now took rapid strides, the
celerity of which nothing could impede. The assembly of Boston, always
in the van, next got up a manifesto, which treated the authority of
the British parliament with contempt. This manifesto declared that the
British parliament had no right to legislate for the colonies in any
matter whatever; denounced the declaratory act recommended by Chatham,
and passed in 1768, as an unjust assumption of a legislative power,
without the consent of the colonists; and charged the British ministry
with a design to complete a system of slavery begun in the house of
commons. Copies of this manifesto were dispersed throughout the province
of Massachusets, urging the people not to dose any longer, or to sit
supinely, whilst the hand of oppression was plucking the choicest fruits
from the tree of liberty. The people, however, seem to have considered
it as too violent, for it was not responded to as the Bostonians
expected it would have been, and they were compelled somewhat to retrace
their steps, They apologized to the British government for having
gone thus far, throwing the whole blame on their new governor, Mr.
Hutchinson, who, they said, had provoked them to act thus by his
intemperate conduct. At the same time they stated that they were
faithful subjects of his majesty, and that they conceived themselves
happy in their connexion with Great Britain! At this critical moment,
however, when the minds of the people of New England wavered, and
when the southern and middle countries were comparatively peaceable,
communications were received from England, which set the whole country
in commotion.

During the course of the disputes, certain letters had been written by
Mr. Hutchinson, Mr. Oliver, lieutenant-governor., and others, to the
home government, reflecting strongly on the character of the colonial
opposition, and recommending the adoption of coercive measures, and a
material change in the system of the government of the colonies. These
letters were strictly confidential, but they were purloined from
the office in which they were deposited by some person favourable to
American interests, and placed in the hands of Dr. Franklin, agent for
the province of Massachusets. Franklin thought proper to transmit these
letters to a friend in that province, with a strict injunction against
their being printed, as he had given a promise to the friend who had
furnished him with them to that effect. Their contents, however,
soon became known, and the legislative assembly obliged Franklin's
correspondent to produce them, and having resolved that the tendency of
them was to overthrow the constitution and to introduce arbitrary power
into the province, the house of assembly drew up a petition to the
king, charging the governor with betraying his trust, and slandering the
people under his government; declaring him an enemy to the colony; and
praying for the instant dismissal of both Hutchinson and Oliver, the
governor and deputy-governor of the province. Copies of this petition,
and also of the letters which gave rise to it, were soon scattered over
all the continent, from the Lawrence to the Mississippi, and from the
shores of the Atlantic to the regions of the far west; and their effects
soon became manifest. Long before this, in 1772, the people of Rhode
Island had insulted the British flag by boarding, capturing, and burning
a British ship of war, and though government had offered a large
reward with pardon, if claimed by an accomplice, for the discovery and
apprehension of any persons engaged in the outrage, all the offenders
had escaped with impunity. Opposition to the British government, now
that the letters transmitted by Franklin had inflamed the public mind,
grew more bold. In the midst of the discontent two ships arrived at
Boston with the cargoes of tea which Lord North had allowed the East
India Company to export duty free. Anterior to their arrival, meetings
had been held and mobs raised, to terrify the consignees into an
engagement not to receive the tea, and when they arrived, another
meeting of the inhabitants of Boston and all the neighbouring towns was
called to prevent its being landed. At this meeting a resolution was
passed, asserting among other things that the tea ships were sent for
the purpose of enslaving and poisoning all free-born Americans, and that
the tea which came charged with a duty to be paid in America should not
be landed, but be sent back in the same bottoms. The consignees offered
to store the teas till they could receive further instructions; but
this moderate offer was rejected with disdain, and a strong body of
Bostonians armed with muskets, rifles, swords, and cutlasses, were sent
down to Griffin's wharf to watch the ships, in order to prevent a single
leaf from being put on shore. This was on the 30th of November, and
on the 14th of December, two other ships freighted by the East India
Company having arrived, another crowded meeting was held at the Old
South Meeting-house, whence orders were sent to the captains of the
tea vessels to return without delay. The answer received was, that the
collector could not give any clearance until the vessels had discharged
their cargoes, and, indeed, if the captains had been disposed to return,
they could not have complied with the demand, as the governor had
ordered that they should not be allowed to pass the forts without a
permit signed by himself, and Admiral Montague had sent two ships of war
to guard all the passages out of the harbour. The meeting waited for the
reply, and when it arrived, a question was put whether those assembled
would abide by their former resolutions respecting the tea, which was
carried unanimously. A message was then sent to desire the governor
to give the ships a permit to depart, and he replied that he could not
consistently with his duty to the king give any pass unless the vessels
were properly qualified from the custom-house. The meeting was about
to consider this reply, when a a person disguised like an Indian, began
uttering the war-whoop in tones so natural that he might have been taken
for a real savage. His yell was succeeded by the cry of "A mob, a mob!"
and some, more cautious than the rest, moved that the meeting should be
dissolved. This was done, and many of the people ran at once from the
old meeting-house to Griffin's wharf, where they were met by a number
of men disguised as Mohawk Indians, and by a still greater number of
skippers, sailors, boatmen, and men of colour. In overwhelming force
these boarded the ships, split open the tea-chests, and having emptied
their contents into the sea, returned, without being discovered, to
their homes. The moment of excitement was followed by trembling anxiety.
The Bostonians now began to tremble for their charter, their property,
and their trade; and, as before, some attempted to throw all the blame
upon the conduct of their governor. As for the governor himself, he
represented to the ministry at home, that it was out of his power to
prevent the destruction of the tea, without yielding to unreasonable
demands, and thereby rendering the authority of government null and
void. It is to be regretted that the assembly took part with the mob,
and thereby accelerated the fearful consummation of their violent
proceedings. As if animated by the popular proceedings they renewed
their personal contests with the governor, and even proceeded so far as
to vote articles of impeachment against the chief justice, Peter
Oliver, for a design of introducing a partial, arbitrary, and corrupt
administration of the laws, he having declined to receive the annual
grant of the assembly, and accepted a stipend from his majesty. The
message conveying this resolution was indignantly rejected by the
governor, who disclaimed all power of determining on such cases, and as
the house persevered in attempting to force it on him under a different
form, he dissolved the assembly.

