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

resigning at so serious a crisis. But the verdict must depend on three

main issues, the importance of the question at stake, that of the

services rendered by the Irish Catholics, and the nature of the promises

made to them. Now, no one will deny that in the days when France was

striving to effect the independence of Ireland--for Bonaparte was

thought to be pressing on the war with that aim in view[595]--the

question of the Union stood paramount. It was the most important problem

confronting Parliament since the Union with Scotland in 1707; and the

difficulties encountered were greater than those raised by the Scots.

The services of the Irish Catholics to the cause of the Union are not

easy to assess; but Castlereagh, a cool judge, rated them high. In such

a case a man of sensitive conscience will deem himself bound to those

who, in reliance on his sense of honour, acted in a way that ensured the

success of his measure. Above all, in so tangled a situation the final

decision will depend on the character of the statesman. Walpole would

have waived aside the debt of honour. Pitt resolved to discharge it.

It is scarcely necessary to notice another slander, that Pitt resigned

because, in his inability to procure peace from France, he intended to

put Addington in office merely for that purpose, to be ousted when it

was fulfilled. No evidence is forthcoming in support of this version,

which found no small favour with Continental historians of a former

generation; but it is now clear that the split occurred solely on

Catholic Emancipation. Those Ministers who approved it resigned; while

its opponents remained in office, namely, Portland, Chatham, and

Westmorland. The same is true of the subordinate offices. The new

Cabinet decided to grant only occasional relief and a "compassionate

allowance" to the Irish priests.[596] In several other matters its

policy differed from that of Pitt; and Addington soon made it apparent

that he was no stop-gap.

But now this clear issue was to be blurred in the blinding glare of the

King's lunacy. The causes of the malady of February 1801 were partly

physical, partly mental. While still agitated by the dismissal of his

trusted Minister, the King, two days later, went to church on the day

appointed for the National Fast. That day of supplication for delivery

from the perils of the time was shrouded in gloom and snow. He remained

a long time in church and took a chill. Nevertheless, with his wonted

energy he persisted in transacting business with Addington, until the

stress told on the brain. On the 16th slight feverish symptoms began to

develop. Yet Addington saw him often about new appointments, until on

Sunday the 22nd the symptoms caused some concern. Willis, son of the man

who had so much control over him during the illness of 1788-9, now came

to the Queen's House, and resumed the old regimen. Dr. Gisborne was also

in attendance. From the notes of Tomline we glean curious details about

the illness. The bilious symptoms were very pronounced, and after the

23rd the King became worse. His manner became nervous and "hurried." He

went up to Willis and shook him eagerly by the hand. When the Queen and

princesses rose to leave, he jocosely extended his arms so as to stop

them; whereupon Willis stepped forward, and, looking at him earnestly,

told him he was very ill. The King at once said with a deep sigh: "I

see, I cannot deceive you. I have deceived all the rest. They think me

well; but I cannot deceive you." He then burst into an agony of weeping,

threw himself into Willis's arms, and said: "You are right. I am ill

indeed. But oh! for God's sake, keep your father from me, and keep off a

Regency."

After weeping for a quarter of an hour, he walked about the room with

Willis for an hour and a half. In the evening he grew worse. At 2.30

a.m. he went to bed, while the Duke of Kent and Willis watched by the

door. As in the previous seizure, intervals of calm and reasonableness

alternated strangely with fits of delirium or even of violence. Now and

again he spoke collectedly, and at such times those about him rejoiced

to hear the familiar "What, what," wherewith he prefaced his

remarks.[597]

Frequently he declared that he would uphold the Church of England; or

again his thoughts started away from the loathed spectre of a Regency.

On 2nd March the illness took so violent a turn that his life seemed in

danger; but, as was the case twelve years before, long spells of sleep

supervened and brought his pulse down from 136 to 84. His powers of

recovery surprised every one about him. By 6th March he was so far well

as to be allowed to see the Dukes of York, Kent, and Cumberland. Not

until 9th March did he undergo the more trying ordeal of seeing the

Prince of Wales. On that same day he requested to see Pitt, who very

properly declined, suggesting, with all deference, that Addington was

the proper person for an interview.[598]

Meanwhile, at or just after the crisis of the illness, Pitt gave a very

important pledge. If we may trust the far from convincing statements of

Lord Malmesbury, who had the story from Pelham, the King on 7th March

charged Willis to inform Pitt of the improvement in his health, and to

add the biting words: "But what has not _he_ to answer for who is the

cause of my having been ill at all?" Pelham further asserted that Pitt,

in a "most dutiful, humble and contrite answer," wrote down his resolve

to give up Catholic Emancipation.[599] Now it is almost certain that

Pitt sent no such letter, for none exists either at the Public Record

Office, Orwell Park, or Chevening. Tomline asserts that Pitt sent by

Willis a verbal assurance that he would not agitate Catholic

Emancipation again during the King's reign; whereupon George III

exclaimed: "Now my mind will be at ease." The bishop, however, believed

that Pitt's assurance was reported in a more emphatic form than was

warranted; and the statesman does not seem to have considered himself

absolutely bound by it. Yet the written assurance sent by Rose to the

King on behalf of Pitt seems binding during that reign.[600]

