|
This page is part of a website based
on the life and achievements of eighteenth-century inventor Henry Cort. Please email site controller Eric
Alexander with any comments or queries. |
18th
century politics
|
Whatever virtues the eighteenth century had, it was
assuredly not democratic. It did not
want to be democratic; and accordingly, even when democratic instruments were
placed in its hands, it did not commonly care or trouble to use them.
From Cole's contribution to A S Turberville (ed), Johnson's England (Oxford 1933). |
It doth not appear, from what you have said, how any
perfection is required towards the procurement of any one station among you,
much less that men are ennobled on account of their virtue, that priests are
advanced for their piety or learning, soldiers for their conduct or valour,
judges for their integrity, senators for the love of their country or
counsellors for their wisdom.
Observation by the King of Brobdingnag following Gulliver’s
explanation of Britain’s government, according to Jonathan Swift, 1726. |
The situation in
1760
We start this political
excursion with the death of George II in 1760.
He is succeeded by his grandson George III. The Seven Years War still has over two years to run. At the head of Government is William
Pitt. Nowadays we would him call Prime
Minister, but the term is not used in his time. Most holders of the office take the title First Lord of the
Treasury.
More than the title, what matters are the Seals of Office that
go with it. These will survive into the
twentieth century.
Pitt has achieved remarkable
success in directing the war effort.
But the new king has ambitions to be ruler of Great Britain, not just a
Hanoverian emigré with a crown and a few palaces this side of the water. His vision includes Scotland (often known as
North Britain at this time), where his mentor the Earl of Bute has his seat.
What is the political
situation he inherits?
A general election is
due. Elections are governed by a
Septennial Act: they must take place at least every seven years. One is also held after accession of a new
king.
Voters in the twenty-first century would barely recognise an
election as held in the eighteenth. The
whole method of voting is different, there is no common party platform to
attract votes across the whole country, and elections hardly ever produce an
immediate change in government.
The ballot, such as it is, is
not secret. If the constituency is
large, it may take place over several days.
Different constituencies vote at different times, so that a candidate
who is unsuccessful in one constituency can go on to contest another in the
same election. The qualifications for
voting vary from constituency to constituency (but nowhere are women allowed to
vote, far less to stand for election).
Many constituencies are not
contested. A contest in a large seat (some
counties have electorates of a few thousand) is expensive. When Ralph Verney stands for Buckinghamshire
in 1790, his agent will hope "to limit his expenses to £12,000 or
£13,000". Since candidates usually
have to meet their own expenses and Members of Parliament are not paid a
salary, many are deterred from standing.
In smaller seats there is
often a tradition of patronage. The
local landowner may choose a candidate: what then is the point of anyone else
standing? Or he may represent the constituency
himself, as Henry Petty does in Wycombe.
On being created Earl of Shelburne in 1760, he nominates his son William
to take over. And when William succeeds to the title, the vacant Commons seat is
offered to his friend Isaac Barré.
Political parties barely exist in Britain in the mid-eighteenth
century. Tories hardly dare show their
faces after being labelled Jacobites for the part played by some in the risings
of 1715 and 1745. Whigs have split into
factions, and there is a fair sprinkling of independent "country
gentlemen". It is commonly held
that political parties cause unnecessary conflict, sometimes even within
families.
A government is chosen
through a balancing of political forces, with the king playing an active
part. It falls if it loses support in
Parliament, if several of its members quit, or if the king gets fed up with it.
George III has a strong card
to play: patronage. Although there is
no salary, over 150 MPs claim an income as holders of "offices of
remuneration under the crown". It
will not be long before a group become known as King's Friends.
George's immediate problem in
1760 is to replace Pitt with his own favourite, the Earl of Bute. Pitt's success in the conduct of the war is
worrying many MPs. They, and the
electors they represent, are property owners: costs of the war will eventually
fall on them. They fear Pitt will
prolong it to bolster his own popularity.
The king and Bute work on
these fears, and on personal rivalries within the ruling group. Soon after the election Pitt loses the
cabinet's support in pursuing the war.
He promptly resigns, Bute takes over, and a tussle develops for control
of Parliament which is not resolved until 1770.
