Chapter IV: , VII (17)

"Parliament met on the 11th of November; on the 18th Fox asked
for leave to introduce a Bill for the Better Government of
India. That day month[?] the Government had ceased to exist.
Into the merits of the Bill it is not now necessary to enter.
... It was clear that it furnished an admirable weapon against
an unpopular Coalition which had resisted economical reform,
demanded a great income for a debauched prince, and now aimed
at securing a monopoly of the vast patronage of
India,--patronage which, genially exercised by Dundas, was
soon to secure Scotland for Pitt. In the House of Commons the
majority for the Bill was over 100; the loftiest eloquence of
Burke was exerted in its favour; and Fox was, as ever,
dauntless and crushing in debate. But outside Parliament the
King schemed, and controversy raged. ... When the Bill arrived
at the House of Lords, the undertakers were ready. The King
had seen Temple, and empowered him to communicate to all whom
it might concern his august disapprobation. The uneasy whisper
circulated, and the joints of the lords became as water. The
peers who yearned for lieutenancies or regiments, for stars or
strawberry leaves; the prelates, who sought a larger sphere of
usefulness; the minions of the bedchamber and the janissaries
of the closet; all, temporal or spiritual, whose convictions
were unequal to their appetite, rallied to the royal nod. ...
The result was overwhelming. The triumphant Coalition was
paralysed by the rejection of their Bill. They rightly refused
to resign, but the King could not sleep until he had resumed
the seals. Late at night he sent for them. The messenger found
North and Fox gaily seated at supper with their followers. At
first he was not believed. 'The King would not dare do it,'
exclaimed Fox. But the under Secretary charged with the
message soon convinced them of its authenticity, and the seals
were delivered with a light heart. In such dramatic fashion, and
the springtide of its youth, fell that famous government,
unhonoured and unwept. 'England,' once said Mr. Disraeli,
'does not love coalitions.' She certainly did not love this
one. On this occasion there was neither hesitation nor delay;
the moment had come, and the man. Within 12 hours of the
King's receiving the seals, Pitt had accepted the First
Lordship of the Treasury and the Chancellorship of the
Exchequer. That afternoon his writ was moved amid universal
derision. And so commenced a supreme and unbroken Ministry of
17 years. Those who laughed were hardly blamable, for the
difficulties were tremendous. ... The composition of the
Government was ... the least of Pitt's embarrassments. The
majority against him in the House of Commons was not less than
40 or 50, containing, with the exception of Pitt himself and
Dundas, every debater of eminence; while he had, before the
meeting of Parliament, to prepare and to obtain the approval
of the East India Company to a scheme which should take the
place of Burke's. The Coalition Ministers were only dismissed
on the 18th of December, 1783; but, when the House of Commons
met on the 12th of January, 1784, all this had been done. The
narrative of the next three months is stirring to read, but
would require too much detail for our limits. ... On the day
of the meeting of Parliament, Pitt was defeated in two pitched
divisions, the majorities against him being 39 and 54. His
government seemed still-born. His colleagues were dismayed.
The King came up from Windsor to support him. But in truth he
needed no support. He had inherited from his father that
confidence which made Chatham once say, 'I am sure that I can
save this country, and that nobody else can'; which made
himself say later, 'I place much dependence on my new
colleagues; I place still more dependence on myself.' He had
refused, in spite of the King's insistance, to dissolve; for
he felt that the country required time. ... The Clerkship of
the Pells, a sinecure office worth not less than £3,000 a
year, fell vacant the very day that Parliament met. It was
universally expected that Pitt would take it as of right, and
so acquire an independence, which would enable him to devote
his life to politics, without care for the morrow. He had not
£300 a year; his position was to the last degree precarious.
... Pitt disappointed his friends and amazed his enemies. He
gave the place to Barré. ... To a nation inured to jobs this
came as a revelation. ... Above and beyond all was the fact
that Pitt, young, unaided, and alone, held his own with the
great leaders allied against him. ... In face of so resolute a
resistance, the assailants began to melt away. Their divisions,
though they always showed a superiority to the Government,
betrayed notable diminution. ... On the 25th of March
Parliament was dissolved, the announcement being retarded by
the unexplained theft of the Great Seal. When the elections
were over, the party of Fox, it was found, had shared the fate
of the host of Sennacherib. The number of Fox's martyrs--of
Fox's followers who had earned that nickname by losing their
seats--was 160. ... The King and Pitt were supported on the
tidal wave of one of those great convulsions of feeling, which
in Great Britain relieve and express pent-up national
sentiment, and which in other nations produce revolutions."