{A.D. 1774}




MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

Parliament met on the 13th of January. At that time little was known of
the disturbances in America, and the king's speech represented the state
of foreign affairs to be in such a quiescent state, that the legislature
would have ample time to attend to the improvement of our domestic
concerns, and to the prosecution of measures immediately connected with
the revenue and commerce of the kingdom. The deteriorated state of the
gold coin was especially mentioned as an object requiring attention. The
addresses were voted in both houses with little or no debate.




EARLY MEASURES IN THIS SESSION.

In the early part of this session public attention was excited by
the proceedings of the house of commons, respecting a libel on their
speaker, which had been published in the Public Advertiser. The house
issued an order for Woodfall the printer to attend at the bar, which was
obeyed without hesitation, and being interrogated as to the author, he
gave the name of the Rev. John Home. Woodfall was then ordered into the
custody of the sergeant-at-arms, and Home was then brought before the
house. Home inquired whether Woodfall's declaration was to be taken
as evidence, or as the charge against him, and being told that it
constituted the charge, he pleaded "Not guilty," as in an ordinary
court. The house was embarrassed; Wood-fall was again called in and
confronted with Home, but as he was implicated in the guilt of the
publication, his evidence was not sufficient to warrant conviction.
Three of Woodfall's printers were next brought before the house; but
they failed in proving the accusation, and Home was set at liberty.

The first parliamentary struggle in this session, took place on the
ministerial motion for 20,000 seamen, as in the preceding year. The
opposition argued that it was absurd to talk of peace and yet keep up
such an establishment, and they called upon ministers to state how they
had disposed of the supplies voted in the last meeting of parliament for
the navy. This motion, however, was carried without a division. On the
part of the opposition two motions were made and negatived: the
first being that of Alderman Sawbridge for shortening the duration of
parliament, and the second, that of Sir George Saville, concerning the
Middlesex election, and the infringement of the rights of electors.
Ministers, however, were not so successful in their opposition to a
motion made by Sir Edward Stanley, to bring in a bill for rendering
Grenville's Controverted Election Act perpetual. Experience seems to
have proved its utility, and though Lord North appeared at the head of
the opposition, many of his friends forsook him on this occasion, and
the bill was passed by a large majority, and received the royal assent
before the end of the session. From this period disputed elections
have been tried with the same scrupulousness and solemnity as any other
titles: while previous to it, as Dr. Johnson observed, "the nation
was insulted with a mock election, and the parliament was filled with
spurious representatives."




THE BOSTONIAN PETITION.

It has been seen that the assembly of Boston had voted a petition to
the king for the removal of their governor and deputy governor. This
petition, together with attested copies of the letters, were transmitted
to Dr. Franklin, the agent for the colony, or house of representatives
of Massachusets. These were delivered by Franklin to Lord Dartmouth, who
presented them to the king, and his majesty signified his pleasure that
they should be laid before the privy council.

In the mean time the affair had been the cause of bloodshed. Mr.
Whately, secretary to the treasury, to whom the letters had been
originally addressed, had recently died, and a sharp correspondence
took place between his brother, a banker in Lombard-street, and Mr.
John Temple, lieutenant-governor of New Hampshire: the former wishing
to avoid the charge of giving up the documents, and the latter that
of purloining them. The dispute ran so high that a duel was the
consequence, in which Mr. Whately was dangerously wounded. The event
caused great excitement, and Dr. Franklin wrote and published a letter
in the Public Advertiser, in which he declared that neither Mr. Whately
nor Mr. Temple had any thing to do with the letters, and that both of
them were totally ignorant of the transaction. His words are:--"I think
it incumbent on me to declare, for the prevention of further mischief,
that I alone am the person who obtained and transmitted to Boston the
letters in question. Mr. Whately could not communicate them, because
they were never in his possession; and for the same reason, they could
not have been taken from him by Mr. Temple. They were not of the nature
of private letters between friends; they were written by public officers
to persons in public stations, on public affairs, and intended to
procure public measures; they were, therefore, handed to other public
persons, who might be influenced by them to produce those measures;
their tendency was to incense the mother country against her colonies,
and by the steps recommended to widen the breach, which they effected.
The chief caution expressed with regard to privacy was, to keep their
contents from the colony agents, who, the writers apprehended, might
return them, or copies of them, to America. That apprehension was, it
seems, well founded; for the first agent who laid his hands on them
thought it his duty to transmit them to his constituents."

It was on the 29th of January that the subject of the Bostonian petition
was brought before the privy council. On that day, Franklin, with
Mr. Dunning as council, attended to support the petition, and Mr.
Wedderburne, the solicitor-general, attended as counsel for the
governor. The counsel for the Assembly of Boston was first heard, and he
endeavoured to substantiate their complaints, by exhibiting the letters
which had been published, and drawing an inference from them, that the
writers were unworthy of confidence, either from the government or the
province of Massachusets. He called for the instant dismissal of an
officer so hostile to the rights and liberties of his countrymen. He
argued that the man who declared that "there must be an abridgment of
English liberty in the colonies," was justly charged with making wicked
and injurious representations, designed to influence the ministry and
the nation, and to excite jealousies in the breast of the king against
his faithful subjects.

