Reign of George III. (Continued) page 10

Chatham showed strong sympathy with the Corsicans, and blamed the indifference of the ministers. This indifference was, however, not partaken of by the duke of Grafton and lord Shelburne. Shelburne addressed a spirited remonstrance to the duke de Choiseul, through the hands of lord Rochford, our ambassador at Paris. He went in it as far as he could without menacing a direct declaration of war. This conduct appeared to make a deep impression, but it was not lasting. The French, who dreaded Chatham, who would not have ventured on this aggression had he been in his full vigour of mind, knew that he was still completely helpless through his malady. They had also managed to discover that the bulk of the English cabinet were wholly regardless of the fate of Corsica. Lord Rochford informed Grafton that Lord Mansfield, who was in Paris, had completely ruined the whole negotiation with France, by saying one day, at the table of one of the ministers of France, that the English ministry were too weak, and the nation too wise, to enter into a war for the sake of Corsica. This instantly changed the whole tone of the French ministry, and they paid no more regard to the remonstrance of the English cabinet.

As it was not for England to endanger another European war by openly assuming the support of Corsica against France, Grafton endeavoured to aid it secretly. He dispatched captain Dunant to Paoli, a gentleman who had been in the Sardinian service. Dunant passed safely through France to Genoa, and thence, in an English ship of war, to Corsica. Paoli represented the importance of a good supply of arms and ammunition, in the absence of other assistance, and these were speedily sent as privately as possible. But the contest of this little island against France was hopeless. Paoli was overpowered, his forces and friends scattered, and he betook himself to London, where he was enthusiastically received - was honoured with a pension by the king, and was the friend of most of the distinguished artists, literati, and statesmen, Burke, Reynolds, Johnson, &c.

In October of this year Chatham at length resigned. He had refurnished Hayes, imagining that he should recover his health there, and in the autumn the gout, quitting in some degree its hold on his nerves, began to determine towards the extremities again. This released the mind to a certain extent, though not so much as to allow him to think of business. He was still invisible to his friends; but the duke of Grafton sought through lady Chatham to convey to him the information of certain changes in the cabinet and in government, which it was feared he might object to, The first was the proposed removal of lord Shelburne, betwixt whom and Grafton there was so much difference of opinion that they could not go on together. The public believed that the real cause of Shelburne's removal was his energetic remonstrances to France against the invasion of Corsica; but in this respect Grafton appears to have been nearly as zealous. The grounds of difference were older and more general. The other change was the removal of sir Jeffrey Amherst from the government of Virginia. Sir Jeffrey had been one of Chatham's most able generals in America, and had received, in reward for his services, the nominal appointment, according to the bad custom of the time, of governor of Virginia, with the liberty of living in England, and performing his duties by a deputy! It was now pleaded, that in the critical state of the American colonies it was necessary to have an active governor on the spot, and Amherst was called upon to resign, and to accept a pension in lieu of the post. Sir Jeffrey stoutly refused, and the king was obliged formally to dismiss him. Ministers did not get much credit for their pretence of sending out a more active governor, by their choice of lord Bottetort; and it was said the change was made - not because Virginia wanted a governor, but because the court wanted a place for a favourite.

Chatham, when informed of these changes by his wife, strongly disapproved of them both. He wrote to Grafton on the 12th of October, only three days after the duke had had his interview with lady Chatham at Hayes, begging he would request the king graciously to permit him to resign the seals. He pleaded his weak and broken health as the necessary cause, but he did not omit to express his regret for the removal of lord Shelburne and Sir Jeffrey Amherst.