The Wilkes episode
Soon after Pitt's resignation
a scurrilous publication called The North
Briton starts to appear. It
portrays Bute's elevation to the top post as a victory for the Scots over the
English. It sneers at members of the
Government and even makes insinuations about the relationship between Bute and
the king's widowed mother. Most
villainously, it exposes to the public the way parliamentary affairs are
conducted.
|
It is a high indignity to and a notorious breach of the Privilege
of this House, for any News-Writer, in Letters, or other Papers (as Minutes,
or under any other denomination), or for any Printer or Publisher of any
printed News-paper of any denomination, to presume to insert in the said
Letters or Papers, or to give therein any account of the Debates or other
proceedings, of this House, or any Committee thereof, as well during the
Recess, as the Sitting of Parliament; and that this House will proceed with
the utmost severity against such offenders. Resolution of Parliament, April 13 1738,
quoted in Turberville (ed), Johnson's England (Oxford 1933). |
The author does not reveal
himself, but people have their suspicions.
Issue number 45 brings
matters to a head by alleging that some of the statements in the King's Speech
at the opening of Parliament are lies.
On 30th April 1763, two Secretaries of State issue a general warrant for
arrest of whoever is responsible. The
culprit is found to be John Wilkes, MP for Aylesbury. He is carted off to the Tower of London and confined.
Not everyone believes Wilkes
is a villain.
|
Keeping Wilkes in prison seems a very imprudent measure. The mob begin to say, whenever he is
indisposed, that he has been poisoned. From letter of Elizabeth
Montagu. |
What matters legally is
whether Wilkes as an MP is entitled to immunity. The Lord Chief Justice rules that he is. He is let out, to great rejoicing in the
streets and great consternation in Parliament.
He defuses the situation for a while by going off to France, but his
return in September is taken as another challenge to Government authority.
On 15 November the Commons,
much influenced by Lord Sandwich’s revelations about
other subversive – nay, blasphemous – literature found near Wilkes’s printing
press, votes 237-111 that North Briton
No 45 was "a false, scandalous and seditious libel".
A conviction for blasphemy
follows. Before he can be apprehended, Wilkes
leaves for France again. The House
votes to expel him.
The new MP for Aylesbury is
less contentious. Anthony Bacon’s business interests should ensure he
does not upset the Government.
But Wilkes’s story is not yet
over. In February 1768, with another
election due, he returns to England. He
stands for the City of London.
Unsuccessful there, he tries Middlesex.
This time he gets elected.
Taking his seat is another matter. He has yet to serve a sentence for blasphemy: at the end of April
he is back in the Tower. Rioting
ensues, leading to seven deaths in May.
A byelection is ordered. He
fights it from prison, and wins.
Still parliament refuses to
accept the Middlesex electorate's decision.
They vote to expel Wilkes and call another byelection. When he wins that, they reject him and
install his defeated opponent.
By now the City establishment
are rallying to Wilkes's side. They
elect him an Alderman. Lord Mayor
William Beckford presents a petition to the king. The king ignores it.
Beckford remonstrates: a
dangerous thing to do, but maybe he knows he has only a few weeks to live. You can read the words of his remonstrance
in the New DNB, and on the plinth of the memorial erected to him in the
Guildhall.
Wilkes is let out in 1771,
amidst "rejoicing on an unprecedented national scale".
But by now people are getting
tired of the battle, Wilkes included.
Elected Sheriff, then Lord Mayor, he joins the establishment. When a particularly bad bout of rioting breaks
out in 1780, he does his bit to quell it.
But he leaves a legacy. No longer does Parliament object to its
proceedings being made public.
No family link has yet been
found to a later John Wilkes responsible for the Universal British Directory
(1793-8).
The
American War
In 1770 comes a Government of
King's Friends, which proceeds to sleepwalk its way to war and the loss of
thirteen American colonies. At the head
of Government is Lord North, heir to the Earldom of Guilford (the sort of lord
who can take a seat in the Commons). At
the Admiralty is the Earl of Sandwich.
The colonists, they reckon,
are subjects of the Crown. We can rely
on the loyalty and obedience of most of them: why bother with a few loudmouths
moaning about "taxation without representation"? They ought to be jolly grateful that we sent
an army when they were threatened by the French. Why shouldn't they pay their whack? We lost a fine soldier when Wolfe fell at Quebec: they couldn't
do without us then.