Mr. Dunning was replied to by Mr. Wedderburne, whose naturally sharp
tongue was on this occasion rendered still sharper by his friendship for
Mr. Whately who was lying between life and death. After reviewing the
arguments of the opposite counsel, Wedderburne directed himself to an
inculpation of the assembly and people of Massachusets; in the course of
which he attacked Dr. Franklin in a strain of bitter invective, on the
ground of having violated private confidence in the disclosure of the
letters. He observed, "These could not have come to Dr. Franklin by fair
means; the writers did not give them to him, nor yet did the deceased
correspondent, who from our intimacy, would otherwise have told me of
it. Nothing then will acquit Dr. Franklin of the charge of obtaining
them by fraudulent or corrupt means, for the most malignant of purposes,
unless he stole them from the person who stole them.... I hope, my
lords, you will mark and brand the man for the honour of this country,
of Europe, and of mankind. Private correspondence has hitherto been held
sacred in times of the greatest party rage, not only in politics, but
religion;--he has forfeited all the respect of societies and of men.
Into what companies will he hereafter go with an unembarrassed face, or
the honest intrepidity of virtue? Men will watch him with a jealous eye;
they will hide their papers from him, and lock up their escrutoires; he
will henceforth esteem it a libel to be called a man of letters; _homo
trium literarum_! He not only took away the letters from one brother,
but kept himself concealed till he nearly occasioned the murder of the
other. It is impossible to read his account, expressive of the coolest
and most deliberate malice, without horror." Wedderburne concluded with
this indignant burst of feeling:--"Amidst tranquil events, here is a
man who, with the utmost insensibility of remorse, stands up and avows
himself the author of all. I can compare him only to Zanga, in Dr.
Young''s Revenge:--

'Know, then, 'twas I. I forged the letter--I disposed the picture--I
hated--I despised--and I destroy'

I ask, my lords, whether the revengeful temper attributed to the
bloody African, is not surpassed by the coolness and apathy of the wily
American?"

It is said that during this celebrated invective the members of the
council laughed with exultation; none preserving a decent gravity,
except Lord North. On the other hand, Franklin is said to have heard it
all with composure, standing erect in one corner of the room, and not
suffering the slightest alteration of his countenance to be visible. The
words of Wedderburne, however, coupled with the derisive and exulting
laugh of the council, sank deep into the soul of Franklin. He appeared
in a full dress of spotted Manchester velvet, and it is said that, when
he returned to his lodgings he took off this dress, and vowed he would
never wear it again until he should sign the degradation of England and
the independence of America. After proceedings against him tended to
perpetuate that feeling. Hitherto he had been allowed to retain the
profitable place of post-master general for America, but three days
after the meeting of the council, he was dismissed by letter from that
office. The report of the council also, on the subject of the petition,
tended to confirm him in feelings of hostility toward the British
government. It stated "that the petition was founded on resolutions
which were formed on false and erroneous allegations: that it was
groundless, vexatious, scandalous, and calculated only for the seditious
purpose of keeping up a spirit of clamour and discontent in the
province: that nothing had appeared to impeach in any degree the honour,
integrity, and conduct of the governor or deputy-governor; and that
their lordships were humbly of opinion that the said petition ought to
be dismissed." Moreover, the sympathy which Franklin met with from
some of the leading members of the opposition, tended still further
to embitter the passions which had been roused in the mind of
the philosopher. That boastful patriot himself--the great Earl of
Chatham--hastened to express his sympathy with Franklin, and his
detestation of the treatment he had received from Wedderburne and the
government. It is due to the character of Chatham, however, to say that
had he been aware of Franklin's extreme intentions, he would, instead of
affording him his sympathy, have joined with Wedderburne in holding him
up to public contempt. That great orator, indeed, at all times, whether
in office or out of office, whether in favour of the measures of
government or banding against them, invariably held that the dependence
of the colonies was absolutely and vitally essential, not merely to the
honour and greatness and wealth of the mother country, but also to her
safety and existence. He had, in truth, asserted that the moment America
should be free, wholly independent of, and separated from Great Britain,
the sun of England would set for ever. It cannot be, therefore, supposed
for one moment, that he would willingly and knowingly have aided in
lopping this fair and fruitful branch from the parent tree. In point of
fact, Franklin endeavoured, to conceal his extreme views from the public
eye; for while in private life, and to bosom friends, he stated his
unalterable resolution of procuring the independence of America, he was
openly professing to his best advocates, the leaders of the opposition
in both houses of parliament, that the wish dearest to his heart--in
common with the hearts of all honest Americans--was a continuance of the
connexion with his dear old mother country!

{GEORGE III. 1773-1775}




PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST AMERICA.

At length intelligence arrived in England concerning the alarming
transactions in America. The news excited strong national resentment, so
that when the subject was brought before parliament, ministers had not
to encounter any formidable opposition to the measures they proposed
in order to meet the case. It was on the 7th of March that Lord North
introduced this subject to the house. On that day he delivered a
message to the members from the king, in which a design was intimated of
correcting and preventing such disorders, and submitted a vast mass of
documents from the governor of Boston, and other persons in authority
for their inspection. In reply to this message, a motion was made for
an address to the throne, to return thanks for it, and the gracious
communication of the papers, with an assurance that they would not fail
to exert every means in their power of effectually providing for objects
so important to the general welfare as maintaining the due execution
of the laws, and securing the just dependence of the colonies upon the
crown and parliament of Great Britain. Some few opposed this address,
although they admitted that the conduct of the Bostonians and Rhode
Islanders was exasperating in the highest degree; but the motion was
nevertheless carried without a division. Following up this address, on
the 14th of March, Lord North moved for leave to bring in a bill "for
the immediate removal of all officers concerned in the collection and
management of his majesty's duties and customs from the town of Boston;
and to discontinue the landing and discharging, lading and shipping, of
goods, wares, and merchandize at the said town of Boston, or within the
harbour thereof." This bill encountered scarcely more opposition than
the address had met with. On its first introduction it was received with
general applause, and it was pushed on with such vigour that it passed
through both houses within fourteen days, and on the 31st of March it
received the royal assent: the trade of Boston was annihilated.