_Lord Rosebery,
Pitt,
chapter 3._

"Three subjects then needed the attention of a great
statesman, though none of them were so pressing as to force
themselves on the attention of a little statesman. These were,
our economical and financial legislation, the imperfection of
our parliamentary representation, and the unhappy' condition
of Ireland. Pitt dealt with all three. ... He brought in a
series of resolutions consolidating our customs laws, of which
the inevitable complexity may be estimated by their number.
They amounted to 133, and the number of Acts of Parliament
which they restrained or completed was much greater. He
attempted, and successfully, to apply the principles of Free
Trade, the principles which he was the first of English
statesmen to learn from Adam Smith, to the actual commerce of
the country. ... The financial reputation of Pitt has greatly
suffered from the absurd praise which was once lavished on the
worst part of it.
{942}
The dread of national ruin from the augmentation of the
national debt was a sort of nightmare in that age. ... Mr.
Pitt sympathised with the general apprehension and created the
well-known 'Sinking Fund.' He proposed to apply annually a
certain fixed sum to the payment of the debt, which was in
itself excellent, but he omitted to provide real money to be
so paid. ... He proposed to borrow the money to payoff the
debt, and fancied that he thus diminished it. ... The exposure
of this financial juggle, for though not intended to be so,
such in fact it was, has reacted very unfavourably upon Mr.
Pitt's deserved fame. ... The subject of parliamentary reform
is the one with which, in Mr. Pitt's early days, the public
most connected his name, and is also that with which we are
now least apt to connect it. ... He proposed the abolition of
the worst of the rotten boroughs fifty years before Lord Grey
accomplished it. ... If the strong counteracting influence of
the French Revolution had not changed the national opinion, he
would unquestionably have amended our parliamentary
representation. ... The state of Ireland was a more pressing
difficulty than our financial confusion, our economical
errors, or our parliamentary corruption. ... He proposed at
once to remedy the national danger of having two Parliaments,
and to remove the incredible corruption of the old Irish
Parliament, by uniting the three kingdoms in a single
representative system, of which the Parliament should sit in
England. ... Of these great reforms he was only permitted to
carry a few into execution. His power, as we have described
it, was great when his reign commenced, and very great it
continued to be for very many years; but the time became
unfavourable for all forward-looking statesmanship."

_W. Bagehot,
Biographical Studies: William Pitt._

ALSO IN:
_Earl Stanhope,
Life of William Pitt,
chapters 4-9 (volume 1)._

_G. Tomline,
Life of William Pitt,
chapters 3-9 (volume 1-2)._

_Lord Rosebery,
Pitt,
chapters 3-4._

ENGLAND: A. D. 1788 (FEBRUARY).
Opening of the Trial of Warren Hastings.

See INDIA: A. D.1785-1795.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1788-1789.
The King's second derangement.

The king's second derangement, which began to show itself in
the summer of 1788, was more serious and of longer duration
than the first. "He was able ... to sign a warrant for the
further prorogation of Parliament by commission, from the 25th
September to the 20th November. But, in the interval, the
king's malady increased: he was wholly deprived of reason, and
placed under restraint; and for several days his life was in
danger. As no authority could be obtained from him for a
further prorogation, both Houses assembled on the 20th
November. ... According to long established law, Parliament,
without being opened by the Crown, had no authority to proceed
to any business whatever: but the necessity of an occasion,
for which the law had made no provision, was now superior to
the law; and Parliament accordingly proceeded to deliberate
upon the momentous questions to which the king's illness had
given rise." By Mr. Fox it was maintained that "the Prince of
Wales had as clear a right to exercise the power of
sovereignty during the king's incapacity as if the king were
actually dead; and that it was merely for the two Houses of
Parliament to pronounce at what time he should commence, the
exercise of his right. ... Mr. Pitt, on the other hand,
maintained that as no legal provision had been made for
carrying on the government, it belonged to the Houses of
Parliament to make such provision." The discussion to which
these differences, and many obstructing circumstances in the
situation of affairs, gave rise, was so prolonged, that the
king recovered his faculties (February, 1789) before the
Regency Bill, framed by Mr. Pitt, had been passed.

_T. E. May,
Constitutional History of England,
volume 1, chapter 3._

ENGLAND: A. D. 1789-1792.
War with Tippoo Saib (third Mysore War).

See INDIA: A. D. 1785-1793.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1793.
The Coalition against Revolutionary France.
Unsuccessful siege of Dunkirk.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (MARCH-SEPTEMBER),
and (JULY-DECEMBER).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1793-1796.
Popular feeling towards the French Revolution.
Small number of the English Jacobins.
Pitt forced into war.
Tory panic and reign of terror.
Violence of government measures.

"That the war [of Revolutionary France] with Germany would
widen into a vast European struggle, a struggle in which the
peoples would rise against their oppressors, and the freedom
which France had won diffuse itself over the world, no French
revolutionist doubted for an hour. Nor did they doubt that in
this struggle England would join them. It was from England
that they had drawn those principles of political and social
liberty which they believed themselves to be putting into
practice. It was to England that they looked above all for
approbation and sympathy. ... To the revolutionists at Paris
the attitude of England remained unintelligible and
irritating. Instead of the aid they had counted on, they found
but a cold neutrality. ... But that this attitude was that of the
English people as a whole was incredible to the French
enthusiasts. ... Their first work therefore they held to be
the bringing about a revolution in England. ... They strove,
through a number of associations which had formed themselves
under the name of Constitutional Clubs, to rouse the same
spirit which they had roused in France; and the French envoy,
Chauvelin, protested warmly against a proclamation which
denounced this correspondence as seditious. ... Burke was
still working hard in writings whose extravagance of style was
forgotten in their intensity of feeling to spread alarm
throughout Europe. He had from the first encouraged the
emigrant princes to take arms, and sent his son to join them
at Coblentz. 'Be alarmists,' he wrote to them; 'diffuse
terror!' But the royalist terror which he sowed would have
been of little moment had it not roused a revolutionary terror
in France. ... In November the Convention decreed that France
offered the aid of her soldiers to all nations who would
strive for freedom. ... In the teeth of treaties signed only
two years before, and of the stipulation made by England when
it pledged itself to neutrality, the French Government
resolved to attack Holland, and ordered its generals to
enforce by arms the opening of the Scheldt [see FRANCE: A.
D.1792-1793 (DECEMBER-FEBRUARY)]. To do this was to force
England into war. Public opinion was already pressing every
day harder upon Pitt. ... But even while withdrawing our
Minister from Paris on the imprisonment of the King, to whose
Court he had been commissioned, Pitt clung stubbornly to a
policy of peace. ...
{943}
No hour of Pitt's life is so great as the hour when he stood
lonely and passionless before the growth of national passion,
and refused to bow to the gathering cry for war. ... But
desperately as Pitt struggled for peace, his struggle was in
vain. ... Both sides ceased from diplomatic communications,
and in February 1793 France issued her Declaration of War.
From that moment Pitt's power was at an end. His pride, his
immovable firmness, and the general confidence of the nation,
still kept him at the head of affairs; but he could do little
save drift along with a tide of popular feeling which he never
fully understood. Around him the country broke out in a fit of
passion and panic which rivalled the passion and panic
oversea. ... The partisans of Republicanism were in reality
but a few handfuls of men. ... But in the mass of Englishmen
the dread of these revolutionists passed for the hour into
sheer panic. Even the bulk of the Whig party believed property
and the constitution to be in peril, and forsook Fox when he
still proclaimed his faith in France and the Revolution."