They petition us to relax
some of our tax demands? All right,
we'll relax them – and come up with new ones.
We have to show them who's the boss.
They dump a load of tea in
Boston Harbour, because they'd rather buy it from their merchants than from
ours? Send out the troops!
They prepare for armed
resistance? Arrest them!
Not everyone in Parliament supports
this attitude. Some, like Barré, understand and sympathise with the
colonists. Some oppose the Government
on principle: they resent the King's influence, and don't mind being rated as
his enemies. Others are concerned about
the war’s cost, which they will eventually have to pay. (Not immediately: money
for the armed forces is raised by the sale of army and navy bonds. Over time these bonds are redeemed, with
interest. Future taxation.)
The war starts with an American
declaration of independence.
|
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his
Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and
destroyed the lives of our people. He
is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to compleat
the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances
of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and
totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation... In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for
Redress on the most humble terms; Our repeated Petitions have been answered
only by repeated injury. A Prince,
whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit
to be the ruler of a free people. Part of the catalogue of George III's
villainies cited in the American Declaration of Independence, 4 July 1776. |
.
The
conduct of the war meets criticism within Parliament. But the idea of giving up is too much for one old stalwart,
leading to a dramatic moment in the Lords…
|
I
must give you an account of Lord Chathams appearance at the House of Lords on
tuesday, and his indisposition. His
Lordship was recovering from a fit of the gout, but tho the distemper was
retiring, strength was not return'd; however the present critical state of
things would not allow a Statesman and a Patriot to slumber on his
Pillow. It was declared he wd come to
the House of Lords. He appear'd there. The Thunder of his eloquence was abated,
the lightening of his eye was dimmed, but experience gave weight to all he
said, and the glory of his days of administration threw a lustre around him. Every eye was fixd on him, every ear
attentive to him. The D. of Richmond
had made a motion, that the Commissioners should have power to declare
America independent, and gave for reason, the sad condition of this
Country. Submission and dejection
never fashioned the counsels of the Great Man. The energy of his mind imparted force enough to his body to
enable him to rise. He said, he
rejoyced that the Grave had spared him to this time, that he might declare
himself against the granting independence to America, and then he went on
reprobating what had been said of the weakness and inability of the
Country. In all the pomp of Oratory,
with all the lustre of eloquence he set forth the former triumphs of our
arms, and the past glories of the Brunswic line; the news papers will give
you the speech more at large. The D.
of Richmond answerd his Lordship, Lord Chatham rose to reply, the Genius of
Brittain seemd to heave in his bosom the Senate was attentive to catch its
Oracle; but the sentiments were too great for utterance, the subject too
important, too august for words; he fell into a convulsion fit; he continued
in the fit, and the House in consternation, for half an hour; his eldest and
second Son and Lord Mahone in speechless agony stood by him. Ld. Lyttelton with
great presence of mind went to Dr. Addington immediately on the accident; he
used every means to recover the Patient, and he brought him back from the
immeasurable distance of the inanimate being to the Earl of Chatham. he was very sick at the stomach for about
two hours, and the Doctor did not think it safe to carry him to Lord Mahones,
where he had taken up his abode, as the situation was remote, but removed him
to Mr. Strutts house adjacent. This
morning being still better he is gone to Downing Street. Humanly speaking (as the phrase is) I wish
and hope his recovery, but how great! how glorious! how marvellous! or, to
say all in one, how Chatham wd be his Exit! ... if he lives he may sweep away
some of our dirt and disgrace, but no addition will be made to his glory, for
we are become a scoundrel Nation, worthy to be scorned, and fit to be
cudgell'd... The account of Ld Chatham I had from his family, so you may
depend on the truth of it. From
letter of Elizabeth Montagu, April 1778. |
.
The Earl of Chatham (William
Pitt in his Commons days) postpones his final exit until 11 May.
Soon France joins the war, followed
later by Spain and Holland.
