Chapter XXXVII.
George III.
Pitt And The French Revolution.
(1783-1801).
I have endeavored to analyze the far distant questions, which for a long time agitated the English nation, and I now return to the events more directly bearing on its internal life and policy. I encounter at the outset, with profound satisfaction, that wise, able, and powerful minister, who has ever remained the type of a great statesman in a free country. His history is that of his country, of her glory as well as of her misfortunes; he lived for her, and died when he believed her vanquished, without carrying into the tomb any presentiment of final victory and noble reward of his indefatigable efforts.
William Pitt was scarcely twenty-four years of age, when he refused to accept the power offered him by George III. He determined, upon the formation of the coalition ministry of North and Fox, that he would not ally himself with either party, but would hold himself in reserve and act with that party which appeared to him to be in the right. Before the end of the session, Pitt found himself at the head of the opposition by his own judgment, as well as by the spontaneous movement of public opinion, openly and justly adverse to the alliance of the Whigs and Tories,—the partisans and the adversaries of American independence.
The affairs of India were upon a hazardous and uncertain footing; the ministers of the coalition had nevertheless resolved to radically change the administration of that country, by the formation of a Council of seven persons, having authority to appoint and to dismiss all agents, and to administer the government at their will, regardless of the charters of the East India Company and its established rights. It was in consequence of a necessity that each day became more and more urgent, that Mr. Fox employed his powerful arguments against the disorders and abuses which reigned in the administration of India. "What is a charter?" impudently asked Attorney-General Lee; "it is only a piece of parchment, with a seal of wax hanging from one of the corners." All English regard for acquired rights and precedents, revolted at this cynical remark. "Necessity is the argument of tyrants, and the law of slaves," said Pitt.
The members of the new Indian council were all intimate friends of the coalition. "The bill upon the Indian question which Fox has presented, will be decisive, one way or the other, for or against the ministry," wrote Pitt to his friend the Duke of Rutland. "I thoroughly believe that the measure is the boldest and most unconstitutional that has ever been attempted; since it throws, by a single blow, in spite of all charters and contracts, an immense influence and patronage in the East into the hands of Charles Fox,—in power or out of power. I believe that this bill will meet with much opposition. The ministry have risked all on a venture upon which they will probably be defeated."
All the efforts of the opposition in the House of Commons failed. The Indian bill passed by a large majority. Burke, eager already to pursue those crimes and abuses which he was one day to overwhelm with the thunders of his eloquence, gave his support to the bill. He delivered in the house a noble eulogy on that friend, from whom he was one day to separate himself with so much applause. Said he, "Fox is traduced and abused for his supposed motives. He will remember that obloquy is a necessary ingredient in the composition of all true glory: he will remember that it was not only in the Roman customs, but it is in the nature and constitution of things, that calumny and abuse are essential parts of triumph. He is now on a great eminence, where the eyes of mankind are turned to him. He may live long, he may do much; but here is the summit: he never can exceed what he does this day. He has faults, but they are faults that, though they may in a small degree tarnish the lustre, and sometimes impede the march of his abilities, have nothing in them to extinguish the fire of great virtues. In those faults there is no mixture of deceit, of hypocrisy, of pride, of ferocity, of complexional despotism, or want of feeling for the distresses of mankind. His are faults, which might exist in a descendant of Henry IV. of France, as they did exist, in that Father of his country."
The House of Lords was less inclined to reject the bill than Pitt had believed. "As much as I abhor tyranny under any form," said Lord Thurlow, "I oppose energetically this strange attempt to destroy the equilibrium of our Constitution. I desire to see the crown respected and powerful; but if the present bill should pass, it will be no longer worthy of the support of a man of honor." The ex-chancellor, boldly facing the Prince of Wales, who at this time was Mr. Fox's personal friend and admirer, added: "In fact, the king will take the crown from his own head, and place it upon that of Mr. Fox."
George III. was more courageous than prudent, and more occupied with the rights of the crown than with parliamentary privileges. He charged Lord Temple to make it known in the house, that he "regarded all those who voted for the Indian bill, not only as unfriendly, but also as enemies." The mission had its effect; the adjournment of the measure was voted. The Commons, in their turn, offended by the royal intervention, censured openly those who had provoked it. The struggle between the two houses increased. On the night of the 18th of December, 1783, Mr. Fox and Lord North received orders to surrender their seals of office. The following day, as Parliament sat agitated and expectant, there entered the House of Commons a young member, Mr. Pepper Arden, who at once offered a resolution proposing to convoke the electors of the borough of Appleby, in order to elect a new representative in place of the very Hon. William Pitt, who had just accepted the post of First Lord of the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer. The move was so bold that at first it excited only incredulity and pleasantry. The opposition supposed that the young minister, finding himself in a minority in the House of Commons, would call for a dissolution. "No one will admit," said Fox, "that such a prerogative ought to be used, solely to serve the purposes of an ambitious young man. As for me, I declare in the face of this house, if the dissolution takes place, and they do not give good and solid reasons for it, I will pledge myself, if I have the honor to sit in the new Parliament, to propose a serious inquiry into this affair, and to compel those who have proposed it to render an account."
Pitt, however, was wiser and bolder than his adversaries anticipated; he resolved to allow the country time to gain confidence in his abilities; to the passions excited by the contest, time to betray their motives and their consequences. He had great difficulty in forming his cabinet. Lord Temple, who accepted the office of Secretary of State, soon resigned, through spite and personal caprice. The Dukes of Rutland and Richmond, Lord Gower, Lord Thurlow and Dundas had nevertheless consented to join the ministry. The young chief resolutely faced the struggle. The houses were to reassemble on the 12th of January, 1784. "Do not quit your house nor dismiss a single servant before you see the result of the 12th," wrote Fox to Lord Northington. "Mr. Pitt is able to do whatever he wishes during the recess," said the friends of Fox.