It might have been imagined, by the consternation which this announcement produced, that Chatham had been all this time most actively discharging the office of premier. The withdrawal of his name merely was regarded as a most detrimental thing to the government. Grafton wrote back instantly, stating how injurious his withdrawal would be to the king's affairs, and reminding him how he had himself remained in at his request, contrary to his own wishes. But Chatham the next day reiterated his proposal in more positive terms. Grafton was obliged to communicate the fact to the king, who was equally alarmed, and wrote with his own hand, pressing his retention of office. "I think," he said, "that I have a right to insist on your remaining in my service, since you entered office at my own requisition in 1766, for I with pleasure look forward to the time of your recovery, when I may have your assistance in resisting the torrent of factions this country so much labours under." He added that Grafton and the lord chancellor were both looking forward to that event with the same pleasure.

All persuasion was useless; Chatham wrote that his health would positively prevent his retaining the seals, and he commissioned lord chancellor Camden to deliver them into the king's hands. Camden, at the same time, proposed to resign also; but neither the king nor Grafton would listen to his retiring, and he remained.

Camden was desired to offer the privy seal to the earl of Bristol, a friend of Chatham's; but Bristol would not consent to accept it, till he had consulted Chatham. Chatham coolly replied that, having withdrawn from public business himself, he must be excused declining to advise what arrangements of office should be made; but recommended Bristol, if he accepted the seal, to accept with an intention to retain it, not as holding it, according to his avowal, as the locum tenens of himself. Bristol took the seal, and lord Rochford was sent for from Paris, and took the place of Shelburne.

Parliament assembled on the 8th of November. The two great objects which engrossed the attention of government in these days were North America and John Wilkes. It is difficult to say to which it attached the most importance, and on which it showed the most want of sagacity. By their proud and arbitrary ignorance of the plainest principles of legislation, they raised Wilkes into the idol of the nation, and lost the noblest colonies of the kingdom. The speech from the throne alluded to the troubles in America in a spirit that boded only further mischief. It spoke of the rebellious character of the proceedings in America, and an address was carried through both houses of the most violent kind. Amongst other things, it was said, "We lament that the arts of wicked and designing men should have been able to rekindle that flame of sedition in some of your majesty's colonies in North America, which, at the close of the late parliament, your majesty saw reason to hope was well nigh extinguished. We shall be ever ready to hear and redress any real grievances of your majesty's American subjects; but we should betray the trust reposed in us if we did not withstand every attempt to infringe or weaken our just rights; and we shall always consider it one of our most important duties to maintain entire and inviolate the supreme authority of the legislature of Great Britain over every part of the British empire."

Here Chatham saw his grand flourish of supreme authority at once assumed for the very purpose of resisting by arms and bloodshed that sacred right, of no taxation without representation, which he had at the same time insisted on.

This preposterous address was carried by the lords unanimously: in the commons it encountered a proper though not a prevailing opposition. There Burke exclaimed in astonishment at the fresh violation of the rights of juries, "If your remedy is such as is not likely to appease the Americans, but rather to exasperate them, you fire a cannon upon your enemy which will recoil upon yourselves. And why take such a course? Because you say you cannot trust a jury of that country. Sir, that word must convey horror to every feeling mind. If you hare not a party amongst two millions of people, you must either change your plan of government, or renounce your colonies for ever!"

Colonel Barre used language equally emphatic. Dowdeswell, Sir George Saville, Alderman Beckford, Sir Charles Saunders, George Onslow, and even George Grenville, now in opposition, resisted the address. But their voices availed nothing against such arguments as those of Mr. Stanley, who talked of the insolent, treasonable libels of the Americans; of their unwarrantable combinations to cut off all commerce with the mother country; of now rejecting all middle terms of accommodation. Or the language of lord Barrington, who called the Americans traitors, and worse than traitors, who must be put down by troops. Or of lord North, who described the Americans as lost to all feelings of duty or regard to the mother country, who gave no proofs of any return of affection, and who gave you no credit for any good intentions towards them. He declared they must go through firmly with the resolve to put them down; and Stanley triumphantly asked what was to become of the insolent town of Boston, when they deprived the inhabitants of the power of sending out their rums and molasses to the coast of Africa? Adding that they must be treated as aliens, for they had treated us as such.