The war
ends
On 12 December 1781, Sir
James Lowther presents a Motion to the House of Commons for "putting an
end to the American War." To judge
from the speeches, news of the Yorktown surrender
has not reached MPs. Despite some
scathing comments about the Government and the inadequacy of the British Navy,
the motion is defeated. For a few
months the Government continues to get its way.
But the message from the
bourgeoisie is getting through: how much more will we have to pay for
this? The Government's majority
slips. In March 1782 North gives up,
and the king reluctantly hands the seals of office to the Marquis of
Rockingham. Under him, as Secretaries
of State, are Charles James Fox (Home Office) and the Earl
of Shelburne (Foreign Office). Keppel takes over from Sandwich at the Admiralty,
while the post of Navy Treasurer goes to Isaac Barré. One of the new Admiralty Board's first actions is to order Admiral Rodney's replacement by Admiral Pigot.
The new Government is
reconciled to American independence. It
opens negotiations with the rebels and their allies. Inquiries also start into the previous Government's conduct of
the war.
The king is not happy with the new arrangement. Accounts generally agree that the king
speaks only to the Foreign Secretary, the Earl of Shelburne, ignoring
Rockingham at the head of government.
In July Rockingham dies. When George calls on Shelburne to form a new
administration, Fox and his supporters pointedly decline to take part.
Two names stand out from the
new team: William Pitt (the younger) as Chancellor of the Exchequer and Henry Dundas as Treasurer of the Navy (Barré moving to
the equivalent army post of Paymaster General). If the new dispensation suits the king, it goes down badly with
his opponents. Fox is prepared to
discard a lot of political baggage to get back into Government: but eventually
the king wins out.
|
The only other possible coalition was between Fox and Lord
North. The two men met several times
and, despite their previous political differences, agreed to put their past
enmity behind them. As soon as the
Whigs and North's supporters began voting together Shelburne was lost... On 1 April North, Fox and the Duke of
Portland tripped up the stairs of St James's to receive the Great Seals of
State, loudly congratulating themselves on their success. From
Amanda Foreman, Georgiana Duchess of
Devonshire (Harper Collins,
1998). |
The Fox-North Government had nothing on which to rest their
feet. Within nine months this
Ministry also collapsed... The King
now seized his chance of regaining popularity by destroying a monstrous
administration. Party and personal
issues alike being exhausted by the weight of the disaster, George III saw
his opportunity if he could find the man...
In William Pitt, the son of the great Chatham, the King found the man. From
Winston S Churchill, A History of the English-speaking Peoples,
Vol III (London, 1957). |
The supremacy of William Pitt
The establishment of a new Government under Pitt
ushers in a new period of stability, the main political features being the king’s
illness of 1788-9 and the outbreak of a revolution in France, leading to new
Anglo-French hostilities in 1793.
In 1801 Pitt resigns after a
disagreement with the king over Catholic emancipation. The new administration under Addington signs
a treaty, the Peace of Amiens, with France and her allies in March 1802, but in
May the following year war breaks out again.
Meanwhile the appointment of Earl St Vincent as First Lord of the
Admiralty gives him an opportunity to settle old scores.
|
You may rest assured the Civil Branch of the Navy is rotten to
the core.
Attributed to John Jervis, Earl St Vincent, in Richmond's contribution
to A.S. Turberville (ed), Johnson's England. |
It was in 1803 that St Vincent achieved a Royal Commission to inquire
into the irregularities, frauds and abuses practised in the naval departments
and in the business of Prize Agency.
The fourteen reports between May, 1803, and June, 1806, exposed
incredible corruption and fraud. From
Geoffrey L. Green, The Royal Navy and
Anglo-Jewry. |
In May 1804 Pitt returns, and
St Vincent is succeeded by the newly ennobled Henry Dundas, Lord Melville.
The Tenth Report of the
Commission of Naval Enquiry appears early in 1805, leading to proceedings against Melville.
After Pitt’s death in January
1806, a ministry “of all the talents” takes over, and Melville is acquitted: at
which point we may leave this account of later eighteenth-century politics,
with nine further years of war to run.
|
RELATED TOPICS John Becher and
the American War Thomas Morgan
and the American War Shelburne, Parry and
associates Thomas
Lyttelton: a fantastic narrative |
henrycort.net
hk