Page images
PDF
EPUB

of the traffic. It certainly does honor to Mr. Pitt, that, under these circumstances, he never wavered or shrunk back. He gave Mr. Wilberforce all the influence of his personal and official character; he spoke and voted for immediate abolition. If he had gone farther, and attempted what Lord Brougham condemns him so bitterly for not doing, he would probably have put an end at once to his ministry, without the slightest advantage, and perhaps with serious detriment, to the cause he had espoused. In 1791, it became the duty of Mr. Pitt to frame a new Constitution for Canada. He did it upon wise and liberal principles. He forever took away the question which led to the American war, that of taxing the colonies for the sake of revenue. The British Parliament now expressly relinquished the right of laying any taxes except for the regulation of trade (to which the Americans were always ready to submit); and, in order to guard this point more fully, Mr. Pitt provided that the proceeds even of these taxes should go to the provincial assemblies, and not to the government at home. It was much for George III. to make such concessions.

The financial measures of Mr. Pitt, during the period under review, were highly successful. He took the government at the end of Lord North's wars, with an unfunded debt of thirty millions sterling, and a national income wholly unequal to the expense of even a moderate peace establishment. There were large claims to be provided for in favor of the American Loyalists; there was a system of enormous fraud in the collection of the public revenues to be searched out and collected; there were permanent arrangements to be made for commercial intercourse with America and some countries of Europe; and the vast concerns of India, all resting back on the treasury at home, were to be reduced to order and placed on a new foundation. In carrying out his plans, he had to fight his way at every step against the acutest and most eloquent men of England; and he did it under the disadvantage of having no common ground of argument on which to meet them, since they were ignorant of the principles of Adam Smith, while the popular maxims and prejudices of the day were all on their side. Within five years the debt was funded and reduced five millions of pounds, notwithstanding the expense of two armaments, and other outlays to the amount of six millions. An entire and most beneficial change was made in the man. ner of collecting the customs and auditing the public accounts, requiring more than three thousand distinct resolutions of Parliament to carry the plan into effect. Under this system, the public revenue went on gradually increasing, until early in 1792 he "felt justified in proposing a repeal of the most burdensome imposts, and an ad· dition of £400,000 to the annual million already appropriated as a Sinking Fund. In respect, then, to the first eight years of Mr. Pitt's administration, it was not, perhaps, too much for Mr. Gibbon to say, that "in all his researches in ancient and modern history, he had nowhere met with a parallel-with one who at so early a period of life had so important a trust reposed in him, which he had discharged with so much credit to himself and advantage to the kingdom."

28

We now come to the course adopted by Mr. Pitt respecting the Revolution in France and a war with that country. This, as Lord Brougham remarks, “is the main charge against him." It is obvious that, whatever may have been his errors on this subject, he had every possible motive to desire the continuance of peace. On this depended all his plans of finance, and especially the success of his Sinking Fund, to which he looked as the proudest memorial of his greatness as a statesman. That he did ardently desire it, no one doubts; and so sanguine were his expectations, that he remarked in the House of Commons, about the middle of 1792, “England had never a fairer prospect of a long continuance of peace. I think we may confidently reckon upon peace for ten years." Mr. Burke had previously expressed similar views.

See Prettyman's Life of Pitt, vol. ii., p. 213; Belsham's Memoirs of the Reign of George III., vol. iv., p. 123; Wade's British History, p. 558.

England had no longer any thing to fear from her hereditary rival. "France," said he, "in a political light, is to be considered as expunged out of the system of Europe." At this moment (July 25th, 1792) Austria and Prussia invaded France for the avowed purpose of restoring Louis XVI. to all his rights as an absolute monarch. It is unnecessary to say that this step kindled the fire which soon after wrapped the whole of Europe in one general conflagration. But it is now known that England had no privity or concern in this invasion. On the contrary, Mr. Pitt declined all communication with Austria on the subject, and declared to Prussia his unalterable resolution to maintain neutrality and avoid all interference with the internal concerns of France.29 It is also known that, some months after, he endeavored to put a stop to the contest, by "negotiating," in the words of Mr. Wilberforce, "with the principal European powers for the purpose of obtaining a joint representation to France, assuring her that if she would formally engage to keep within her own limits, and not molest her neighbors, she should be suffered to settle her own internal government and constitution without interference." This negotiation was broken off in the midst by the execution of Louis XVI., and Mr. Pitt thus failed in his efforts to arrest the war on the Continent.

