William Pitt and the Great War by John Holland Rose (e book reader for pc .TXT) 📖

the assessment of 1797, and made it a

perpetual charge upon each parish. The results have in many cases been

most incongruous. Agricultural land, which was generally rated high,

continued to pay at that level long after depreciation set in. On the

other hand, large tracts in the manufacturing districts, rapidly

increasing in value, paid far less than their due share. In some cases

where a barren moor has become a hive of industry, the parish now raises

its quota by a rate of .001 in the pound. In a few cases, where the fall

in value has been severe, the rate is very heavy, in spite of remedial

legislation. Pitt could not have foreseen differences such as these;

but, in view of the rapid growth of manufactures in the Midlands and

North, he should have ensured either a re-valuation of the parochial

quotas or a complete and methodical redemption from the Land Tax. He

took neither course, and that, too, in spite of the warnings of Lord

Sheffield and Sinclair as to the injustice and impolicy of his

proposals. They passed both Houses by large majorities, perhaps because

he offered to landlords the option of redeeming their land at twenty

years' purchase. Less than one fourth of the tax was redeemed before the

year 1800, a fact which seems to show that the landed interest was too

hard pressed to profit by the opportunity. As Sir Francis Burdett said,

country gentlemen had to bear a heavy burden of taxation, besides

poor-rates, tithes, and the expense of the mounted yeomanry. Thurlow

compared the country magnates to sheep who let themselves be shorn and

re-shorn, whereas merchants and traders were like hogs, grunting and

bolting as soon as one bristle was touched. In defence of Pitt's action,

it may be said that he hoped to secure a considerable gain by the

investment of the purchase money in Consols and to enhance their value;

but it appears that not more than £80,000 a year was thus realized.[471]

 

The prevalence of discontent early in 1798 and the threatened coalition

of Irish and British malcontents will be noticed in the following

chapter. Pitt was so impressed by the danger as to press for the

suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act and the renewal of the Aliens Act

(April 1798). As happened in 1794, the revival of coercion produced

vehement protests. Already the Duke of Norfolk had flung defiance at

Ministers. Presiding at a great banquet held at the Crown and Anchor, on

the occasion of Fox's birthday, 24th January, he not only compared the

great orator to Washington, but hinted that the 2,000 men present might

do as much as Washington's handful had done in America. Finally he

proposed the distinctly Jacobinical toast, "Our Sovereign, the Majesty

of the People." For this he was dismissed from the command of a militia

regiment and from the Lord Lieutenancy of the West Riding of Yorkshire.

 

Fox chose to repeat the toast early in May 1798, when large parts of

Ireland were on the brink of revolt. In so dire a crisis it behoved a

leading man to weigh his words. But the wilful strain in his nature set

all prudence at defiance. Thereupon several of Pitt's friends

recommended a public prosecution for sedition, or at least a reprimand

at the bar of the House of Commons. To the former course Pitt objected

as giving Fox too much consequence, besides running the risk of an

acquittal; but he saw some advantage in the latter course; for (as he

wrote to Dundas) Fox, when irritated by the reprimand, would probably

offer a new insult and could then be sent to the Tower for the rest of

the Session. The suggestion is perhaps the pettiest in the whole of

Pitt's correspondence; but probably it was due to the extremely grave

situation in Ireland and the fear of a French invasion. Further, Fox had

ceased to attend the House of Commons; and a member who shirks his duty

is doubly guilty when he proposes a seditious toast. Pitt, however, did

not push matters to extremes, and the course actually adopted was the

removal of the name of Fox from the Privy Council by the hand of

George III on 9th May.

 

Sixteen days later, Pitt and Tierney had a passage of arms in the

House. That pugnacious Irishman had thrust himself to the fore during

the secession of Fox and other prominent Whigs from the House, and had

to bear many reproaches for his officiousness. He also nagged at Pitt at

every opportunity, until, on his opposing a motion of urgency for a Bill

for better manning the Navy, Pitt's patience gave way. He accused the

self-constituted leader of seeking to obstruct the defence of the

country. The charge was in the main correct; for Tierney's opposition to

a pressing measure of national defence was highly unpatriotic.

Nevertheless, Tierney had right on his side when he called Pitt to order

and appealed to the Speaker for protection. Rarely has that personage

been placed in a more difficult position. Pitt was right in his facts;

but etiquette required that he should withdraw or at least attenuate his

charge. Addington politely hinted that the words were unparliamentary,

but suggested that the Minister should give an explanation. Pitt stiffly

refused either to withdraw his words, or to explain their meaning. There

the incident closed. On the next day, Saturday, 26th May, Tierney sent

Pitt a challenge, which was at once accepted.

 

We find it difficult now to take seriously a duel between a slim man of

near forty who had rarely fired a shot in sport, never in anger, and a

stoutly built irascible Irishman, for whom a good shot meant lynching or

lasting opprobrium. Visions of Bob Acres and Sir Lucius O'Trigger flit

before us. We picture Tierney quoting "fighting Bob Acres" as to the

advantage of a sideways posture; and we wonder whether the seconds, if

only in regard for their own safety, did not omit to insert bullets. The

ludicrous side of the affair soon dawned on contemporaries, witness the

suggestion that in all fairness Pitt's figure ought to be chalked out on

Tierney's, and that no shot taking effect outside ought to count. But,

on the whole, people took the incident seriously. Certainly the

principals did. Pitt made his will beforehand, and requested Addington

as a friend to come and see him, thereby preventing his interposition as

Speaker. He asked Steele to be his second; but, he being away from town,

Dudley Ryder took his place. Leaving Downing Street about noon on

Whitsunday, 27th May, the pair walked along Birdcage Walk, mounted the

steps leading into Queen Street, and entered a chaise engaged for their

excursion. After passing the villages of Chelsea and Putney, and,

topping the rise beyond, they proceeded along the old Portsmouth Road,

which crosses the northern part of Putney Heath. At the top of the steep

hill leading down into Kingston Vale they alighted, made their way past

the gibbet where swung the corpse of a well-known highwayman, Jerry

Abershaw, long the terror of travellers on that road. Did Pitt know that

libellers likened him to the highwayman; for "Jerry took purses with his

pistols, and Pitt with his Parliaments"? Lower down Pitt and Ryder found

Tierney and his second, General Walpole, in a charming dell radiant with

golden gorse and silver birches.[472]

 

But they were not alone. That fine Whitsuntide had brought many chaises

along the road; and not a few curious persons skirted the rising ground

towards Putney and Wimbledon. To these inquisitive groups rode up a tall

bland-looking man, now more than usually sedate. It was Addington.

