Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T02:52:30.010Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

III. Party Politics, 1801–1802: George Canning and the Trinidad Question

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Patrick C. Lipscomb
Patrick C. Lipscomb
Affiliation:
Louisiana State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

On 23 November 1801 Henry Addington addressed the House of Commons on the financial affairs of the nation. The prime minister, in the course of his remarks, alluded briefly to the government's intention of selling certain Crown properties in the West Indies. The measure was planned, he explained, as a means of reducing arrears charged upon the Civil List.1 Although Addington hoped to effect the sales without parliamentary opposition, the question soon became entangled in the meshes of political intrigue. With remarkable cunning the young Pittite, George Canning, sought to use the issue as a means of driving William Pitt into opposition to Addington's government and of creating a new opposition party with Pitt as its leader.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , September 1969 , pp. 442 - 466
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The Parliamentary Register; Or, History of the Proceedings and Debates of the Houses of Lords and Commons (4 ser.; 112 v.; London, 1775–1813), 3rd ser., XVI (1801–2), 267, 444–5.Google Scholar

2 See, for example, Bagot, Josceline (ed.), George Canning and His Friends, Containing Hitherto Unpublished Letters, Jeux d'esprit, etc. (2 vols.; London, 1909), I, 188–96;Google ScholarMarshall, Dorothy, The Rise of George Canning, with an Introduction by Harold Temperley (London, 1938), pp. 226–8;Google ScholarZiegler, Philip, Addington: A Life of Henry Addington, Viscount Sidmouth (London, 1965), pp. 151–2;Google ScholarFoord, Archibald S., His Majesty's Opposition, 1714–1830 (Oxford, 1964), pp. 425–7;Google Scholar and Festing, Gabrielle, John Hookham Frere and His Friends (London, 1899), pp. 67–82.Google Scholar

3 Canning's fortunes, as well as his expenses, had been considerably enlarged by his marriage to Miss Joan Scott on 8 July 1800. For a sympathetic account of this period of Canning's career, see Marshall, The Rise of George Canning, pp. 158–218.

4 Canning had held the office of Under-Secretary at the Foreign Office from January 1796 to March 1799, had been a Commissioner of the Board of Control from March 1799 to May 1800 and Joint Paymaster-General from May 1800 to March 1801. See ibid. pp. 112, 191–3, 221.

5 Ibid. pp. 219–26; and George Canning to William Leigh, Pay Office, 16 February 1801, Canning Papers (Harewood), on deposit at the Archives Department, Sheepscar Library, Leeds (hereafter cited as the Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library).

6 Harris, James, Diaries and Correspondence of James Harris, First Earl of Malmesbury…, edited by his grandson, the third earl (4 vols.; London, 1844), IV, 4.Google Scholar For a recent discussion of the influence of the courtiers on Pitt's resignation, see the editor's Introduction in The Later Correspondence of George III…, ed. Aspinall, A. (5 vols., in progress; Cambridge, 1962), III, xvi–xvii,Google Scholar xviii–xix. For a perceptive discussion of the king's responsibility for Pitt's fall from power, see Sir May, Thomas Erskine, The Constitutional History of England since the Accession of George The Third… (3 vols.; London: Longmans, Green, 1912), I, 63–6.Google Scholar

7 Marshall, The Rise of George Canning, pp. 219–25; Canning to J. H. Frere, South Hill Park, 12 July 1801, B.M. Add. MSS. 38833, ff. 29–32; Canning to Frere, South Hill Park, 13 September 1801, B.M. Add. MSS. 38833, ff. 43–5.

8 For two accounts of Canning and Addington's relationship sympathetic to Addington's position, see Pellew, George, The Life and Correspondence of the Right Honble Henry Addington, First Viscount Sidmouth (3 vols.; London, 1847), I, 319–25;Google Scholar and Ziegler, Addington, pp. 112–16.