1130

When the French drove out the Austrians and Prussians, they seized, in turn, or the Austrian Netherlands, early in November, 1792. Here arose the first point of collision between England and France. The Republican rulers forced the passage of the River Scheldt from the Netherlands down to the sea. This river had been closed, under the provisions of the treaty of Westphalia, for a century and a half, out of regard to the rights of Holland, through which it flows, and England was bound by treaty to defend those rights. A second point of collision was the French Decree of Fraternity, passed November 19, 1792, by the National Assembly, declaring that the French "would grant fraternity and assistance to all those people who wish to procure liberty, and charged the executive power to send orders to their generals to give assistance to such people as have suffered, or are now suffering, in the cause of liberty." This was considered as a declaration of war against all the monarchies of Europe, and a direct call upon their subjects to rise in rebellion. It was brought home to England by the fact, that delegates from societies in London and elsewhere, consisting of many thousands, were received at the bar of the French National Convention nine days after the publication of this decree, where they declared their intention to "adopt the French form of government, and establish a National Convention in Great Britain." The President of the Convention replied in very significant terms: "Royalty in Europe is either destroyed or on the point of perishing; and the Declaration of Rights placed by the side of thrones is a devouring fire which wil consume them. The festival which you have celebrated in honor of the French Rev olution is the prelude to the festival of nations!" There is no doubt that the French at this time, expected a revolution in England.

These aggressions and insults would have justified the English government in de manding ample reparation. But there was a difficulty as to the mode of negotiating When Louis XVI. was made a prisoner of the Convention by the events of Augus 10th, 1792, his government ceased, and Mr. Pitt recalled the English embassador from Paris, and suspended the functions of M. Chauvelin, the French embassador a1 London. How, then, were the two countries to communicate? This soon after be came a practical question. England began to arm, which she might reasonably de under existing circumstances. The French government instructed M. Chauvelin, who remained at London, to demand whether this armament was directed against France, tendering at the same time an explanation of the Decree of Fraternity as 29 See his statements on this subject, page 611.

* See Life, page 125, Philadelphia edition. See, also, page 612 of this volume.

not aimed at England, and proposing to negotiate in relation to the Scheldt. What was Mr. Pitt now to do? No one would expect him instantly to recognize the National Convention as de jure the government of France. Mr. Fox proposed to treat with them as the government de facto; but this is a distinction which has sprung up chiefly since the French Revolution, and it is easy to see how strong a repugnance George III. and most of the English must have felt to any recognition of the new government, while they held their King as a prisoner, and were calling on the subjects of every other monarch in Europe to join with them in rebellion. Mr. Pitt took a middle course. He did not refuse to communicate with the French rulers, but he declined to receive the paper of M. Chauvelin as "an official communication." He did, however, reply "under a form neither regular nor official," telling him, "If France is really desirous of maintaining friendship and peace with England, she must show herself disposed to renounce her views of aggression and aggrandizement, and confine herself within her own territory, without insulting other governments, without disturbing their tranquillity, without violating their rights." Within less than a month the King of France was beheaded. M. Chauvelin, whose functions had been suspended during the imprisonment of Louis, was now dismissed and sent out of the kingdom; and seven days after, France declared war against England. Such is an exact representation of the facts. It is certainly to be regretted that Mr. Pitt did not adopt the course recommended by Mr. Fox, and thus take from France all pretense of putting him in the wrong. But in passing a sentence on his conduct we are not to be influenced by our knowledge of the result. He acted under the prevailing delusion that, even if war took place, it could not be severe or calamitous. "It must certainly be ended," said he to a friend, “in one or two campaigns." He acted as most men act who feel strong, in dealing with those whom they consider as weak. He acted, also, under the belief (which subsequent events proved correct) that the French were insincere in their disavowals, that they only wished to gain time. The French Minister of War is now understood to have said at this juncture, "We have three hundred thousand men in arms, and we must make them march as far away as their legs will carry them, or they will return and cut our throats." From the moment of their triumph in the Austrian Netherlands, the policy of the French government was war. On the other hand, George III. and the great body of the English people were equally bent on fighting. "If a stop is not put to French principles," said he, "there will not be a king left in Europe in a few years."31 The only stop then thought of was to shut out these principles by war, and to put down the authors of them as enemies of the human race. Had Mr. Pitt refused to go to war," says a late writer, who was by no means friendly to his measures, "he would have been driven from power by the united voice of king and people; and his successor, whether Whig or Tory, would have been compelled to pursue the course of policy which was only reluctantly followed by that celebrated statesman.' 32 The war, therefore, was not Mr. Pitt's war; it was equally the war of the English and of the French nation.