_J. R. Green,
History of the English People,
book 9, chapter 4 (volume 4)._

"Burke himself said that not one man in a hundred was a
Revolutionist. Fox's revolutionary sentiments met with no
response, but with general reprobation, and caused even his
friends to shrink from his side. Of the so-called Jacobin
Societies, the Society for Constitutional Information numbered
only a few hundred members, who, though they held extreme
opinions, were headed by men of character, and were quite
incapable of treason or violence. The Corresponding Society
was of a more sinister character; but its numbers were
computed only at 6,000, and it was swallowed up in the loyal
masses of the people. ... It is sad to say it, but when Pitt
had once left the path of right, he fell headlong into evil.
To gratify the ignoble fears and passions of his party, he
commenced a series of attacks on English liberty of speaking
and writing which Mr. Massey, a strong anti-revolutionist,
characterizes as unparalleled since the time of Charles I. The
country was filled with spies. A band of the most infamous
informers was called into activity by the government. ...
There was a Tory reign of terror, to which a slight increase
of the panic among the upper classes would probably have lent
a redder hue. Among other measures of repression the Habeas
Corpus Act was suspended; and the liberties of all men were
thus placed at the mercy of the party in power. ... In
Scotland the Tory reign of terror was worse than in England."

_Goldwin Smith,
Three English Statesmen,
pages 239-247._

"The gaols were filled with political delinquents, and no man
who professed himself a reformer could say, that the morrow
might not see him a prisoner upon a charge of high treason.
... But the rush towards despotism against which the Whigs
could not stand, was arrested by the people. Although the
Habeas Corpus had fallen, the Trial by Jury remained, and now,
as it had done before, when the alarm of fictitious plots had
disposed the nation to acquiesce in the surrender of its
liberties, it opposed a barrier which Toryism could not pass."
The trials which excited most interest were those of Hardy,
who organized the Corresponding Society, and Horne Tooke. But
no unlawful conduct or treasonable designs could be proved
against them by creditable witnesses, and both were
acquitted." The public joy was very general at these
acquittals. ... The war lost its popularity; bread grew
scarce; commerce was crippled; ... the easy success that had
been anticipated was replaced by reverses. The people
clamoured and threw stones at the king, and Pitt eagerly took
advantage of their violence to tear away the few shreds of the
constitution which yet covered them. He brought forward the
Seditious Meetings bill, and the Treasonable Practices bill.
Bills which, among other provisions, placed the conduct of
every political meeting under the protection of a magistrate,
and rendered disobedience to his command a felony."

_G. W. Cooke,
History of Party,
volume 3, chapter 17._

ALSO IN:
_J. Adolphus,
History of England: Reign of George III.,
chapters 81-89 and 95 (volumes 5-6)._

_J. Gifford,
History of the Political Life of William Pitt,
chapters 23-24, and 28-29 (volumes 3-4)._

_W. Massey,
History of England: Reign of George III.,
chapters 32-36 (volumes 3-4)._

_E. Smith,
The Story of the English Jacobins._

_A. Bisset,
Short History of the English Parliament,
chapter 8._

ENGLAND: A. D. 1794.
Campaigns of the Coalition against France.
French successes in the Netherlands and on the Rhine.
Conquest of Corsica.
Naval victory of Lord Howe.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1794 (MARCH-JULY).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1794.
Angry relations with the United States.
The Jay Treaty.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1794-1795.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1794-1795.
Withdrawal of troops from the Netherlands.
French conquest of Holland.
Establishment of the Batavian Republic.
Crumbling of the European Coalition.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1794-1795 (OCTOBER-MAY).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1795.
Disastrous expedition to Quiberon Bay.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1794-1796.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1795.
Capture of the Cape of Good Hope from the Dutch.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1795 (JUNE-DECEMBER).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1796 (SEPTEMBER).
Evacuation and abandonment of Corsica.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1796 (SEPTEMBER).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1796 (OCTOBER).
Unsuccessful peace negotiations with the French Directory.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1796 (OCTOBER).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1796-1798.
Attempted French invasions of Ireland.
Irish Insurrection.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1793-1798.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1797.
Monetary panic and suspension of specie payments.
Defeat of the first Reform movement.
Mutiny of the Fleet.
Naval victories of Cape St. Vincent and Camperdown.