While the Boston Port Bill was before the lords, North, in a committee
of the whole house, brought in a bill "for better regulating the
government of Massachusets Bay." The object of this bill was to alter
the constitution of that province as it stood upon the charter of
William III.; to do away with the popular elections, which decided
everything in that colony; to take the executive power out of the hands
of the democratic party; and to vest the nomination of the members of
the council, of the judges, and of magistrates, including sheriffs, in
the crown, and in the king's governor. In support of this bill, Lord
North said, that the province of Massachusets Bay had been turbulent
beyond all bearing, and had set an ill example to all the colonies; that
an executive power was required in that province, inasmuch as the force
of the civil power consisted solely in the _posse comitatus_: that is,
in the very people by whom the tumults were excited. He asked if the
democratic party exhibits a contempt for the laws, how any governor
was to enforce them, if he had not the power either of appointing or
removing magistrates? He could now, he said, give no order without the
assent of seven members of the popularly elected council; and he urged
that it was in vain laws and regulations were made in England, when
there were none found to execute them in America. In conclusion, he
expressed a hope that the present bill would create an executive power,
and give strength and spirit to the civil magistracy; and professed
himself open to discussion and a change of opinion, if his views were
proved to be erroneous.

This bill encountered more opposition than that of the Boston Port Bill,
and it was considerably altered in committee. As it stood when presented
anew, after the Easter recess, the council of Massachusets Bay was
placed on the same footing as the councils of other colonies: the
nomination was vested in the crown., and they were to have no negative
voice, or power to appoint, as hitherto, the judicial officers of the
province. Moreover, the mode of choosing juries was altered, and the
continual assemblies and town-meetings held in Boston were not to be
convened without the consent of the governor, unless for the annual
election of certain officers. The bill, as altered, however, encountered
much opposition. In support of it Mr. Welbore Ellis asserted that it was
the duty of the legislature to alter or take away charters, if they were
abused, or found deficient; and he was supported in these views by Mr.
Charles Jenkinson and Mr. Dyson, who argued that in this case the
house proceeded, not in its judicial, but in its legislative capacity,
regulating and supplying deficiencies in charters granted by the crown.
The opposition took a different view of the measure, denouncing it as
arbitrary and likely to lead to permanent evils. Thus General Conway
could see nothing but increased exasperation, misfortune, and ruin from
the adoption of such measures; and he, with other members, asked for
more time, and demanded that the province should be heard before an act
was passed which would deprive its people of their chartered rights. The
opposition, also, argued, that the Bostonians and their neighbours had
flourished for nearly fourscore years under their democratic charter,
and that, therefore, they ought not now to be deprived of it. Some even
asked what crime and errors the New Englanders had really been guilty
of, as though they had never heard of the outrages which had been
committed. In reply to this latter question, Lord North said, with more
than his usual warmth, "I will tell you what the Americans have done:
they have tarred and feathered the officers and subjects of Great
Britain; they have plundered our merchants, burnt our ships, denied all
obedience to our laws and authority! Our conduct has been clement and
forbearing, but now it is incumbent to take a different course. Whatever
may be the consequence, we must risk something, or all is over." To
adopt such a measure as this, however, was clearly risking too much.
Governor Pownall, who said that he spoke for the last time on the
subject, warned ministers of the more than probable consequences of it,
in these terms:--"The measure which you are pursuing will be resisted,
not by force or the effect of arms, but by a regular united system. I
told this house, four years ago, that the people of America would resist
the tax then permitted to remain on them--that they would not oppose
power to power, But would become implacable. Have they not been so from
that time to this very hour? I tell you again, that they will resist
the measures now pursued in a more vigorous way. Committees of
correspondence in the different provinces are in constant communication:
they do not trust in the conveyance of the post-office; they have set up
a constitutional courier, which will quickly grow up to the superseding
of your post-office. As soon as intelligence of these affairs reaches
them, they will judge it necessary to communicate with each other: it
will be found inconvenient and ineffectual to do so by letters. They
must confer; they will hold a conference; and to what these committees,
thus met in congress, will grow up, I will not say. Should recourse be
had to arms, you will hear of other officers than those appointed by
your governor Then, as in the late civil wars of this country, it
will be of little consequence to dispute who were the aggressors." Sir
Richard Sutton spoke in a similar strain; asserting, that though it
was not confessed, the Americans were aiming at total independence,
and would never again submit quietly to English laws and regulations of
trade.

This debate took place on the second reading of the bill. The third
reading occurred on the 2nd of May, when Sir William Meredith insisted
that the parliament of Great Britain had an indisputable right to
lay duties upon the Americans, and to tax them externally. Mr. Thomas
Townshend, also, though equally warm as Sir William Meredith in
opposition to ministers on general points, gave this measure his decided
support. Though averse to meddling with charters, he said, the evils of
town-meetings justified interference, and that the institution of juries
was properly altered according to the forms of the mother country.
Thurlow, the attorney-general, and Lord North spoke in favour of the
bill, likewise, on this occasion, the latter expressing a hope that good
consequences might arise from its adoption. It was opposed by Mr. Burke,
Mr. Charles Fox, and Colonel Barré, the latter of whom reprobated the
violence of both houses. "In the lords," said he, "the phrase is, 'We
have passed the Rubicon!'--in the commons, 'Delenda est Carthago!'"
But opposition was of no avail. The bill was carried by an overwhelming
majority in the lower house; and when it was taken into the upper house,
though it was severely criticised, opposed, and denounced by a few
lords, most of the peers were in its favour, and it passed into a law.