66

As to " French principles," which were an object of so much terror to the King, they had, no doubt, to some extent, gained a foothold among the middling and lower classes. Paine's Rights of Man, and other publications of a still more radical character, were widely circulated; and it has since been stated on high authority, that "the soldiers were every where tampered with." You have a great estate," said one of these radical reformers to General Lambton; " we shall soon divide it among us." "You will presently spend it in liquor," replied the general, and what will you do then?" "Why, then we will divide again!”

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

31 Nicholl's Recollections of George III., p. 470.
32 Wade's British History, p. 572.

Between 1793 and 1795 very stringent measures wore adopted for putting down this spirit. Acts of Parliament were passed, as already stated in the memoir of Mr. Fox, suspending the Habeas Corpus Act, imposing severe restrictions on the holding of political meetings, and giving a wider extent to the crime of treason. They were designed, however, only as temporary measures, and were limited to three years. Still, they brought great reproach on Mr. Pitt, though it now appears that they originated not with him, but with the followers of Mr. Burke, who had been recently brought into the ministry. Lord Campbell, speaking of this period, says, "Now began that sys. tem of policy for the repression of French principles, which has caused the period in which it prevailed to be designated, in the language of exaggeration, 'the Reign of Terror.' I think the system was unwise, and that Lord Loughborough is chiefly answerable for it. I am afraid that, if he did not originate, he actively encouraged it, and that he, as the organ of the alarmist party, forced it upon the reluctant Prime Minister. Pitt had not only come forward in public life on the popular side, but I believe that his propensities continued liberal, and that, if he could have fulfilled his wishes, he would have emancipated the Catholics-he would have abolished slavery -he would have established free trade-and he would have reformed the House of Commons. His regard for the liberty of the press he had evinced by carrying Fox's Libel Bill by the influence of government, notwithstanding the furious opposition of Lord Chancellor Thurlow. He was likewise particularly adverse to any stringent measures against reformers, being aware that, having himself very recently belonged to that body, he would appear rather in an invidious light as the persecutor of his former associates. But he found that he could not adhere to constitutional laws and constitutional practices, without the disruption of his administration." During this period, also, occurred those state trials, arising out of some wild attempts at parlia mentary reform, in which Erskine was so much distinguished. Some reproach has fallen upon Mr. Pitt for allowing them to go on. It appears, however, from the state ment of Lord Campbell, that "Lord Loughborough was the principal adviser of them. He had surrendered himself to the wildest apprehensions of Burke, he feared that any encouragement to parliamentary reform was tantamount to rebellion; and he believed that general bloodshed would be saved by the sacrifice of a few individuals *** When the plan was first proposed of arresting the members of the Corresponding Society, and proceeding capitally against them, it is said that Pitt, who had studied the law, expressed some disapprobation of the notion of 'constructive treason,' but he did not like to rely upon the objection that the Duke of Richmond and himself had supported similar doctrines, and no doubt in his heart he believed that, under the pretense of parliamentary reform, deeper designs were now carried on. The Attorney and Solicitor General, being consulted by the Chancellor, gave an opinion that the imputed conspiracy to change the form of government was a compassing of the King's death within the meaning of the statute of Edward III.—and the King himself, upon this opinion, was eager for the prosecutions. So in an evil hour an order was made that they should be instituted, and warrants were signed for the arrest of the supposed traitors." "Happily, English juries," adds Lord Campbell," and the returning sober sense of the English people, at last saved public liberty from the great peril to which it was then exposed." ***“To the credit of George III., when the whole subject was understood by him, he rejoiced in the acquittals, and, laying all the blame on the Chancellor, he said, 'You have got us into the wrong box, my Lord, you have got us into the wrong box. Constructive treason won't do, my Lord, construc