"The aspect of affairs in Britain had never been so clouded
during the 18th century as at the beginning of the year 1797.
The failure of Lord Malmesbury's mission to Paris had closed
every hope of an honourable termination to the war, while of
all her original allies, Austria alone remained; the national
burdens were continually increasing, and the three-per-cents
had fallen to fifty-one; while party spirit raged with
uncommon violence, and Ireland was in a state of partial
insurrection. A still greater disaster resulted from the panic
arising from the dread of invasion, and which produced such a
run on all the banks, that the Bank of England itself was
reduced to payment in sixpences, and an Order in Council
appeared (February 26) for the suspension of all cash
payments. This measure, at first only temporary, was prolonged
from time to time by parliamentary enactments, making bank-notes
a legal-tender; and it was not till 1819, after the conclusion
of peace, that the recurrence to metallic currency took place.
{944}
The Opposition deemed this a favourable opportunity to renew
their cherished project of parliamentary reform; and on 26th
May, Mr. (afterwards Lord) Grey brought forward a plan chiefly
remarkable for containing the outlines of that subsequently
carried into effect in 1831. It was negatived, however, after
violent debates, by a majority of 258 against 93. After a
similar strife of parties, the motion for the continuance of
the war was carried by a great majority in both houses; and
the requisite supplies were voted. ... Unknown to the
government, great discontent had for a long time prevailed in
the navy. The exciting causes were principality the low rate
of pay (which had not been raised since the time of Charles
II.), the unequal distribution of prize-money, and undue
severity in the maintenance of discipline. These grounds of
complaint, with others not less well founded, gave rise to a
general conspiracy, which broke out (April 15) in the Channel
fleet under Lord Bridport. All the ships fell under the power
of the insurgents; but they maintained perfect order, and
memorialised the Admiralty and the Commons on their
grievances: their demands being examined by government, and
found to be reasonable, were granted; and on the 7th of May
the fleet returned to its duty. But scarcely was the spirit of
disaffection quelled in this quarter, when it broke out in a
more alarming form (May 22) among the squadron at the Nore,
which was soon after (June 6) joined by the force which had
been cruising off the Texel under Lord Duncan. The mutineers
appointed a seaman named Parker to the command; and,
blockading the mouth of the Thames, announced their demands in
such a tone of menacing audacity as insured their instant
rejection by the government. This second mutiny caused
dreadful consternation in London; but the firmness of the King
remained unshaken, and he was nobly seconded by the
parliament. A bill was passed, prohibiting all communication
with the mutineers under pain of death. Sheerness and Tilbury
Fort were armed and garrisoned for the defence of the Thames;
and the sailors, finding the national feelings strongly
arrayed against them, became gradually sensible that their
enterprise was desperate. One by one the ships returned to
their duty; and on 15th June all had submitted. Parker and
several other ringleaders suffered death; but clemency was
extended to the multitude. ... Notwithstanding all these
dissensions, the British navy was never more terrible to its
enemies than during this eventful year. On the 14th of
February, the Spanish fleet of 27 sail of the line and 12
frigates, which had put to sea for the purpose of raising the
blockade of the French harbours, was encountered off Cape St.
Vincent by Sir John Jarvis, who had only 15 ships and 6
frigates. By the old manœuvre of breaking the line, 9 of the
Spanish ships were cut off from the rest; and the admiral,
while attempting to regain them by wearing round the rear of
the British line, was boldly assailed by Nelson and
Collingwood,--the former of whom, in the Captain, of 74 guns,
engaged at once two of the enemy's gigantic vessels, the
Santissima Trinidad of 136 guns, and the San Josef of 112;
while the Salvador del Mundo, also of 112 guns, struck in a
quarter of an hour to Collingwood. Nelson at length carried
the San Josef by boarding, and received the Spanish admiral's
sword on his own quarterdeck. The Santissima Trinidad--an
enormous four-decker--though her colours were twice struck,
escaped in the confusion; but the San Josef and the Salvador,
with two 74-gun ships, remained in the hands of the British;
and the Spanish armament, thus routed by little more than half
its own force, retired in the deepest dejection to Cadiz, which
was shortly after insulted by a bombardment from the gallant
Nelson. A more important victory than that of Sir John Jarvis
(created in consequence Earl St. Vincent) was never gained at
sea, from the evident superiority of skill and seamanship
which it demonstrated in the British navy. The battle of St.
Vincent disconcerted the plans of Truguet for the naval
campaign; but later in the season a second attempt to reach
Brest was made by a Dutch fleet of 15 sail of the line and 11
frigates, under the command of De Winter, a man of tried
courage and experience. The British blockading fleet, under
Admiral Duncan, consisted of 16 ships and 3 frigates; and the
battle was fought (October 16) off Camperdown, about nine
miles from the shore of Holland. The manœuvres of the British
Admiral were directed to cut off the enemy's retreat to his
own shores; and this having been accomplished, the action
commenced yard-arm to yard-arm, and continued with the utmost
fury for more than three hours. The Dutch sailors fought with
the most admirable skill and courage, and proved themselves
worthy descendants of Van Tromp and De Ruyter; but the prowess
of the British was irresistible. 12 sail of the line,
including the flagship, two 56-gun ships, and 2 frigates,
struck their colours; but the nearness of the shore enabled
two of the prizes to escape, and one 74-gun ship foundered.
The obstinacy of the conflict was evidenced by the nearly
equal number of killed and wounded, which amounted to 1,040
English, and 1,160 Dutch. ... The only remaining operations of
the year were the capture of Trinidad in February, by a force
which soon after was repulsed from before Porto Rico; and an
abortive attempt at a descent in Pembroke Bay by about 1,400
French."

_Epitome of Alison's History of Europe,
sections 190-196 (chapter 22,
volume 5--of complete work)._

ALSO IN:
_J. Adolphus,
History of England: Reign of George III.,
chapters 100-103 (volume 6)._

_R. Southey,
Life of Nelson,
chapter 4._

_E. J. De La Gravière,
Sketches of the Last Naval War,
volume 1, part 2._

_Captain A. T. Mahan,
Influence of Sea Power on the
French Revolution and Empire,
chapters 8 and 11 (volume 1)._

ENGLAND: A. D. 1798 (AUGUST).
Nelson's victory in the Battle of the Nile.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1798 (MAY-AUGUST).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1798.
Second Coalition against Revolutionary France.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1798-1799 (AUGUST-APRIL).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1799 (APRIL).
Final war with Tippoo Saib (third Mysore War).