In order to qualify the severity of the bill for regulating the
government of Massachusets, Mr. Rose Fuller, on the 19th of April,
moved that the house should, that day se'nnight, resolve itself into a
committee for taking into consideration the question of a total repeal
of the tea duty. This was opposed by Lord North, who contended that no
acts of lenity ought to attend their restrictive measures. He argued,
that to repeal at this time would show such wavering and inconsistent
policy as would defeat the good effects of that vigorous system which
had been too long delayed, and which was now adopted. The expediency of
the repeal, however, was ably advocated by Mr. Burke. He contended, that
from the period of the repeal of the Stamp Act, the practical right of
taxing America ought to have been for ever banished from the minds of
all statesmen; and he severely exposed the absurdity of continuing a
tax merely for the sake of a preamble to an act of parliament, when
five-sixths of the revenue intended to be raised by it had been
abandoned. Burke then gave a concise detail of our ministerial and
political transactions with America; after which he recommended the
repeal of this impost as a measure of policy, and advised the house, if
they found any ill effects arising from this concession, then at once to
stop short, and to oppose the ancient policy and practice of the empire
to innovations on both sides. This, he said, would enable them to stand
on great, manly, and sure grounds. As for the distinctions of rights
he deprecated all reasonings about them. "Leave the Americans," he
observed, "as they anciently stood; and these distinctions, born of our
unhappy contest, will die with it. Be content to bind America by laws
of trade. You have always done so; and let this be your reason for
continuing to do it. Do not burden them with taxes; for you were not
used to do so from the beginning. These are arguments for states
and kingdoms: leave the rest to the schools where alone they can be
discussed with safety." The rejection of this advice, he said, would
be followed by resistance on the part of the colonies; for if the
sovereignty of England and the freedom of America could not be
reconciled, the Americans would be sure to cast off sovereignty: no man
would be argued into slavery. The opinions which Burke uttered on this
occasion were at variance with those expressed on the passing of the
Declaratory Act, and with the act itself. He attempted to reconcile
them, however, by the nice distinction of a double power in parliament.
He remarked:--"The parliament of Great Britain sits at the head of her
extensive empire in two capacities--one as the local legislature of this
island, with the executive power as her instrument of action; the other
and nobler capacity is what I call her imperial character, by which she
guides and controls all the inferior and provincial legislatures." In
this, he maintained, her power was boundless; and having entered at
large on its utility, and the manner in which it had been exercised,
he thus concluded:--"It is agreed that a revenue is not to be had from
America: if, then, we lose the profit, let us at least get rid of the
odium." No arguments, however powerful, were of avail--the motion was
negatived.

A third measure of restriction introduced into the commons by ministers
was "A Bill for the impartial Administration of Justice in the Cases
of Persons questioned for any Acts done by them in the Execution of the
Laws, as for the Suppression of Riots and Tumults in the Province of
Massachusets Bay, in New England." By this bill the governor, if he
found that a person indicted for murder, or any other capital offence,
incurred in suppressing such tumults, was not likely to obtain an
impartial trial, might send the person so indicted to another colony or
to Great Britain, to be fairly tried there. This bill was to be limited
to four years, and in support of it Lord North argued, that it was
absolutely necessary to give effect to the other coercive measures; that
it was in vain to appoint a magistracy that would act if none could be
found bold enough to act with them and execute their orders; that
these orders would probably be resisted by force; and this force would
necessitate force on the side of government, and probably occasion the
shedding of blood. He asked, what officers would risk this event if the
rioters themselves, or their abettors, were afterwards to sit as
their judges? And he alleged, that a precedent was to be found in our
own laws, in the case of smuggling, it being customary to remove the
trial of smugglers to another county: the Scotch rebels were also,
he said, in 1745, tried in England. North next urged, that particular
privileges ought to give way on some occasions, and that when the public
safety of our own country was endangered even the _Habeas Corpus_ had
been suspended. The bill, he remarked, was not meant to screen guilt,
but to protect innocence. The Americans, he said, must be taught that we
will no longer sit quietly under their insults; and that, being
roused, our measures, though free from cruelty and revenge, would be as
efficacious as they were necessary. This was the last act, he stated,
that he had to propose in order to perfect his plan, and that the rest
would depend on the vigilance of his majesty's servants employed in
America. In conclusion, he mentioned that four regiments, usually
stationed in different parts of North America, had all been ordered
to Boston; and that General Gage was appointed governor and
commander-in-chief.

This measure was opposed with greater vehemence and better arguments
than those which had preceded it. Colonel Barré, who had given a
partial support to the Boston Port Bill, denounced it as unprecedented,
unwarranted, and as fraught with misery and oppression to America, and
with danger to this country. It stigmatised a whole people, he remarked,
as persecutors of innocence, and as men incapable of doing justice,
whereas the very reverse was the fact. As a proof of the impartiality
of Bostonian courts and juries, he instanced the acquittal of Captain
Preston and the soldiers who had killed some persons in a riot; and
he denied that the instances of trials for smuggling and for treason,
adduced by Lord North, were at all applicable to the present case. He
asked, what reliance the Americans could have on the impartiality of
juries in other provinces, or in England, and dwelt with great force
on the danger of screening the soldiery, whose passions were already
inflamed against the people of Massachusets Bay. "A soldier," he
observed, "feels himself so much above the rest of mankind, that the
strict hand of the civil power is necessary to check and restrain
the haughtiness of disposition which such superiority inspires. What
constant care is taken in this country to remind the military that they
are under the restraint of civil power! In America their superiority is
felt still more. Remove the check of the law, as this bill proposes, and
what insolence, what outrage, may you not expect! Every passion that
is pernicious to society will be let loose on a people unaccustomed
to licentiousness and intemperance. The colonists, who have been long
complaining of oppression, will see in the soldiery those who are to
enforce it on them; while the military, strongly prepossessed against
the people as rebellious, unawed by the civil power, and actuated by
that arbitrary spirit which prevails in the best troops, will commit
violences that might rouse the tamest people to resistance, and which
the vigilance of their officers cannot effectually restrain. The
inevitable consequences will be open rebellion, which you profess by
this act to obviate. I have been bred a soldier; I have served long; I
respect the profession, and live in the strictest habits of friendship
with many officers; but no country gentleman in this house looks on
the army with a more jealous eye, or would more strenuously resist the
setting them above the control of civil power. No man is to be trusted
in such a situation. It is not the fault of the soldier, but the vice of
human nature, which, unbridled by law, becomes insolent and licentious,
wantonly violating the peace of society, and trampling upon the rights
of human kind." In conclusion, Barré warned ministers of the results of
their restrictive measures; entreating them, likewise, not to urge them
on to rebellion. In the course of his speech Lord North had said that
he had had the advantage of being aided by the ablest lawyers; and
when Colonel Barré had concluded his harangue Mr. Wedderburne, the
solicitor-general, arose, and explained and defended the principles
of the bill, which, he observed, was limited as to time, and intended
solely to procure a fair trial for the imputed offences of all who might
be concerned or engaged to act under government.