Probably he was the most anxious man alive. He knew that his weakness as

Speaker had freed Pitt from the necessity of apologizing to Tierney as

the occasion demanded. Now, too, as Speaker, he ought to intervene. As a

friend, pledged by Pitt to secrecy, he could do nothing but look on.

Below, in the dell, the seconds saw to the pistols and measured the

distance--twelve paces. Pitt and Tierney coolly took aim, and, at the

signal, fired. Addington's heart must have leaped with joy to see Pitt's

figure still erect. Again the seconds produced pistols, and again the

pair fired: but this time Pitt discharged his weapon into the air. Was

it a sign of his contrition for his insult to Tierney, or of his

chivalrous sense of Tierney's disadvantage in the matter of

target-space? Certain it is that Walpole leaped over the furze bushes

for joy on seeing the duellists still erect.

 

Thus ended the duel, to the satisfaction of all present. Pitt had

behaved with spirit, and Tierney had achieved immortal fame. But that

the duel was fought at all caused deep concern. Hannah More was

inexpressibly shocked at the desecration of Whitsunday; Wilberforce also

was deeply pained. Indeed, he deemed the matter so serious as to propose

to give notice of a motion for preventing duelling; but he dropped it

on Pitt frankly assuring him that, if carried, it would involve his

resignation. George III signified to Chatham his decided disapproval,

and expressed to Pitt a desire that such an incident should never occur

again. "Public characters," he added, "have no right to weigh alone what

they owe to themselves; they must consider what they owe to their

country." Thomas Pitt strongly reprobated the conduct of Tierney in

challenging Pitt; for we find the latter replying to him on 30th May: "I

shall feel great concern if the feelings of my friends betray them into

any observations on Mr. Tierney's conduct reproachful or in the smallest

degree unfavourable to him, being convinced that he does not merit

them." This is the letter of a spirited gentleman. Buckingham evidently

sympathized with Thomas Pitt; for he expressed his surprise that the

Prime Minister should risk his life against such a man as Tierney. A

more jocular tone was taken by the Earl of Mornington, soon to become

the Marquis Wellesley. Writing to Pitt from Fort St. George on 8th

August 1799 (three months after the capture of Seringapatam), he

expressed strong approval of his Irish policy and concluded as follows:

"I send you by Henry a pair of pistols found in the palace at

Seringapatam. They are mounted in gold and were given by the late King

of France to the 'citizen Sultan' (Tippoo). They will, I hope, answer

better for your next Jacobin duel than those you used under Abershaw's

gibbet."[473]--What became of those pistols?

 

The general opinion was adverse to Pitt's conduct. For at that time the

outlook in Ireland could scarcely have been gloomier, and Bonaparte's

armada at Toulon was believed to be destined for those shores. In such a

case, despite the nice punctilio of honour, neither ought Tierney to

have sent a challenge nor Pitt to have accepted it. The recklessness of

Pitt in this affair is, however, typical of the mood of the British

people in the spring and summer of that year. The victories of Jervis

and Duncan, the rejection of Pitt's offers of peace by the French

Directory, and its threats to invade these shores, aroused the fighting

spirit of the race. As the war became a struggle for existence, all

thoughts of surrender vanished. The prevalent feeling was one of

defiance. It was nurtured by Canning in the "Anti-Jacobin," in which he

lampooned the French democrats and their British well-wishers. Under

the thin disguise of "the Friend of Humanity" he satirized Tierney in

the poem, "The Knife-Grinder," a parody, in form, of Southey's "Widow,"

and, in meaning, of Tierney's philanthropic appeals. In a play, "The

Rovers," he sportfully satirized the romantic drama of Schiller, "The

Robbers." In one of the incidental poems he represented the hero, while

in prison, recalling the bright days

 

                      at the U-

    -niversity of Göttingen,

    -niversity of Göttingen.

 

Pitt was so charmed with this _jeu d'esprit_ that he is said to have

added the following verse in the same mock-heroic style:[474]

 

    Sun, moon, and thou, vain world, adieu,

    That Kings and priests are plotting in;

    Here doomed to starve on water gru-

    -el, never shall I see the U-

          -niversity of Göttingen,

          -niversity of Göttingen.

 

A Prime Minister who can throw off squibs, and a nation that can enjoy

them, will not succumb even in the worst crisis.

 

In truth, all patriots were now straining their utmost to repel an

aggressive and insolent enemy. The Volunteer Movement more than ever

called forth the manly exertions of the people; and one of the most

popular caricatures of the time (May 1798) shows Pitt as a Volunteer

standing rigidly at attention. Sermons, caricatures, pamphlets, and

songs, especially those of Dibdin, served to stimulate martial ardour.

Singular to relate, Hannah More (now in her fifty-third year) figured

among the patriotic pamphleteers, her "Cheap Repository" of political

tracts being an effective antidote to the Jacobinical leaflets which

once had a hold on the poorer classes. Space will not admit of an

account of all the agencies which heralded