See INDIA: A. D. 1798-1805.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1799 (AUGUST-OCTOBER).
Expedition against Holland.
Seizure of the Dutch fleet.
Ignominious ending of the enterprise.
Capitulation of the Duke of York.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1799 (APRIL-SEPTEMBER),
and (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1800.
Legislative union of Ireland with Great Britain.
Creation of the "United Kingdom."

See IRELAND: A. D. 1798-1800.

{945}

ENGLAND: A. D. 1801.
The first Factory Act.

See FACTORY LEGISLATION.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1801-1802.
Import of the Treaty of Luneville.
Bonaparte's preparations for conflict with Great Britain alone.
Retirement of Pitt.
The Northern Maritime League and its summary annihilation at
Copenhagen.
Expulsion of the French from Egypt.
The Peace of Amiens.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1802.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1801-1806.
Pitt's promise to the Irish Catholics broken by the King.
His resignation.
The Addington Ministry.
The Peace of Amiens.
War resumed.
Pitt at the helm again.
His death.
The Ministry of "All the Talents."

"The union with Ireland introduced a new topic of party
discussion, which quickly became only second to that of
parliamentary reform. In transplanting the parliament of
College Green to St. Stephen's, Pitt had transplanted the
questions which were there debated; and, of these, none had
been more important than the demand of the Catholics to be
admitted to the common rights of citizens. Pitt, whose Toryism
was rather the imperiousness of a haughty master, than the
cautious cowardice of the miser of power, thought their
complaints were just. In his private negotiations with the
Irish popular leaders he probably promised that emancipation
should be the sequel to the union. In his place in parliament
he certainly gave an intimation, which from the mouth of a
minister could receive no second interpretation. Pitt was not
a minister who governed by petty stratagems, by ambiguous
professions, and by skilful shuffles: he was at least an
honourable enemy. He prepared to fulfil the pledge he had
given, and to admit the Catholics within the pale of the
constitution. It had been better for the character of George
III. had he imitated the candour of his minister; had he told
him that he had made a promise he would not be suffered to
fulfil, before he had obtained the advantage to gain which
that promise had been made. When Pitt proposed Catholic
emancipation as one of the topics of the king's speech, for
the session of 1801, the royal negative was at once
interposed, and when Dundas persisted in his attempt to
overcome his master's objections, the king abruptly terminated
the conference, saying, 'Scotch metaphysics cannot destroy
religious obligations.' Pitt immediately tendered his
resignation. ... All that was brilliant in Toryism passed from
the cabinet with the late minister: When Pitt and Canning were
withdrawn, with their satellites, nothing remained of the Tory
party but the mere courtiers who lived upon the favour of the
king, and the insipid lees of the party; men who voted upon
every subject in accordance with their one ruling idea--the
certain ruin, which must follow the first particle of
innovation. Yet from these relicts the king was obliged to
form a new cabinet, for application to the Whigs was out of
the question. These were more strenuous for emancipation than
Pitt. Henry Addington, Pitt's speaker of the house of commons,
was the person upon whom the king's choice fell; and he
succeeded, with the assistance of the late premier, in filling
up the offices at his disposal. ... The peace of Amiens was
the great work of this feeble administration [see FRANCE: A.
D. 1801-1802], and formed a severe commentary upon the
boastings of the Tories. 'Unless the monarchy of France be
restored,' Pitt had said, eight years before, 'the monarchy of
England is lost forever.' Eight years of warfare had succeeded,
yet the monarchy of France was not restored, and the crusade
was stayed. England had surrendered her conquests, France
retained hers; the landmarks of Europe had been in some degree
restored; England, alone, remained burdened with the enduring
consequences of the ruinous and useless strife. The peace was
approved by the Whigs, who were glad of any respite from such
a war, and by Pitt, who gave his support to the Addington
administration. But he could not control his adherents. ... As
the instability of the peace grew manifest, the incompetency
of the administration became generally acknowledged: with Pitt
sometimes chiding, Windham and Canning, and Lords Spencer and
Grenville continually attacking, and Fox and the Whigs only
refraining from violent opposition from a knowledge that if
Addington went out Pitt would be his successor, the conduct of
the government was by no means an easy or a grateful task to a
man destitute of commanding talents. When to these
parliamentary difficulties were added a recommencement of the
war, and a popular panic at Bonaparte's threatened invasion,
Addington's embarrassments became inextricable. He had
performed the business which Pitt had assigned him; he had
made an experimental peace, and had saved Pitt's honour with
the Roman Catholics. The object of his appointment he had
unconsciously completed, and no sooner did his predecessor
manifest an intention of returning to office, than the
ministerial majorities began to diminish, and Addington found
himself without support. On the 12th of April it was announced
that Mr. Addington had resigned, and Pitt appeared to resume
his station as a matter of course. During his temporary
retirement, Pitt had, however, lost one section of his
supporters. The Grenville party and the Whigs had gradually
approximated, and the former now refused to come into the new
arrangements unless Fox was introduced into the cabinet. To
this Pitt offered no objection, but the king was firm--or
obstinate. ... In the following year, Addington himself, now
created Viscount Sidmouth, returned to office with the
subordinate appointment of president of the council. The
conflagration had again spread through Europe. ... Pitt had
the mortification to see his grand continental coalition, the
produce of such immense expense and the object of such hope,
shattered in one campaign. At home, Lord Melville, his most
faithful political supporter, was attacked by a charge from
which he could not defend him, and underwent the impeachment
of the commons for malpractices in his office as treasurer of
the navy. Lord Sidmouth and several others seceded from the
cabinet, and Pitt, broken in health, and dispirited by
reverses, had lost much of his wonted energy. Thus passed away
the year 1805. On the 23d of January, 1806, Pitt expired. ...
The death of Pitt was the dissolution of his administration.
The Tory party was scattered in divisions and subdivisions
innumerable. Canning now recognised no political leader, but
retained his old contempt for Sidmouth and his friends, and
his hostility to the Grenvilles for their breach with Pitt.
Castlereagh, William Dundas, Hawkesbury, or Barham, although
sufficiently effective when Pitt was present to direct and to
defend, would have made a hopeless figure without him in face
of such an opposition as the house of commons now afforded.
{946}
The administration, which was ironically designated by its
opponents as 'All the Talents,' succeeded. Lord Grenville was
first lord of the treasury. Fox chose the office of secretary
for foreign affairs with the hope of putting an end to the
war. Windham was colonial secretary. Earl Spencer had the
seals of the home department. Erskine was lord chancellor. Mr.
Grey was first lord of the admiralty. Sheridan, treasurer of
the navy. Lord Sidmouth was privy seal. Lord Henry Petty, who,
although now only in his 26th year, had already acquired
considerable distinction as an eloquent Whig speaker, was
advanced to the post of chancellor of the exchequer, the
vacant chair of Pitt. Such were the men who now assumed the
reins under circumstances of unparalleled difficulty."

