History of Civilization in England, Vol. 1 of 3

802

On the connexion between the decline of the Stuart interest and the increased power of the crown under George III., compare Thoughts on the Present Discontents, in Burke's Works, vol. i. pp. 127, 128, with Watson's Life of Himself, vol. i. p. 136; and for an intimation that this result was expected, see Grosley's London, vol. ii. p. 252.

803

Campbell's Chancellors, vol. v. p. 245: ‘The divine indefeasible right of kings became the favourite theme – in total forgetfulness of its incompatibility with the parliamentary title of the reigning monarch.’ Horace Walpole (Mem. of George III. vol. i. p. 16) says, that in 1760 ‘prerogative became a fashionable word.’

804

The respect George III. always displayed for church-ceremonies formed of itself a marked contrast with the indifference of his immediate predecessors; and the change was gratefully noticed. Compare Mahon's Hist. of England, vol. v. pp. 54, 55, with the extract from Archbishop Secker, in Bancroft's American Revolution, vol. i. p. 440. For other evidence of the admiration both parties felt and openly expressed for each other, see an address from the bishop and clergy of St. Asaph (Parr's Works, vol. vii. p. 352), and a letter from the king to Pitt (Russell's Memorials of Fox, vol. iii. p. 251), which should be compared with Priestley's Memoirs, vol. i. pp. 137, 138.

805

The education of George III. had been shamefully neglected; and when he arrived at manhood he never attempted to repair its deficiencies, but remained during his long life in a state of pitiable ignorance. Compare Brougham's Statesmen, vol. i. pp. 13–15; Walpole's Mem. of George III. vol. i. p. 55; Mahon's Hist. of England, vol. iv. pp. 54, 207.

806

See some good remarks by Lord John Russell in his Introduction to the Bedford Correspondence, vol. iii. p. lxii.

807

In a motion for reform in Parliament in 1782, he declared that it was ‘essentially necessary.’ See his speech, in Parl. Hist. vol. xxii. p. 1418. In 1784 he mentioned ‘the necessity of a parliamentary reform,’ vol. xxiv. p. 349; see also pp. 998, 999. Compare Disney's Life of Jebb, p. 209. Nor is it true, as some have said, that he afterwards abandoned the cause of reform because the times were unfavourable to it. On the contrary, he, in a speech delivered in 1800, said (Parl. Hist. vol. xxxv. p. 47): ‘Upon this subject, sir, I think it right to state the inmost thoughts of my mind; I think it right to declare my most decided opinion, that, even if the times were proper for experiments, any, even the slightest, change in such a constitution must be considered as an evil.’ It is remarkable that, even as early as 1783, Paley appears to have suspected the sincerity of Pitt's professions in favour of reform. See Meadley's Memoirs of Paley, p. 121.

808

In 1794 Grey taunted him with this in the House of Commons: ‘William Pitt, the reformer of that day, was William Pitt, the prosecutor, ay and persecutor too, of reformers now.’ Parl. Hist. vol. xxxi. p. 532; compare vol. xxxiii. p. 659. So, too, Lord Campbell (Chief-Justices, vol. ii. p. 544): ‘He afterwards tried to hang a few of his brother reformers who continued steady in the cause.’ See further, on this damning fact in the career of Pitt, Campbell's Chancellors, vol. vii. p. 105; Brougham's Statesmen, vol. ii. p. 21; Belsham's History, vol. ix. pp. 79, 242; Life of Cartwright, vol. i. p. 198; and even a letter from the mild and benevolent Roscoe, in Life of Roscoe, by his Son, vol. i. p. 113.

809

Such was the king's zeal in favour of the slave-trade, that in 1770 ‘he issued an instruction under his own hand commanding the governor (of Virginia), upon pain of the highest displeasure, to assent to no law by which the importation of slaves should be in any respect prohibited or obstructed.’ Bancroft's American Revolution, vol. iii. p. 456: so that, as Mr. Bancroft indignantly observes, p. 469, while the courts of law had decided ‘that as soon as any slave set his foot on English ground he becomes free, the king of England stood in the path of humanity, and made himself the pillar of the colonial slave-trade.’ The shuffling conduct of Pitt in this matter makes it hard for any honest man to forgive him. Compare Brougham's Statesmen, vol. ii. pp. 14, 103–105; Russell's Mem. of Fox, vol. iii. pp. 131, 278, 279; Belsham's Hist. of Great Britain, vol. x. pp. 34, 35; Life of Wakefield, vol. i. p. 197; Porter's Progress of the Nation, vol. iii. p. 426; Holland's Mem. of the Whig Party, vol. ii. p. 157; and the striking remarks of Francis, in Parl. Hist. vol. xxxii. p. 949.

