William Pitt and the Great War by John Holland Rose (book club reads txt) 📕

clerks. On behalf of the last suggestion an anonymous writer points out

that it would enhance the dignity of the legal profession. Another

correspondent suggests a similar impost on physicians, surgeons, and

chemists, ranging from ten guineas in London to three guineas in the

provinces, in order to discourage the entry of illiterates. He also

urges the need of stopping the increase of luxury and amusements by

taxing hot-houses, horses and carriages let out on Sundays, organs,

pianos, and all musical instruments, as well as the owners thereof, on

the ground that this step will lessen the alarming growth of

bankruptcies and divorces. A tax on armorial bearings is suggested as

one which will not be resented by the rich. A fourth correspondent

advocates a graduated Income Tax, ranging from 6_d._ in the pound on

incomes under £400, up to 5_s._ in the pound on incomes of more than,

£30,000 a year, and estimates the total yield at £62,625,000. The same

writer urges the need of a tax on sinecures and pensions, and finally

begs Pitt for a place for life, devolving on his son.[449]

The Chancellor of the Exchequer therefore had the choice of the direct

attack on the purse or the increase of atmospheric pressure. For the

present he chose the latter method, enhancing the duties on tea, wines,

sugar, spirits, game licences, glass, tobacco, and snuff, besides

raising the "Assessed Taxes" by ten per cent. The produce of some of

these imposts is curious. Hair-powder yielded £197,000; the extra tea

and wine duties £186,000 and £923,000, severally; those on tobacco and

snuff only £40,000. Pitt's procedure in December 1796 was very cautious.

He carefully watched the yield of the new taxes, in order to see whether

the increase of price checked consumption. Finding that this did not

happen in the case of tea and spirits, he further raised the duties on

those commodities; but, on behalf of the poor, he exempted the cheaper

kinds of tea. On the other hand he proposed to check the consumption of

spirits by imposing an extra duty of five pence a gallon along with a

surcharge on distillery licences. Further, as the duties on bricks,

auction sales, sugar, bar iron, oil, wines, and coal had not lessened

consumption, he again increased them. A questionable experiment was an

increase in the postage of letters and parcels, and in the duties on

newspapers, stage coaches, and canal tolls. A new House Duty, levied in

proportion to the number of servants, is open to less objection. On the

whole he expected the new taxes to yield £2,138,000. The total supply

asked for was £27,640,000.

The financial outlook grew darker in the year 1797. At the close of

January came the news of Hoche's expedition to Bantry Bay, which

revealed the possibility of revolutionizing Ireland. On 4th February

Pitt heard of the triumph of Bonaparte at Rivoli. The tidings told

disastrously on markets already in a nervous state. A correspondent of

Pitt attributed the decline to the action of the Bank of England at the

close of 1795, in reducing their discounts. Fox and his friends ascribed

it to the export of specie to Vienna; while Ministers and their friends

gave out that it resulted from the fears of invasion, and the desire of

depositors everywhere to withdraw their money and place it in hiding.

Privately, however, Pitt confessed to Auckland that the export of gold

brought matters to a climax.

The amount of specie in the Bank of England, which was nearly £8,000,000

in 1795, fell to £1,272,000 in February 1797. In reality the Bank was

solvent, but it could not have realized its securities; and on several

occasions the Directors warned Pitt that any further withdrawals of

specie would bring on a crisis.[450] The final cause of alarm was a loan

of £1,500,000 to the Irish Government, the first occasion on which any

large sum was raised for that Administration.[451] On 25th and 26th

February, then, crowds rushed to withdraw money from the Bank into which

eleven weeks before they thronged in order to procure shares in the

Loyalty Loan. So serious was the crisis that Ministers decided to

intervene. On Sunday the 26th a meeting was held of the Privy Council,

which issued an Order in Council empowering the Directors to refuse

payments in cash until Parliament gave further orders on the

subject.[452]

For a few hours there was the prospect of a general collapse; and as

the Bank issued no notes for less than £5, though Sinclair and others

had advised the issue of £3 and £2 notes, small traders were threatened

with a recurrence to barter. Fortunately on 27th February the Directors

published a reassuring statement, and the Lord Mayor presided at an

influential meeting on the same day, which decided to accept banknotes

as legal tender for any amount. Thus a crash was averted. But Fox,

Sheridan, and the Opposition ably accused Pitt of leading his own

country to the brink of bankruptcy, even while he proclaimed the

imminent insolvency of France. They thundered against the export of gold

to the Emperor, and demanded a searching inquiry into the high-handed

dealings of the Minister with the Bank and with national finance. "We

have too long had a confiding House of Commons," exclaimed Fox; "I want

now an inquiring House of Commons." Despite Pitt's poor defence of his

loans to the Emperor, the Government carried the day by 244 votes to 86

(28th February); but the unwonted size of the minority was a sharp

warning to curtail loans and subsidies. Apart from a small loan to

Portugal in 1798, nothing of note was done to help Continental States

until Russia demanded pecuniary aid for the War of the Second Coalition.

In order to provide a circulating medium, the Bank was empowered to

issue notes for £2 and £1, and to refuse cash payments for sums

exceeding £1 (March to May 1797).

Meanwhile, shortly after the Bank crisis, came news of the failure of an

American, Colonel Tate, with some 1,400 French gaol-birds, to make a

raid at Fishguard in Pembrokeshire. A later legend sought to embellish

this very tame affair by ascribing his failure to the apparition on the

hills of Welsh women in high hats and scarlet cloaks, whom the invaders

took for regulars. Unfortunately for lovers of the picturesque, the

apparition occurs only in much later accounts.[453] Far more important

were the tidings from Cape St. Vincent. There Jervis, with only fifteen

ships, boldly attacked twenty-seven Spaniards while still in confusion

after a foggy night. As is well known, the boldness of Nelson, in

wearing out of the line so as to prevent the reunion of the enemy's

ships, crowned the day with glory (14th February). The weakness of the

Spanish navy stood glaringly revealed, and the fear of invasion, which

turned mainly on a junction of their fleet to that of France,

thenceforth subsided.