_G. W. Cooke,
History of Party,
volume 3, chapters 17-18._

ALSO IN:
_Earl Stanhope (Lord Mahon),
Life of Pitt,
chapters 29-44 (volumes 3-4)._

_A. G. Stapleton,
George Canning and His Times,
chapters 6-8._

_Earl Russell,
Life and Times of Charles James Fox,
chapters 58-69 (volume 3)._

_G. Pellew,
Life and Correspondence of Henry Addington,
1st Viscount Sidmouth,
chapters 10-26 (volumes 1-2)._

ENGLAND: A. D. 1802 (OCTOBER).
Protest against Bonaparte's interference in Switzerland.
His extraordinary reply.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1803.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1802-1803.
Bonaparte's complaints and demands.
The Peltier trial.
The First Consul's rage.
Declaration of war.
Napoleon's seizure of Hanover.
Cruel detention of all English people in France, Italy,
Switzerland and the Netherlands.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1802-1803.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1804-1809.
Difficulties with the United States.
Questions of neutral rights.
Right of Search and Impressment.
The American Embargo.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1804-1809, and 1808.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1805 (JANUARY-APRIL).
Third Coalition against France.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1805 (JANUARY-APRIL).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1805.
Napoleon's threatened invasion.
Nelson's long pursuit of the French fleet.
His victory and death at Trafalgar.
The crushing of the Coalition at Austerlitz.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1805 (MARCH-DECEMBER).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1806.
Final seizure of Cape Colony from the Dutch.

See SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1486-1806.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1806.
Cession of Hanover to Prussia by Napoleon.
War with Prussia.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1806 (JANUARY-AUGUST).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1806.
Attempted reinstatement of the dethroned King of Naples.
The Battle of Maida.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1805-1806 (DECEMBER-SEPTEMBER).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1806.
Death of Pitt.
Peace negotiations with Napoleon.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1806 (JANUARY-OCTOBER).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1806-1807.
Expedition against Buenos Ayres.

See ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1806-1820.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1806-1810.
Commercial warfare with Napoleon.
Orders in Council.
Berlin and Milan Decrees.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1806-1810.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1806-1812.
The ministry of "All the Talents."
Abolition of the Slave Trade.
The Portland and the Perceval ministries.
Confirmed insanity of George III.
Beginning of the regency of the Prince of Wales.
Assassination of Mr. Perceval.