But even this language might have lost much of its irritating effects, had it not been backed by acts of a still more irritating character. Lord Hillsborough, the new colonial minister, moved votes of censure on the proceedings of the assembly of Massachusetts and the meetings at Boston; but he had done more - he had already sent troops into the colony to crush such expressions of opinion by martial force.

The news of the act imposing import duties had reawakened all th® indignation of the people of Massachusetts. Dr. Franklin had immediately a practical proof of the doctrine he had propounded before the English parliament, that it might levy import duties, but not internal duties. Lord Chatham, had he been in a condition of mind capable of it, might then see the fallacy of the very same opinions held by him. The Americans scattered all such specious cobwebs to the winds. They declared that no taxes of any kind should be levied, except through the medium of their own representatives in their own assemblies; and had our statesmen of that day only recognised this simple and conspicuous principle of Magna Charta, they would have spared England a bloody war against its own children, and North America might to-day have been an integral portion of the British empire.

The Bostonians took immediate steps to realise their doctrines. In October, 1767, the chief men there met, and entered into a bond to purchase or wear no English manufacture, but to encourage domestic manufacture till these obnoxious import duties were withdrawn. The Massachusetts' assembly passed strong resolutions to the same effect, and Mr. James Otis, who had been most active in contending for them, exerted himself, through the press, to circulate them all over America. Mr. John Dickinson wrote the celebrated "Letters of a Farmer in Pennsylvania," which were in England strongly attributed to Franklin, who had now seen that it was time to renounce publicly his ill-considered opinions on the subject of taxation; and he did this in a preface which he wrote for this work, and which he republished here. At the same time, Franklin still confessed his error with reluctance; and, in private conversation, would ask what the Bostonians meant? what subordination they acknowledged to parliament, if they disclaimed its power of making law? It is clear that Franklin, with all his shrewdness, did not yet comprehend all the meaning of that significant word - representation.

Causes were not long wanting for testing the resolution of the people of Massachusetts. The governor of that colony, Francis Barnard, was precisely the man to bring the matter to a crisis. He was able, determined, and of a hot temper. The people hated him, because they knew that he was writing home dispatches full of the most unfavourable representations of their proceedings and designs. He refused to confirm the nomination of such members of the council as he knew were opposed to the new regulation; and lord Shelburne supported him in his act. In consequence, the assembly addressed a circular letter to all the other colonies, calling on them to unite in defeating the new duties. Barnard in vain opposed the resolution authorising this circular letter; and, on his report, lord Hillsborough instructed him to demand from the assembly the rescinding of the resolution. The assembly refused, declaring that if a British minister could control the votes of provincial assemblies, liberty was but a mere show. The effect of all this was so far to strengthen the spirit of opposition, that several of the members, who had voted against the circular letter, now voted against rescinding it. Lord Hillsborough had instructed Barnard to dissolve the assembly in case it refused to rescind the resolution. In the meantime, events took place which might have caused a more judicious man to pause ere he fulfilled these instructions.

On the 10th of June, 1768, a sloop called the Liberty, the property of Mr. John Hancock, of Boston, arrived in the harbour of that city laden with a cargo of Madeira wine. It had been the custom of late, on the arrival of vessels carrying goods chargeable with the new import duties, for the tide-waiter, on going on board, to sit and drink punch with the master in the cabin, whilst the sailors and others were landing the goods; after which the compliant tide- waiter proceeded to examine the ship, and, finding no chargeable cargo, reported accordingly. But now the new staff of commissioners had arrived, and they took their measures to prevent this winking at the truth. This had already led to direct violence. A daring smuggler, named Malcolm, had some time before, with his men, fought sword in hand the custom-house officers, and landed from his ship sixty pipes of Madeira in spite of them. From that time he had become one of the most determined supporters of the compact not to purchase any thing manufactured in England, and threatened the persons and property of such as declined to subscribe to it.