The motion for leave to bring in this bill was passed without a
division, and it was introduced on the 21st of April, on which occasion
another stormy debate occurred. Alderman Sawbridge contended, that it
was a ridiculous and cruel measure--a measure designed to enslave the
Americans, by a minister who would, if opportunity was afforded him,
enslave England. He added:--"But I sincerely hope the Americans will
not admit of the execution of any of those destructive bills, but nobly
refuse them all. If they do not, they are the most abject slaves upon
the face of the earth, and nothing which the minister can do is base
enough for them." Lord North, in reply, calmly disclaimed any intention
of enslaving America, and declared that the assertion was about as true
as another report, circulated in some quarters, which stated that the
colonists had seen their error, and were willing to make reparation to
the East India Company for the tea they had destroyed. Instead of making
reparation, he added, letters had been recently received which conveyed
intelligence of renewed acts of violence. In the course of the debate
one member uttered these remarkable words:--"I will now take my leave of
the whole plan: you will commence your ruin from this day. I am sorry to
say, that not only the house has fallen into this error, but the people
approve of the measure. The people, I am sorry to say it, are misled.
But a short time will prove the evil tendency of this bill. If ever
there was a nation running headlong to its ruin it is this." The people
were, in fact, as violently excited against the Americans, and the
Bostonians in particular, as the ministers themselves, which doubtless
had the effect of encouraging them in their measures. As a dissolution
of parliament was near at hand, this may have caused the absence of many
members; for it is a remarkable circumstance, that during the debates
on these momentous questions there never was a full house. On the
third reading, indeed, only one hundred and fifty-one members were
present--one hundred and twenty-seven out of which number voted for the
measure.

In the house of lords the bill was opposed in the same manner, and to
a similar degree as in the commons. One of the most striking arguments
against the measure was uttered by the Marquess of Rockingham. After
reviewing ministerial transactions relative to America, since the repeal
of the Stamp Act, and denouncing the tea duty as an uncommercial
and unproductive claim, retained only as a bone of contention, he
remarked:--"If officers were men of honour and sensibility, their
situation would be worse under the protection of such a law than without
it, as no acquittal could be honourable where the prosecutor had not the
usual means of securing a fair trial." The bill, however, passed by
a large majority--eight peers signing a strong protest against it, in
which it was designated as "a virtual indemnity for murder."

During these debates the Earl of Chatham had been absent from
indisposition. An opportunity, however, was afforded him of uttering his
sentiments concerning the measure adopted towards America, on the
27th of May, in a discussion on a bill "for the quartering and better
regulating the troops in the colonies." He had long been complaining of
the gout and other infirmities; but on this night, which was the
third reading of the bill, he made a very long speech. He commenced by
asserting, that the whole history of the Americans, their descent, and
the character and disposition which they inherited from their English
ancestors, all forbade the thought that they would ever submit to
slavish and tyrannical principles; for as was the mother, so were her
offspring. He admitted that the conduct of the Americans, and especially
the Bostonians, was unwarrantable; but he denied that the means adopted
to bring them back to a sense of their duty were either wise or
just. Against the blocking up the harbour of Boston he inveighed most
bitterly, assuming in the face of all fact, that it was "some guilty
profligates" who had been concerned in destroying our goods, and not
the main body of the people. He assumed, also, what was notoriously
untrue, that the colonies had no thought of prosecuting the quarrel;
asserting, that their gratitude was full to overflowing for the repeal
of the Stamp Act, and that it was the tea tax alone which had goaded
them on to insubordination and rebellion. Forgetting, moreover, that his
own Declaratory Act had inflamed the passions of the colonists after
the repeal of the Stamp Act, he charged ministers with having purposely
irritated them into their late outrages. Finally, although it is clear
that Chatham, as a minister, would never have granted the objects which
the American leaders required of the government, he recommended the
substitution of kindness for severity. He remarked:--"Proceed like a
kind and affectionate parent towards a child whom he tenderly loves;
and, instead of these harsh and severe proceedings, pass an amnesty
on all their youthful errors; clasp them once more in your fond and
affectionate arms, and I will venture to affirm that you will find them
children worthy of their sire. But should their turbulence exist after
your proffered terms of forgiveness, I, my lords, will be among the
foremost to move for such measures as will effectually prevent a
relapse, and make them feel what it is to provoke a fond and forgiving
parent." It is manifest, however, that the children had already resolved
to run all risks in discarding allegiance to their parent, and that
they could never be bound to their duty by the law of kindness. So the
majority of the peers whom Chatham addressed seemed to think, for the
bill he was opposing passed.




BILL FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF CANADA.