810

That Pitt wished to remain at peace, and was hurried into the war with France by the influence of the court, is admitted by the best-informed writers, men in other respects of different opinions. See, for instance, Brougham's Statesmen, vol. ii. p. 9; Rogers's Introduction to Burke's Works, p. lxxxiv.; Nicholls's Recollections, vol. ii. pp. 155, 200.

811

The mere existence of such a party, with such a name, shows how, in a political point of view, England was receding during this period from the maxims established at the Revolution. Respecting this active faction, compare the indignant remarks of Burke (Works, vol. i. p. 133) with Albemarle's Rockingham, vol. i. pp. 5, 307; Buckingham's Mem. of George III. vol. i. p. 284, vol. ii. p. 154; Russell's Mem. of Fox, vol. i. pp. 61, 120, vol. ii. pp. 50, 77; Bedford Correspond. vol. iii. p. xlv.; Parr's Works, vol. viii. p. 513; Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i. p. 74; Burke's Correspond. vol. i. p. 352; Walpole's George III. vol. iv. p. 315; The Grenville Papers, vol. ii. pp. 33, 34, vol. iii. p. 57, vol. iv. p. 79, 152, 219, 303; Parl. Hist. vol. xvi. pp. 841, 973, vol. xviii. pp. 1005, 1246, vol. xix. pp. 435, 856, vol. xxii. pp. 650, 1173.

812

See an extraordinary passage in Pellew's Life of Sidmouth, vol. i. p. 334.

813

This decline in the abilities of official men was noticed by Burke, in 1770, as a necessary consequence of the new system. Compare Thoughts on the Present Discontents (Burke's Works, vol. i. p. 149) with his striking summary (Parl. Hist. vol. xvi. p. 879) of the degeneracy during the first nine years of George III. ‘Thus situated, the question at last was not, who could do the public business best, but who would undertake to do it at all. Men of talents and integrity would not accept of employments where they were neither allowed to exercise their judgment nor display the rectitude of their hearts.’ In 1780, when the evil had become still more obvious, the same great observer denounced it in his celebrated address to his Bristol constituents. ‘At present,’ he says, ‘it is the plan of the court to make its servants insignificant.’ Burke's Works, vol. i. p. 257. See further Parr's Works, vol. iii. pp. 256, 260, 261.

814

The military success of his administration is related in very strong language, but not unfairly, in Mahon's Hist. of England, vol. iv. pp. 108, 185, 186, and see the admirable summary in Brougham's Statesmen, vol. i. pp. 33, 34: and for evidence of the fear with which he inspired the enemies of England, compare Mahon, vol. v. p. 165 note; Bedford Correspond. vol. iii. pp. 87, 246, 247; Walpole's Letters to Mann, vol. i. p. 304, edit. 1843; Walpole's Mem. of George III. vol. ii. p. 232; and the reluctant admission in Georgel, Mémoires, vol. i. pp. 79, 80.

815

Lord Brougham (Sketches of Statesmen, vol. i. pp. 22, 33) has published striking evidence of what he calls ‘the truly savage feelings’ with which George III. regarded Lord Chatham (compare Russell's Mem. of Fox, vol. i. p. 129). Indeed, the sentiments of the king were even displayed in the arrangements at the funeral of the great minister. Note in Adolphus's Hist. of George III. vol. ii. p. 568; and for other evidence of ill-will, see two notes from the king to Lord North, in Mahon's Hist. of England, vol. vi. appendix, pp. lii. liv.; The Grenville Papers, vol. ii. p. 386; Bancroft's American Revolution, vol. i. p. 438.

816

Lord Brougham (Sketches of Statesmen, vol. i. p. 219) says: ‘It may be questioned if any politician, in any age, ever knew so thoroughly the various interests and the exact position of all the countries with which his own had dealings to conduct or relations to maintain.’ See also Parr's Works, vol. iv. pp. 14, 15; Russell's Mem. of Fox, vol. i. pp. 320, 321, vol. ii. pp. 91, 243; Bisset's Life of Burke, vol. i. p. 338.