The "Ministry of All the Talents" is "remarkable solely for
its mistakes, and is to be remembered chiefly for the death of
Fox [September 13, 1806] and the abolition of the slave-trade.
Fox was now destined at the close of his career to be
disillusioned with regard to Napoleon. He at last thoroughly
realized the insincerity of his hero. ... The second great
object of Fox's life he succeeded in attaining before his
death;--this was the abolition of the slave-trade. For more
than thirty years the question had been before the country,
and a vigorous agitation had been conducted by Clarkson,
Wilberforce, and Fox. . Pitt was quite at one with them on
this question, and had brought forward motions on the subject.
The House of Lords, however, rejected all measures of this
description during the Revolutionary War, under the influence
of the Anti-Jacobin feeling. It was reserved for Fox to
succeed in carrying a Bill inflicting heavy pecuniary
punishments on the traffic in slaves. And yet this
measure--the sole fruit of Fox's statesmanship--was wholly
inadequate; nor was it till the slave-trade was made felony in
1811 that its final extinction was secured. The remaining acts
of the Ministry were blunders. ... Their financial system was
a failure. They carried on the war so as to alienate their
allies and to cover themselves with humiliation. Finally, they
insisted on bringing forward a measure for the relief of the
Catholics, though there was not the slightest hope of carrying
it, and it could only cause a disruption of the Government.
... The king and the Pittites were determined to oppose it,
and so the Ministry agreed to drop the question under protest.
George insisted on their withdrawing the protest, and as this was
refused he dismissed them. ... This then was the final triumph
of George III. He had successfully dismissed this Ministry; he
had maintained the principle that every Ministry is bound to
withdraw any project displeasing to the king. These principles
were totally inconsistent with Constitutional Government, and
they indirectly precipitated Reform by rendering it absolutely
necessary in order to curb the royal influence. ... The Duke
of Portland's sole claims to form a Ministry were his high
rank, and the length of his previous services. His talents
were never very great, and they were weakened by age and
disease. The real leader was Mr. Perceval, the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, a dexterous debater and a patriotic statesman.
This Government, being formed on the closest Tory basis and on
the king's influence, was pledged to pursue a retrograde
policy and to oppose all measures of Reform. The one really
high-minded statesman in the Cabinet was Canning, the Foreign
Minister. His advanced views, however, continually brought him
into collision with Castlereagh, the War Minister, a man of
much inferior talents and the narrowest Tory views. Quarrels
inevitably arose between the two, and there was no real Prime
Minister to hold them strongly under control. ... At last the
ill-feeling ended in a duel, which was followed by a mutual
resignation on the ground that neither could serve with the
other. This was followed by the resignation of Portland, who
felt himself wholly unequal to the arduous task of managing
the Ministry any longer.
{947}
The leadership now devolved on Perceval, who found himself in
an apparently hopeless condition. His only supporters were
Lords Liverpool, Eldon, Palmerston, and Wellesley. Neither
Canning, Castlereagh, nor Sidmouth (Addington) would join him.
The miserable expedition to Walcheren had just ended in
ignominy. The campaign in the Peninsula was regarded as a
chimerical enterprise, got up mainly for the benefit of a Tory
commander. Certainly the most capable man in the Cabinet was
Lord Wellesley, the Foreign Minister, but he was continually
thwarted by the incapable men he had to deal with. However, as
long as he remained at the Foreign Office, he supported the
Peninsular War with vigour, and enabled his brother to carry
out more effectually his plans with regard to the defence of
Portugal. In November, 1810, the king was again seized with
insanity, nor did he ever recover the use of his faculties
during the rest of his life. The Ministry determined to bring
forward Pitt's old Bill of 1788 in a somewhat more modified
form, February, 1811. The Prince of Wales requested Grey and
Grenville to criticize this, but, regarding their reply as
lukewarm, he began to entertain an ill-will for them. At this
moment the judicious flattery of his family brought him over
from the Whigs, and he decided to continue Perceval in office.
Wellesley, however, took the opportunity to resign, and was
succeeded by Castlereagh, February, 1812. In May Perceval was
assassinated by Mr. Bellingham, a lunatic, and his Ministry at
once fell to pieces."

_B. C. Skottowe,
Our Hanoverian Kings,
book 10, chapter 3._

ALSO IN:
_F. H. Hill,
George Canning,
chapters 13-17._

_S. Walpole,
Life of Spencer Perceval,
volume 2._

_R. I. and S. Wilberforce,
Life of William Wilberforce,
chapter 20 (volume 3)._

ENGLAND: A. D. 1807.
Act for the Abolition of the Slave-Trade.

See SLAVERY, NEGRO: A. D. 1792-1807.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1807 (FEBRUARY-SEPTEMBER).
Operations in support of the Russians against the Turks and
French.
Bold naval attack on Constantinople and humiliating failure.
Disastrous expedition to Egypt.

See TURKS: A. D. 1806-1807.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1807 (JUNE-JULY).
Alliance formed at Tilsit between Napoleon and Alexander I. of
Russia.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1807 (JUNE-JULY).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1807 (AUGUST-NOVEMBER).
Bombardment of Copenhagen and seizure of the Danish fleet.
War with Russia and Denmark.

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES: A. D. 1807-1810.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1807 (OCTOBER-NOVEMBER).
Submission of Portugal to Napoleon under English advice.
Flight of the house of Braganza to Brazil.

See PORTUGAL: A. D. 1807.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1808 (MAY).
Ineffectual attempt to aid Sweden.
Expedition of Sir John Moore.

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES: A. D. 1807-1810.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1808 (JULY).
Peace and alliance with the Spanish people against the new
Napoleonic monarchy.
Opening of the Peninsular War.

See SPAIN: A. D.1808 (MAY-SEPTEMBER).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1808.
Expulsion of English forces from Capri.

See ITALY (SOUTHERN): A. D.1808-1809.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1808-1809.
Wellington's first campaign in the Peninsula.
Convention of Cintra.
Evacuation of Portugal by the French.
Sir John Moore's advance into Spain and his retreat.
His death at Corunna.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1808-1809 (AUGUST-JANUARY).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1809 (FEBRUARY-JULY).
Wellington sent to the Peninsula.
The passage of the Douro and the Battle of Talavera.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1809 (FEBRUARY-JULY).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1809 (JULY-DECEMBER).
The Walcheren Expedition.