Thus had the King conquered--by madness. No incident in the life of Pitt

is more unfortunate than this surrender. The King had made an ungenerous

use of the privileges of an invalid, and the pressure which he put on

Pitt passes the bounds even of the immorality of a sick-room. The

illness began with a chill due to his own imprudence; but he used its

later developments to extort a promise which otherwise would never have

been forthcoming. Nothing but the crisis in the King's illness led Pitt

to waver. For at the end of February he authorized Castlereagh to send

to Cornwallis at Dublin a declaration intended to reassure the Irish

Catholics. It pointed out that the majority of the Cabinet had resigned

owing to the impossibility of carrying Catholic Emancipation at the

present juncture. He (Pitt) still resolved to do his utmost for the

success of that cause; and therefore begged them to refrain from any

conduct which would prejudice it in the future. Cornwallis delivered

this and another paper to the titular Archbishop of Dublin and Lord

Fingall for circulation among their friends and found that it produced

good results.[601] Far different, of course, was the effect produced on

those few who knew of Pitt's private promise to the King. They

contrasted it with the contrary promise to the Irish Catholics and drew

the most unfavourable inferences, forgetting that between 27th February

and 2nd March the King's illness had taken so dangerous a turn as

perhaps to justify the use of that political sedative.

While blaming Pitt for weakness in giving this pledge to the King, we

must remember that the prolongation of the reign of George III was the

first desire of all responsible statesmen. The intrigues of the Prince

of Wales and Fox for a Regency were again beginning; and thus there

loomed ahead an appalling vista of waste and demoralization. In these

circumstances Dundas and Cornwallis came to the conclusion that the

King's conscience must not again be troubled. Grenville seems to have

held firm on the Catholic Question.[602] But his colleagues now took an

opportunist view. Pitt had two or three interviews with the Prince of

Wales, late in February and early in March, and made it clear that the

Prince would be well advised to accept the Regency Bill drafted in 1789.

On the Prince asking whether this was the opinion of certain of Pitt's

colleagues, who then opposed that Bill as derogatory to his interests,

Pitt at once replied in the affirmative; and when the Prince further

objected to certain restrictions on the power of the Regent, Pitt

declared that no change would be acceptable. They parted courteously but

coolly; and we may be sure that the Prince never forgave Pitt for his

uncompromising assertion of the rights of Parliament.

So dark was the outlook at home and abroad that Pitt was persuaded,

probably by Dundas, Tomline, Rose, and Canning, to re-consider the whole

question with a view to continuance in office, provided that some

suitable position were found for Addington. The bishop penned some notes

of sharp criticism on the conduct of Addington, affirming that, if he

had been patriotic and sincere, he would have pressed Pitt to remain in

office. The following words are remarkable: "Mr. Pitt, Mr. Dundas and

myself had a long conversation upon this point at Wimbledon; and I am

satisfied that, if Mr. Addington had entered into the idea cordially,

Mr. Pitt's resignation might have been prevented." He adds that they

drew up a tentative scheme of a Cabinet, Pitt remaining as chief, while

Addington was to be a Secretary of State; but the latter rejected this

indignantly.[603] Pitt also finally deemed the plan "utterly improper,"

and threatened to hold aloof from those who would not support the new

Administration or croaked about its instability. The action of Dundas

and the bishop was unfortunate; for it gave rise to the report that Pitt

was intriguing with them for a shuffling of offices in which he would

again come out at the top; and, as usually happens, the meanest version

overshadowed the truth.

Fortune willed that the new Ministry, by far the weakest Ministry of

recent times, should win two brilliant successes and secure a not

inglorious peace. So bewildering a change seemed impossible in the dark

days of February-March 1801, when it was the bounden duty of every

strong man to remain at his post, and of under-studies to stand aside.

The fates and Addington willed otherwise. Pitt resigned on 14th March,

nineteen days before Nelson triumphed at Copenhagen.

Meanwhile Pitt had endeavoured to place the nation's finance on a sound

footing. His Budget speech of 18th February has a ring of confidence and

pride. True, the expenses were unprecedentedly heavy. Great Britain had

to provide £12,117,000, and Ireland £3,785,000, for the army alone. The

navy cost £15,800,000; the Ordnance £1,938,000. The bad seasons or other

causes having lessened the yield of the Income Tax and the Malt Tax, he

proposed further imposts upon sugar, raisins, tea, paper, timber, lead,

and all exports without exception. He increased the Excise duty on

horses, even those used for agriculture, on stamp duties, and on the

postage of letters. He also urged that not less than £200,000 (the

normal amount) should be set apart for the reduction of the British

National Debt. Over against these depressing proposals he set the

notable fact that British commerce prospered more than ever, and that

the revenue showed remarkable buoyancy. From these extraordinary

symptoms he augured that the strength and spirit of the people were

equal to all the demands of the crisis; and he declared that the

attachment of the nation to its revered monarch and beloved constitution

furnished a moving spectacle to Europe. The House accepted these

crushing imposts without demur.

He found it more difficult to reconcile his followers to the sway of

Addington. As we have seen, Dundas had already expressed to Pitt his

scorn of him and his desire for a Portland Ministry. Rose also refused

to serve under a man whom he accused (unjustly, as we now know) of

worming his way to office; and the high-spirited Canning declined to

give to Pitt any pledge except that he would not laugh at the new Prime

Minister. It is clear that Canning, like his chief, disliked

resignation. As the gifted young Irishman wrote, it was not at all good

fun to move out of the best house in London (Downing Street) and hunt

about for a little dwelling.[604] Ryder and Steele kept their posts.

Singular to relate, the Mr. Pliable of so many Ministries was soon to be

turned out. Loughborough, on whose