817

Burke, even after the French Revolution, said, that Fox ‘was of the most artless, candid, open, and benevolent disposition, disinterested in the extreme; of a temper mild and placable even to a fault, without one drop of gall in his whole constitution.’ Speech on the Army Estimates in 1790, in Parl. Hist. vol. xxviii. p. 356. For further evidence, compare Alison's Hist. of Europe, vol. vii. p. 171; Holland's Mem. of the Whig Party, vol. i. pp. 3, 273; Trotter's Mem. of Fox, pp. xi. xii., 24, 178, 415.

818

Adolphus's Hist. of George III. vol. vi. p. 692. A singular circumstance connected with this wanton outrage is related in the Mem. of Holcroft, vol. iii. p. 60.

819

Compare Adolphus's Hist. of George III. vol. iv. pp. 107, 108, with Russell's Mem. of Fox, vol. i. pp. 191, 287, 288, vol. ii. p. 44. Dutens, who had much intercourse with English politicians, heard of the threat of abdication in 1784. Dutens's Mémoires, vol. iii. p. 104. Lord Holland says, that during the fatal illness of Fox, ‘the king had watched the progress of Mr. Fox's disorder. He could hardly suppress his indecent exultation at his death.’ Holland's Mem. of the Whig Party, vol. ii. p. 49.

820

In 1725, the Duke of Wharton, in a letter to the Pretender, after mentioning some proceedings in the Commons, adds, ‘In the House of Lords our number is so small, that any behaviour there will be immaterial.’ Mahon's Hist. of England, vol. ii. appendix, p. xxiii. See also, respecting the greater strength of the Tories in the House of Commons, Somers Tracts, vol. xi. p. 242, vol. xiii. pp. 524, 531; Campbell's Chancellors, vol. iv. p. 158; Campbell's Chief-Justices, vol. ii. p. 156.

821

Compare Vernon Correspond. vol. iii. p. 149, with Burnet's Own Time, vol. iv. p. 504. Burnet says, ‘All the Jacobites joined to support the pretensions of the Commons.’ The Commons complained that the Lords had shown ‘such an indulgence to the person accused as is not to be paralleled in any parliamentary proceedings.’ Parl. Hist. vol. v. p. 1294. See also their angry remonstrance, pp. 1314, 1315.

822

Mahon's Hist. of England, vol. iii. p. 122.

823

‘Content, 47; non-content, 92.’ Parl. Hist. vol. xii. p. 711. Mr. Phillimore (Mem. of Lyttleton, vol. i. p. 213) ascribes this to the exertions of Lord Hardwicke; but the state of parties in the upper house is sufficient explanation; and even in 1735 it was said that ‘the Lords were betwixt the devil and the deep sea,’ the devil being Walpole. Marchmont Papers, vol. ii. p. 59. Compare Bishop Newton's Life of Himself, p. 60.

824

See an account of some of its provisions in Mahon's Hist. of England, vol. i. pp. 80, 81. The object of the bill is frankly stated in Parl. Hist. vol. vi. p. 1349, where we are informed that ‘as the farther discouragement and even ruin of the dissenters was thought necessary for accomplishing this scheme, it was begun with the famous Schism Bill.’

825

By 237 to 126. Parl. Hist. vol. vi. p. 1351.

826

Mahon's Hist. of England, vol. i. p. 83; Bunbury's Correspond. of Hanmer, p. 48. The bill was carried in the Lords by 77 against 72.

827

‘If we scrutinize the votes of the peers from the period of the revolution to the death of George II., we shall find a very great majority of the old English nobility to have been the advocates of Whig principles.’ Cooke's Hist. of Party, vol. iii. p. 363.

828

Compare Harris's Life of Hardwicke, vol. iii. p. 519, with the conversation between Sir Robert Walpole and Lord Hervey, in Hervey's Mem. of George II. vol. ii. p. 251, edit. 1848.

829

Cooke's Hist. of Party, vol. iii. pp. 363, 364, 365, 463; Parl. Hist. vol. xviii. p. 1418, vol. xxiv. p. 493, vol. xxvii. p. 1069, vol. xxix. pp. 1334, 1494, vol. xxxiii. pp. 90, 602, 1315.

830

This was too notorious to be denied; and in the House of Commons, in 1800, Nicholls taunted the Government with ‘holding out a peerage, or elevation to a higher rank in the peerage, to every man who could procure a nomination to a certain number of seats in parliament.’ Parl. Hist. vol. xxxv. p. 762. So, too, Sheridan, in 1792, said (vol. xxix. p. 1333), ‘In this country peerages had been bartered for election interest.’