9 At Pitt's request, Canning in August 1801 considered the possibility of his return to office as Joint Paymaster General. Canning, however, rejected the proposal in a letter to Pitt, written 28 August 1801, suggesting instead that he be made Secretary-at-War with a seat in the Cabinet. See the letter printed in Rose, John Holland, Pitt and Napoleon: Essays and Letters (London, 1912), pp. 326–8,Google Scholar and the discussion of it by Beaven, Alfred B., ‘Canning and the Addington Administration in 1801’, English Historical Review, XXVIII (01 1913), pp. 131–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Bell, Robert, The Life of the Rt. Hon. George Canning (London, 1846), p. 181.Google Scholar Canning to William Pitt (copy), South Hill, 21 October 1801, Canning Papers, William L. Clements Library, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (hereafter cited as the Canning Papers, Clements Library).

11 Arthur Aspinall, ‘The Canningite Party’, Transactions of The Royal Historical Society, 4th ser., XVII, 177–81; Canning to William Sturges (afterwards known as Sturges-Bourne), South Hill, 25 October 1801; and Canning to Sturges, South Hill, 4 February 1802, both letters in the Canning Papers, Clements Library.

12 Canning to Frere, South Hill, 21 November 1801, B.M. Add. MSS. 38833, ff. 61–4.

13 The word ‘party’ is used here in Professor D.E. Gutter's sense, as a group which ‘seeks the sources of its power to a large and significant extent outside itself’. This ‘outward orientation’ is expressed normally ‘in commitment to ideology and in organization…’. See the Introduction to Ginter, D.E. (ed.), Whig Organization in the General Election of 1790; Selections from the Blair Adam Papers (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1967), pp. xiii–xiv.Google Scholar Because Canning's party never materialized, it is difficult to determine what its ‘ideology’ would have been. Presumably the party would have stressed a strong policy towards France, naval security for Great Britain, support for the empire, a high standard of administrative competence in government, economical reform, and independence of the court.

14 The Grenvilles in 1818 sought unsuccessfully to follow just such a strategy and ‘hoped to attract into their orbit all the independent members of both Houses’. See Aspinall, Arthur, Lord Brougham and the Whig Party (Manchester, 1927), p. 83.Google Scholar The political potentialities of such a group had already been demonstrated by Lord Moira who, in 1788 and again in 1797, had sought to organize some of them into an opposition to Pitt's goverment. See G. F. R. Barker's biographical sketch of Moira in the Dictionary of National Biography (hereafter referred to as D.N.B.), IX, 118.

15 Because of the confusion of parties and the scarcity of division lists and other relevant evidence, it is difficult to analyze precisely the composition of the House of Commons in the period from January 1802 to May 1804. The best available evidence suggests the following conjectural estimates of the strength of parties. About December 1801, the Court and Treasury Party numbered 210, Addingtonians 28, Pittites 80, Prince of Wales's men 40, Fox Whigs 60, Grenville Whigs 20, ‘Saints’ 10, Dundas Whigs 10, and independents (English and Irish) 170. By June 1803 the Court and Treasury party had grown to 230 members, Addington's personal following to 50, the Grenville Whigs to 30, the Fox Whigs to 70, the Prince of Wales's men to 60, the Canningites had become a distinct faction of perhaps 12–14 members, Pitt's strength had fallen to 56, and the independents numbered 120. There is not space enough here to indicate the calculations on which these estimates are based. See The Parliamentary History of England, From the Earliest Period to the Year 1803 (36 vols.; London, 1803–1820), XXXVI (1801–3), pp. 441–2,Google Scholar 645–6, 828, 1228, 1491, 1570; Cobbett's Parliamentary Debates (22 vols.; London, 1804–1812), I, 805–6,Google Scholar 865, 927–8; II, 249–51, 319–20, 607–8, 754–5; Homer, Francis, Memoirs and Correspondence…, edited by his brother Horner, Leonard (2 vols.; London, 1843), I, 280;Google ScholarEnglish Historical Documents; general editor: Douglas, David C. (12 vols. in 13; in progress; London, 1953–), XI, 253–5,Google Scholar 258; Rose, George, The Diaries and Correspondence of the Right Hon. George Rose…, ed. the Rev. Harcourt, Leveson Vernon (2 vols.; London, 1860) II, 119;Google Scholar and George III, The Later Correspondence, IV, ix-xxxii.