Towards the close of this session a bill was brought into the house of
lords, "for making more effectual provision for the government of the
province of Quebec, in North America." The main objects of this bill was
to ascertain the limits of that province; to form a legislative council
for all its affairs, except taxation, which council should be appointed
and be removable by the crown, and in which his majesty's Canadian Roman
Catholic subjects should have a place; to establish the old French laws,
to which the Canadians had been accustomed, including trial without
jury, in all civil cases, and the English laws with trial by jury in all
criminal cases; and to secure to the Roman Catholics those rights which
the articles of capitulation had allowed--that is, the legal enjoyments
of their lands and of their tithes, in their own community, or from
all who professed their doctrines. This bill passed through the
lords without difficulty; but in the commons it met with a storm of
opposition. On the second reading, which took place on the 20th of May,
Mr. Thomas Townshend, junior, asked why the affairs of Canada had been
so long postponed, and why the country, from the time of its conquest,
had been left a prey to anarchy and confusion? The bill proposed to
enlarge the boundaries of the province, so as to comprehend the whole
country lying between New England, New York, and Pennsylvania, to the
Ohio and eastern bank of the Mississippi; and northward, to the southern
boundary of the territory granted to the merchant adventurers of England
trading to Hudson's Bay. Of this Townshend complained, and he said that
it was the general opinion, that ministers intended to make all this
vast tract of country an essentially French colony, as the population
was almost entirely French, and the religion, laws, &c, that of
France--the only exception being that they had at their head a subject
of Great Britain as their governor. This, he opined, would one day cause
a revolution, and would tend to re-establish the dominion of France in
that country. As for the legislative council he deemed it as proposed
the very worst kind of government ministers could have invented. He
remarked:--"If it is not the proper time to give to Canada an assembly
like those which exist in our other American colonies, it is better to
let the governor be absolute--better to let him be without a council. He
will then be responsible. But what have we here? Seventeen or eighteen
gentlemen, who may be removed or suspended by the governor; so that, if
an act of oppression should come from the crown, these may be a screen
for the governor to excuse and justify him." Townshend next condemned
the countenance given by the bill to the church of Rome, and then put
a series of stringent questions to the ministers concerning the
administration of the French laws in Canada. Were they, he asked, to be
administered by Canadians or French lawyers? and were English gentlemen
who had bought estates in that country to be subject to them? It would
be better, he conceived, to show the French Canadians, by degrees, the
advantages of English law, and to gradually mix it with their own. In
reply, Lord North excused the delay which had occurred in bringing this
measure forward, on the ground that he had been seeking the fullest
information before he legislated. He did not pretend that the bill was
perfect, but he considered that it was the best that could have been
devised, both for Great Britain and the colony, under all circumstances.
North then justified the enlargement of the limits of the colony,
and the concessions which the bill made to the Roman Catholics. He
observed:--"The honourable gentleman dislikes the omitting the assembly;
but the assembly cannot be granted, seeing that it must be composed of
Canadian Roman Catholic subjects, for otherwise it would be oppressive.
On the other hand, as the bulk of the inhabitants are Roman Catholics,
to subject them to an assembly, composed of a few British Protestant
subjects would be a great hardship. Being, therefore, under the
necessity of not appointing an assembly, this is the only legislature
you can give the Canadians, and it is the one under which they live at
present. The governor and council really have been the legislature
ever since our conquest, only now it is put under some regulation."
As regarded the question of law, he reminded the house, that the most
material part, that of the criminal law, was to be English, and that if
the French civil law should be found incompatible with the wishes of the
colony, the governor and council would have power to alter it. Returning
to the question of religion, North remarked, that the free exercise of
it was confirmed to the Canadians by treaty, and that the laws of Great
Britain permitted the full and free exercise of any religion different
from that of the Church of England, in any and all of the colonies. It
was another question, he added, whether it is convenient to continue
or abolish the bishop's jurisdiction; though, at the same time, he
asserted, no bishop could be there under papal authority, as such
is expressly forbidden in the act of supremacy. North concluded by
asserting, that there was no intention of substituting French lawyers
and judges for the English who now administered the laws in that
country. Townshend rejoined; complaining bitterly of carrying the
system of French law into those parts of the country where it had not
previously existed, and where there were some thousands of British
subjects. Having, at the end of the war, promised the Canadians English
law, he conceived that injustice would be done them by giving them that
of France. Mr. Townshend was followed by Mr. Dunning, who called the
measure one of the most extensive, as well as the most pernicious, ever
offered to parliament. He particularly inveighed against the concessions
made to the Roman Catholics, though he admitted that the free exercise
of their religion was promised to the Canadians by the treaty of
peace. This bill, however, he contended, gave them more than this: it
established the Roman Catholic faith, whereas Protestantism was merely
tolerated, and its clergy left for a maintenance to the discretion
of the crown. He observed:--"Different gentlemen may entertain
different opinions: my opinion of toleration is, that nothing can be
more impolitic than to give establishment to that religion which is
not the religion of our own country. Among the circumstances that unite
countries, or divide countries, a difference in religion has ever been
thought to be the principal and leading one. The Catholic religion
unites France, but divides England. Without going further into the
subject, it suffices me to say, that the religion of England seems to be
preferable to the religion of France, if your object is to make this
an English colony. When one sees that the Roman Catholic religion
is established by law, and that the same law does not establish the
Protestant religion, the people are, of course, at liberty to choose
which they like. Are we, then, to establish the Roman Catholic religion,
and tolerate the Protestant religion?" Mr. Dunning next insisted,
that the civil law, as well as the criminal law of England, should be
preserved, and that the institution of juries, however unpalatable
it might prove to the Canadians, ought not to be dispensed with. He
concluded by showing the unfitness of this political state to the habits
and character of English settlers, and that there was an insurmountable
difficulty in reconciling the feelings and habits of the small minority
with the great French majority. The bill was next defended warmly in all
its points by Attorney-general Thurlow. The definitive treaty of peace,
he said, was made in favour of property in Canada; in favour of the
Catholic religion, and in favour of the several religious orders, under
which obligations it was that the crown of this country was called
upon to frame a constitution for the colony. As for the importing and
enforcing English laws in a country already settled, and habitually
governed by other laws, he considered that it would be an act of the