831

On this great influx of lawyers into the House of Lords, most of whom zealously advocated arbitrary principles, see Belsham's Hist. of Great Britain, vol. vii. pp. 266, 267; Adolphus's Hist. of George III. vol. iii. p. 363; Parl. Hist. vol. xxxv. p. 1523.

832

It was foretold at the time, that the effect of the numerous creations made during Pitt's power would be to lower the House of Lords. Compare Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i. p. 76, with Erskine's speech in Parl. Hist. vol. xxix. p. 1330; and see Sheridan's speech, vol. xxxiii. p. 1197. But their language, indignant as it is, was restrained by a desire of not wholly breaking with the court. Other men, who were more independent in their position, and cared nothing for the chance of future office, expressed themselves in terms such as had never before been heard within the walls of Parliament. Rolle, for instance, declared that ‘there had been persons created peers during the present minister's power, who were not fit to be his grooms.’ Parl. Hist. vol. xxvii. p. 1198. Out of doors, the feeling of contempt was equally strong; see Life of Cartwright, vol. i. p. 278; and see the remark even of the courtly Sir W. Jones, on the increasing disregard for learning shown by ‘the nobles of our days.’ Preface to Persian Grammar, in Jones's Works, vol. ii. p. 125.

833

In his Thoughts on French Affairs, written in 1791, he says, ‘At no period in the history of England have so few peers been taken out of trade, or from families newly created by commerce.’ Burke's Works, vol. i. p. 566. Indeed, according to Sir Nathaniel Wraxall (Posthumous Memoirs, vol. i. pp. 66, 67, Lond. 1836), the only instance when George III. broke this rule was when Smith the banker was made Lord Carrington. Wraxall is an indifferent authority, and there may be other cases; but they were certainly very few, and I cannot call any to mind.

834

Nicholls, who knew him, says, ‘The political knowledge of Mr. Burke might be considered almost as an encyclopædia; every man who approached him received instruction from his stores.’ Nicholls's Recollections, vol. i. p. 20.

835

‘The excursions of his genius are immense. His imperial fancy has laid all nature under tribute, and has collected riches from every scene of the creation, and every walk of art.’ Works of Robert Hall, London, 1846, p. 196. So, too, Wilberforce says of him, ‘He had come late into Parliament, and had had time to lay in vast stores of knowledge. The field from which he drew his illustrations was magnificent. Like the fabled object of the fairy's favours, whenever he opened his mouth pearls and diamonds dropped from him.’ Life of Wilberforce, vol. i. p. 159.

836

Lord Thurlow is said to have declared, what I suppose is now the general opinion of competent judges, that the fame of Burke would survive that of Pitt and Fox. Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i. p. 169. But the noblest eulogy on Burke was pronounced by a man far greater than Thurlow. In 1790, Fox stated in the House of Commons, ‘that if he were to put all the political information which he had learnt from books, all which he had gained from science, and all which any knowledge of the world and its affairs had taught him, into one scale, and the improvement which he had derived from his right hon. friend's instruction and conversation were placed in the other, he should be at a loss to decide to which to give the preference.’ Parl. Hist. vol. xxviii. p. 363.

837

Lord Campbell (Lives of the Chief-Justices, vol. ii. p. 443) says, ‘Burke, a philosophic statesman, deeply imbued with the scientific principles of jurisprudence.’ See also, on his knowledge of law, Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i. p. 131; and Bisset's Life of Burke, vol. i. p. 230.

838

Barry, in his celebrated Letter to the Dilettanti Society, regrets that Burke should have been diverted from the study of the fine arts into the pursuit of politics, because he had one of those ‘minds of an admirable expansion and catholicity, so as to embrace the whole concerns of art, ancient as well as modern, domestic as well as foreign.’ Barry's Works, vol. ii. p. 538, 4to, 1809. In the Annual Register for 1798, p. 329, 2nd edit., it is stated that Sir Joshua Reynolds ‘deemed Burke the best judge of pictures that he ever knew.’ See further Works of Sir J. Reynolds, Lond. 1846, vol. i. p. 185; and Bisset's Life of Burke, vol. ii. p. 257. A somewhat curious conversation between Burke and Reynolds, on a point of art, is preserved in Holcroft's Memoirs, vol. ii. pp. 276, 277.