tive treason won't do.'"'34

Mr. Pitt saw, was to think of refusing to recognize the French Republic as forming part of the po

within three years from the commencement of the war, how idle it

33 Lives of the Chancellors, vol. vi., p. 254.

34 Id. ib., p. 266

litical system of Europe. She had extorted that recognition from, all around her at the point of the bayonet, and had nearly doubled her territory and dependencies at the expense of her neighbors. He therefore brought down a message from the King, acknowledging her government as established under the Directory in October, 1795, and in October, 1796, sent a plenipotentiary to Paris with proposals of peace. His terms were highly liberal. He offered to restore the conquests he had made from France, being all her rich colonies in the East and West Indies, receiving nothing in return, and only asking for Austria, as the ally of England, a similar restoration of the territory which had been wrested from her by the French. This the Directory refused, and, after a short negotiation, ordered the English embassador to quit Paris in twenty-four hours.

The next year, 1797, was one of the darkest seasons that England had known for centuries. In April, Austria was compelled to sue for peace, leaving the English to carry on the contest single-handed; and at the moment when this intelligence arrived, a mutiny had broken out in the fleets both at the Nore and Spithead, more extensive and threatening than has ever occurred in the English navy; while Ireland was on the brink of rebellion, and actually had deputies in France soliciting the aid of her troops. Never were the funds so low, even in the worst periods of the American war. These events were ushered in by the greatest calamity that can befall a commercial people, a drain of specie arising from the operation of the war, which endangered the whole banking system of the country. Whether Mr. Pitt was to blame or not for the causes which produced this drain, it is certain that his daring resolution saved the country in this alarming crisis. He issued an order of the Privy Council, February 26th, 1797, requiring the Bank of England to suspend specie pay ments. He might have avoided the personal hazard thus incurred by throwing the responsibility on Parliament, which was then in session-the order, indeed, was generally considered as unconstitutional; but the case would not admit of delay, a single night's debate on such a question might have destroyed all credit throughout the kingdom. Parliament and the country justified the course he took, while the bankers in every part of the empire united to sustain him. The mutiny was quelled by a judicious union of firmness and concession; Ireland was held down for another year; and Great Britain, instead of being plunged into the gulf of national and individual bankruptcy as predicted by Mr. Fox, was placed on a vantage ground, which enabled her to sustain the pressure of the war without injury to her financial system. It is not wonderful that the friends of Mr. Pitt were loud in their applause of " the pilot that weathered the storm."

About the middle of the same year, July, 1797, Mr. Pitt renewed his proposals of peace. He sent Lord Malmesbury to Lisle, offering, as in the former case, to restore all his conquests, and, as Austria was now out of the way, demanding nothing in return. There were at this juncture two parties in the Directory, one for peace and the other for war; and the negotiation changed its aspect, from time to time, during the two months of its continuance, as the one or the other obtained the mastery. It is a curious circumstance, showing the difficulties he had to encounter, that a similar division existed in his own cabinet; so that among the "astounding disclosures" made in Lord Malmesbury's diary, we find that it was necessary for his Lordship to send two sets of dispatches every time he communicated with his government, one of a more general nature to be read by Lord Loughborough and his associates, who were bent on defeating the negotiation, and the other for Mr. Pitt, Lord Grenville, and Mr. Dundas! The violent part of the Directory at last prevailed. War became the policy of the government, and Lord Malmesbury was dismissed. The French were to be deluded with new visions of conquest. Bonaparte was sent to subdu Egypt, and thus open a pathway to India; and the whole of Hindostan, with its hund

« PreviousContinue »