most absurd and cruel tyranny ever practised by a conquering nation over
a conquered country--an act which would be unprecedented in the world's
history. He thought it would be equally monstrous to strip the Roman
Catholic clergy of their rights and dues, and to set up an Anglican
establishment where the followers of our church were but few in number.
To assimilate the constitution of the province to that of England
he deemed neither practicable nor desirable, and asserted, that the
constitution now proposed was on the side of liberality, and the
best that could be given under existing circumstances. He concluded
thus:--"If any English resort to that country, they do not carry with
them the laws that are to prevail the moment they get there. It would be
just as wise to say, if an Englishman goes to Guernsey, the laws of the
city of London are carried over with him. To take the laws as they stand
in Canada has been allowed--to act according to those laws, and to be
bound by their coercion, is a natural consequence. In this view I think
the bill has done nothing obnoxious. I have no speculative opinions. I
would have consulted the French customs to a much greater extent, if
it had been for me to have framed the law." Colonel Barré, Lord John
Cavendish, and Sergeant Glynn next warmly opposed the bill, and they
were followed by the Solicitor-general, Wedderburne, who defended
it with greater ability and more knowledge of history than had been
displayed by any of the preceding speakers. Sergeant Glynn had asserted,
that in conquering the Irish and Welsh our laws had been imposed upon
them; but Wedderburne clearly showed that this was only effected in the
lapse of ages; English laws not being introduced into Ireland till the
time of James I., and in Wales till the time of Henry VIII. He argued,
that it was the custom of all conquering states to leave the conquered
countries in the possession of their own laws. He remarked:--"Not
only are there instances of great states not considering themselves
warranted, by right of conquest, in forcing their laws upon the
conquered, but even countries that have scarcely any trace of public
laws and general systems, have had that good policy with regard to the
countries they have made themselves masters of. The very Mussulman, the
Ottoman, the Turks--the worst of all conquerors--in the countries they
subdued left the people in possession of their municipal laws. This is
the case in Wallachia; this is the case in Moldavia; this is the case
with all the great settlements in which the Turks have pushed their
arms." Wedderburne next showed the difference existing in the law of
succession in England and Canada, and argued, that it would be hard
upon all younger sons in that province to establish the right of
primogeniture on a sudden. He concluded by representing the people of
Canada as having, for several years past, been annually calling upon
government to let them know what really was to be the law of the
province. Charles Fox argued, that as the bill allowed the clergy of the
Church of Rome their dues and rights, which dues he understood to mean
the receiving of tithes, which were a tax upon the Canadians, it was to
all intents and purposes a money bill. This objection he conceived
fatal to the bill, inasmuch as the commons never permitted bills of that
nature to originate in the lords. Dunning now took up the same line of
argument, and as Lord North denied the conclusion to which these members
had suddenly come, the speaker was appealed to for his opinion. The
speaker replied, that he had seen bills that had originated in the lords
that, he thought, ought not to have been brought into the lower house,
but that he never presumed to judge upon them himself, and in this in
stance it would be very unbecoming in him to do so, therefore' he would
leave it for the house to determine as was thought right. The second
reading was carried by a majority of one hundred and five, against
twenty-nine; and on the 31st of May, when the house went into committee
on the bill, several amendments were negatived, with equally large
majorities. On this occasion petitions were presented against the
measure from Thomas Penn, on behalf of himself and of John Penn, Esq.,
true and absolute proprietors of Pennsylvania, and the counties of
Newcastle, Kent, and Sussex, in Delaware, praying that the territory
granted by King Charles II. to their father and grandfather might not be
encroached upon by any extension of the frontiers of Canada. Ministers
denied that it was ever intended to entrench upon other colonies, and
the petition was ordered to lie upon the table; leave, also, being given
to the petitioners to be heard by counsel if they thought proper. At the
same time a petition was presented from merchants of the city of London,
trading to the province of Quebec, praying for the preservation or
establishment of the English civil law, in all matters of controversy
relative to property and civil rights, with trial by jury, &c. This
petition was ordered to be referred to the committee on the bill, and
the petitioners were also ordered to be heard by themselves or counsel.
Counsel were heard, and witnesses examined, which occupied the attention
of the house for more than a week; but on the 13th of June the bill
passed the commons as it originally stood--a few boundary amendments,
made in committee, alone excepted. The bill thus passed was sent back
to the lords for their concurrence in the amendments, on which occasion
Chatham rose to reprobate the whole spirit of the bill. It tended, he
said, to establish the worst of despotisms, and denounced it as a most
cruel, oppressive, and odious measure--a measure which destroyed the
very roots of justice and good principle. He called the bill "a child of
inordinate power," and asked, if any on the bench of bishops would hold
it out for baptism? He invoked the bishops to resist a law which would
spread the Roman Catholic tenets over so vast a continent, and asserted,
that parliament had no more right to alter the oath of supremacy than
to repeal the great charter, or the bill of rights. The dangerous
innovations of the bill, he declared, were at utter variance with all
the safeguards and barriers against the return of popery and of popish
influence, so wisely provided against by all oaths and offices of trust,
from the constable up to the members of both houses, and even to the
sovereign in his coronation oath. Chatham concluded by expressing his
fears that such a measure might shake the confidence of his majesty's
Protestant subjects in England and Ireland, and totally alienate the
hearts of all his American subjects. The bill, however, passed by
twenty-six to seven, and received the royal assent on the 22nd of June;
the corporation of London having ineffectually petitioned the king to
refuse it.




PROROGATION OF PARLIAMENT.

On the same day that his majesty gave his assent to the above-mentioned
bill, he prorogued parliament. In his speech he expressed his approval
of that bill, conceiving it likely to produce the best effect in
quieting the minds, and promoting the happiness of the Canadians. His
majesty also applauded the temper and firmness, and general concurrence
of parliament in the measures they had adopted with reference to
Massachusets Bay; at the same time assuring them that nothing depending
on him should be wanting to render those measures effectual. At
the close of this session, Lord North, notwithstanding his many
embarrassments, appeared to be more firmly seated in office than ever.
Even Chatham himself was obliged to confess his success, efficiency, and
the solidity of his position; asserting that no minister in any age
ever held a better tenure. It was necessary that North should be well
supported, for he had difficulties before him which would soon have
compelled him to resign, and to seek solace in the shades of retirement,
had not the voice of parliament been with him.




PROCEEDINGS AT BOSTON.

During the deliberations of the British parliament, the Bostonians and
people of Massachusets Bay had continued their outrages. The assembly
and populace alike showed their utter aversion t