Jervis remarked before the fight that England never stood in more need

of a victory. The news reached London most opportunely on 3rd March;

for, along with the Bank crisis, came rumours of serious discontent

among our seamen. Even Jervis could scarcely stamp out disaffection in

the fleet that rode triumphantly before Cadiz; and in home waters mutiny

soon ran riot. Is it surprising that sailors mutinied? In large part

they were pressed men. Violence swept the crews together, and terror

alone kept them together. The rules of the service prescribed flogging

for minor offences, hanging for refusal to work. How men existed in the

over-crowded decks is a mystery. On paper the rations seem adequate, a

pound of meat per day, a proportionate amount of biscuit, and half a

pint of rum. But these provisions were issued by pursers who often eked

out their scanty pay by defrauding the crew. Weevilly biscuits and meat

of briny antiquity were therefore the rule, excess of salt and close

packing being deemed adequate safeguards against decay. Finally the

indurated mass became so susceptible of polish as in the last resort to

provide the purser with a supply of snuff-boxes. One little comfort was

allowed, namely, cocoa for breakfast. But the chief solace was rum,

cheap, new, and fiery, from the West Indies. This and the rope-end

formed the _nexus_ of the crew. As for the pay, from which alone the

sailor could make his lot bearable, it had not been increased since the

reign of Charles II. Thanks to the Duke of York, that of the army had

been raised from 8 1/4_d._ to 1_s._ a day, though not in proportion to

the cost of living, the net gain being only 2_d._ a day. The sailor

alone was forgotten, and, lest he should come into touch with Radical

clubs, leave of absence was rarely if ever accorded.

The men of the Channel Fleet were the first to resolve to end their

chief grievances, namely, insufficient pay, withdrawal of leave of

absence, and the unfair distribution of prize money. On putting back to

Spithead in March 1797, they sent to Admiral Howe several round-robins

demanding an increase of pay. He was then ill at Bath, and, deeming them

the outcome of a single knot of malcontents, ignored them. This angered

the men. His successor in command, Lord Bridport (brother of Sir

Alexander Hood), was less popular; and when it transpired that the fleet

would soon set sail, the men resolved to show their power. Accordingly,

on 15th April, on the hoisting of the signal to weigh anchor, the crew

of the flag-ship, the "Queen Charlotte," manned her shrouds and gave

three cheers. The others followed her example, and not an anchor was

weighed. On the next day (Easter Sunday) the men formed a central

committee, sent ashore some hated officers, and formulated the demands

outlined above, promising to fight the French if they put to sea, and

afterwards to renew the same demands.

That Easter was a time of dismay in London. Ministers at once met in

Cabinet Council and agreed to despatch to Portsmouth Spencer, first Lord

of the Admiralty, along with Admiral Young, and others. Spencer's

reputation for sincerity, love of justice, and regard for the seamen

inspired general confidence; and when the Commissioners were joined by

Bridport, Parker, Colpoys, and Gardner, there was hope of a compromise.

The men allowed Bridport to retain his command, provided that he did not

issue orders for sea; they enforced respect to officers; they flogged

one man who became drunk, and ducked more venial offenders three times

from a rope tied at the main-yard. Their committee of thirty-two (two

from each ship), met every day on the "Queen Charlotte"; it demanded an

increase of pay from 9 3/4_d._ to 1_s._ a day. But when Spencer promised

to lay this request before the King, on condition of immediate

restoration of discipline, the men demurred. Conscious of their power,

they now claimed that rations must be served out, not 12 ounces, but 16

ounces to the pound; that the power of awarding heavy punishments for

petty offences should be curtailed, extended opportunities being also

granted for going ashore. In vain did Spencer and his colleagues protest

against this dictation of terms. A personal appeal to the crew of the

"Royal George" had no effect; and when Gardner vehemently reproached the

men for skulking from the French, they ran at him; and he would have

fared badly had he not placed his neck in a noose of a yard-rope and

called on the men to hang him provided they returned to duty. The men

thereupon cheered him and retired.

On 18th April the men's committee formulated their demands in two

manifestoes. Further conferences took place, in one of which Gardner

shook a delegate by the collar and was himself nearly murdered. The

whole fleet then defiantly flew the red flag. Spencer and his colleagues

returned to London for an interview with Pitt; and along with him and

the Lord Chancellor they posted to Windsor to urge the need of

compliance with the men's demands. Grenville, journeying from Dropmore,

joined them, and a Privy Council was held. Pitt's and Spencer's views

prevailed, and a Royal Proclamation was drawn up on 22nd April,

pardoning the crews if they would return to duty. A horseman riding at

full speed bore the document to Portsmouth in seven hours, and the

fleet, with the exception of the "Marlborough," re-hoisted the white

ensign and prepared for sea. The discontent rife at Plymouth also

subsided. On 26th April, during a Budget debate, Pitt promised to

provide for the extra pay to seamen and marines.

But on 3rd May an indiscreet opening of the whole question in the House

of Lords by the Duke of Bedford led to a revival of discontent at

Spithead. He upbraided Pitt with delay in introducing a Bill to give

effect to the Royal Proclamation. Howe thereupon proceeded to justify

his former conduct; and Spencer remarked that he did not expect to

receive the King's commands to bring down any communication on the

affair to the House of Lords. By an