839

See a letter from Winstanley, the Camden Professor of Ancient History, in Bisset's Life of Burke, vol. ii. pp. 390, 391, and in Prior's Life of Burke, p. 427. Winstanley writes, ‘It would have been exceedingly difficult to have met with a person who knew more of the philosophy, the history, and filiation of languages, or of the principles of etymological deduction, than Mr. Burke.’

840

Adam Smith told Burke, ‘after they had conversed on subjects of political economy, that he was the only man who, without communication, thought on these topics exactly as he did.’ Bisset's Life of Burke, vol. ii. p. 429; and see Prior's Life of Burke, p. 58; and on his knowledge of political economy, Brougham's Sketches of Statesmen, vol. i. p. 205.

841

‘Politics ought to be adjusted, not to human reasonings, but to human nature; of which the reason is but a part, and by no means the greatest part.’ Observations on a late State of the Nation, in Burke's Works, vol. i. p. 113. Hence the distinction he had constantly in view between the generalizations of philosophy, which ought to be impregnable, and those of politics, which must be fluctuating; and hence in his noble work, Thoughts on the Cause of the present Discontents, he says (vol. i. p. 136), ‘No lines can be laid down for civil or political wisdom. They are a matter incapable of exact definition.’ See also p. 151, on which he grounds his defence of the spirit of party; it being evident that if truth were the prime object of the political art, the idea of party, as such, would be indefensible. Compare with this the difference between ‘la vérité en soi’ and ‘la vérité sociale,’ as expounded by M. Rey in his Science Sociale, vol. ii. p. 322, Paris, 1842.

842

In 1780 he plainly told the House of Commons that ‘the people are the masters. They have only to express their wants at large and in gross. We are the expert artists; we are the skilful workmen, to shape their desires into perfect form, and to fit the utensil to the use. They are the sufferers, they tell the symptoms of the complaint; but we know the exact seat of the disease, and how to apply the remedy according to the rules of art. How shocking would it be to see us pervert our skill into a sinister and servile dexterity, for the purpose of evading our duty, and defrauding our employers, who are our natural lords, of the object of their just expectations!’ Burke's Works, vol. i. p. 254. In 1777, in his Letter to the Sheriffs of Bristol (Works, vol. i. p. 216), ‘In effect, to follow, not to force, the public inclination; to give a direction, a form, a technical dress, and a specific sanction, to the general sense of the community, – is the true end of legislature.’ In his Letter on the Duration of Parliament (vol. ii. p. 430), ‘It would be dreadful, indeed, if there was any power in the nation capable of resisting its unanimous desire, or even the desire of any very great and decided majority of the people. The people may be deceived in their choice of an object. But I can scarcely conceive any choice they can make to be so very mischievous, as the existence of any human force capable of resisting it.’ So, too, he says (vol. i. pp. 125, 214), that when government and the people differ, government is generally in the wrong: compare pp. 217, 218, 276, vol. ii. p. 440. And to give only one more instance, but a very decisive one, he, in 1772, when speaking on a Bill respecting the Importation and Exportation of Corn, said, ‘On this occasion I give way to the present Bill, not because I approve of the measure in itself, but because I think it prudent to yield to the spirit of the times. The people will have it so; and it is not for their representatives to say nay. I cannot, however, help entering my protest against the general principles of policy on which it is supported, because I think them extremely dangerous.’ Parl. Hist. vol. xvii. p. 480.

843

The effect which Burke's profound views produced in the House of Commons, where, however, few men were able to understand them in their full extent, is described by Dr. Hay, who was present at one of his great speeches; which, he says, ‘seemed a kind of new political philosophy.’ Burke's Correspond. vol. i. p. 103. Compare a letter from Lee, written in the same year, 1766, in Forster's Life of Goldsmith, vol. ii. pp. 38, 39; and in Bunbury's Correspond. of Hanmer, p. 458.

844

Burke was never weary of attacking the common argument, that, because a country has long flourished under some particular custom, therefore the custom must be good. See an admirable instance of this in his speech on the power of the attorney-general to file informations ex officio; where he likens such reasoners to the father of Scriblerus, who ‘venerated the rust and canker which exalted a brazen pot-lid into the shield of a hero.’ He adds: ‘But, sir, we are told that the time during which this power existed, is the time during which monarchy most flourished: and what, then, can no two things subsist together but as cause and effect? May not a man have enjoyed better health during the time that he walked with an oaken stick, than afterwards, when he changed it for a cane, without supposing, like the Druids, that there are occult virtues in oak, and that the stick and the health were cause and effect?’ Parl. Hist. vol. xvi. pp. 1190, 1191.