"Three times before, during the war, it had occurred to one or
another, connected with the government, that it would be a
good thing to hold Antwerp, and command the Scheldt, seize the
French ships in the river, and get possession of their
arsenals and dockyards. On each occasion, men of military
science and experience had been consulted; and invariably they
had pronounced against the scheme. Now, however, what Mr. Pitt
had considered impracticable, Lord Castlereagh, with the
rashness of incapacity, resolved should be done: and, in order
not to be hindered, he avoided consulting with those who would
have objected to the enterprise. Though the scene of action
was to be the swamps at the mouths of the Scheldt, he
consulted no physician. Having himself neither naval,
military, nor medical knowledge, he assumed the
responsibility--except such as the King and the Duke of York
chose to share. ... It was May, 1809, before any stir was
apparent which could lead men outside the Cabinet to infer
that an expedition for the Scheldt was in contemplation; but
so early as the beginning of April (it is now known), Mr.
Canning signified that he could not share in the
responsibility of an enterprise which must so involve his own
office. ... The fleet that rode in the channel consisted of 39
ships of the line, and 36 frigates, and a due proportion of
small vessels: in all, 245 vessels of war: and 400 transports
carried 40,000 soldiers. Only one hospital ship was provided
for the whole expedition, though the Surgeon General implored
the grant of two more. He gave his reasons, but was refused.
... The naval commander was Sir Richard J. Strachan, whose
title to the responsibility no one could perceive, while many
who had more experience were unemployed. The military command
was given (as the selection of the present Cabinet bad been)
to Lord Chatham, for no better reason than that he was a
favourite with the King and Queen, who liked his gentle and
courtly manners, and his easy and amiable temper. ... The
fatal mistake was made of not defining the respective
authorities of the two commanders; and both being
inexperienced or apathetic, each relied upon the other first,
and cast the blame of failure upon him afterwards. In the
autumn, an epigram of unknown origin was in every body's
mouth, all over England:

'Lord Chatham, with his sword undrawn,
Stood waiting for Sir Richard Strachan;
Sir Richard, longing to be at 'em,
Stood waiting for the Earl of Chatham.'

The fleet set sail on the 28th of July, and was on the coast
of Holland the next day. The first discovery was that there
were not boats enough to land the troops and the ordnance. The
next was that no plan had been formed about how to proceed.
The most experienced officers were for pushing on to Antwerp,
45 miles off, and taking it before it could be prepared for
defence; but the commanders determined to take Flushing first.
They set about it so slowly that a fortnight was consumed in
preparations.
{948}
In two days more, the 15th of August, Flushing was taken.
After this, Lord Chatham paused to consider what he should do
next; and it was the 21st before be began to propose to go on
to Antwerp. Then came the next discovery, that, by this time
two intermediate places had been so strengthened that there
must be some fighting on the way. So he did nothing more but
take possession of two small islands near Flushing. Not
another blow was struck; not another league was traversed by
this magnificent expedition. But the most important discovery
of all now disclosed itself. The army had been brought into
the swamps at the beginning of the sickly season. Fever sprang
up under their feet, and 3,000 men were in hospital in a few
days, just when it became necessary to reduce the rations,
because provisions were falling short. On the 27th of August,
Lord Chatham led a council of war to resolve that 'it was not
advisable to pursue further operations.' But, if they could
not proceed, neither could they remain where they were. The
enemy had more spirit than their invaders. On the 30th and
31st, such a fire was opened from both banks of the river,
that the ships were obliged to retire. Flushing was given up,
and everything else except the island of Walcheren, which it
was fatal to hold at this season. On the 4th of September,
most of the ships were at home again; and Lord Chatham
appeared on the 14th. Eleven thousand men were by that time in
the fever, and he brought home as many as he could. Sir Eyre
Coote, whom he left in command, was dismayed to see all the
rest sinking down in disease at the rate of hundreds in a day.
Though the men had been working in the swamps, up to the waist
in marsh water, and the roofs of their sleeping places had
been carried off by bombardment, so that they slept under a
canopy of autumn fog, it was supposed that a supply of Thames
water to drink would stop the sickness; and a supply of 500
tons per week was transmitted. At last, at the end of October,
a hundred English bricklayers, with tools, bricks, and mortar,
were sent over to mend the roofs; but they immediately dropped
into the hospitals. Then the patients were to be accommodated
in the towns; but to spare the inhabitants, the soldiers were
laid down in damp churches; and their bedding had from the
beginning been insufficient for their need. At last,
government desired the chief officers of the army Medical
Board to repair to Walcheren, and see what was the precise
nature of the fever, and what could be done. The
Surgeon-General and the Physician-General threw the duty upon
each other. Government appointed it to the Physician-General,
Sir Lucas Pepys; but he refused to go. Both officers were
dismissed, and the medical department of the army was
reorganized and greatly improved. The deaths were at this time
from 200 to 300 a week. When Walcheren was evacuated, on the
23rd of December, nearly half the force sent out five months
before were dead or missing; and of those who returned, 35,000
were admitted into the hospitals of England before the next 1st
of June. Twenty millions sterling were spent on this
expedition. It was the purchase money of tens of thousands of
deaths, and of ineffaceable national disgrace."

_H. Martineau,
History of England, 1800-1815,
book 2, chapter 2._

ALSO IN:
_C. Knight,
Popular History of England,
volume 7, chapter 20._

ENGLAND: A. D. 1809 (AUGUST-DECEMBER).
Difficulties of Wellington's campaign in the Peninsula.
His retreat into Portugal.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1809 (AUGUST-DECEMBER).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1810.
Capture of the Mauritius.

See INDIA: A. D. 1805-1816.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1810-1812.
The War in the Peninsula.
Wellington's Lines of Torres Vedras.
French recoil from them.
English advance into Spain.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1800-1810 (OCTOBER-SEPTEMBER),
and 1810-1812.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1811.
Capture of Java from the Dutch.

See INDIA: A. D. 1805-1816.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1811-1812.
Desertion of Napoleon's Continental System by Russia and Sweden.
Reopening of their ports to British commerce.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1810-1812.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1812 (JANUARY).
Building of the first passenger Steam-boat.

See STEAM NAVIGATION: THE BEGINNINGS.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1812 (JUNE-AUGUST).
The Peninsular War.
Wellington's victory at Salamanca and advance to Madrid.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1812 (JUNE-AUGUST).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1812-1813.
The Liverpool Ministry.
Business depression and bad harvests.
Distress and rioting.
The Luddites.