16 George III, The Later Correspondence, III, xx.

17 Wilberforce, Robert Isaac and Wilberforce, Samuel, The Life of William Wilberforce (5 vols.; London, 1838), II, 258–65.Google Scholar

18 Ibid. III, 35–6; Canning to Sturges, South Hill, 4 February 1802, Canning Papers, Clements Library.

19 The Crown's properties on Grenada, acquired in 1763 by the Treaty of Paris, or in 1796 by confiscation after a rebellion of the French inhabitants, were for the most part already stocked with Negroes and under leasehold cultivation. Their sale therefore was, as Canning said, ‘only so much property changing hands’. Those on Jamaica, located in the remote, mountainous interior of the island, had been brought under the Crown's control as a result of the celebrated ‘Maroon’ revolt of 1796. Considered unsuitable for extensive sugar cultivation, they do not seem to have been seriously considered for sale in 1801. See Canning to Sturges, South Hill, 4 February 1802, Canning Papers, Library, Clements, and Ragatz, Lowell J., The Fall of the Planter Class in the British Caribbean, 1763–1833; A Study in Social and Economic History (New York, 1928), pp. 222–7.Google Scholar

20 SirFortescue, John W., A History of the British Army (13 vols. in 14; London, 1910–1930), IV (part 1), 429–30,Google Scholar 493–5; and Lowell J. Ragatz, The Fall of the Planter Class, pp. 222–3, 228.

21 Fortescue, A History of the British Army, IV (part 1), 539–40.

22 The Times (London), Saturday, 3 October 1801 (microfilm edition; Kodak Limited; Louisiana State University Library). All references to The Times in this article are to the microfilm edition.

23 Wilberforce and Wilberforce, The Life of William Wilberforce, III, 35–6.

24 Canning to Edward Wilbraham Bootle (afterwards Bootle-Wilbraham), Spring Gardens, 7 June 1799, printed in Bagot, George Canning and His Friends, I, 151; Canning to John Parker, 1st Baron Boringdon, 28 November 1799, printed in Augustus Stapleton, Granville, George Canning and His Times (London, 1859), pp. 59–60.Google Scholar

25 Canning to Pitt, Brooksby, 16 December 1799, printed in Rose, Pitt and Napoleon, pp. 322–3.

26 Addington's views on the slave-trade question are discussed in Ziegler, Addington, pp. 73–4. 150–2, 228–9, and 256–8. For a discussion of Pitt's views and the long controversy which has surrounded his abolition policy, see the author's monograph, ‘William Pitt and the Abolition Question: A Review of an Historical Controversy', printed in the Proceedings of the Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society, Literary and Historical Section, vol. XII, part IV, 87–128

27 Canning to Frere, South Hill, 21 November 1801, Canning Papers, B.M. Add. MSS. 38833, f. 63.

28 Canning to John Sneyd, South Hill, 10 February 1802, printed in Bagot, George Canning and His Friends, I, 188–9.

29 Rose, John Holland, Life of William Pitt (New York, 1924), part II, p. 469;Google Scholar Henry Richard Vassall Fox, 3rd Holland, Baron, Memoirs of the Whig Party during My Time; edited by his son, Holland, Henry Edward Lord (2 vols.; London, 1852–1854), I, 187.Google Scholar

30 Unfortunately, there is no satisfactory political history for the period from 1794 to 1807. See, however, Holland, Memoirs of the Whig Party, I, 79–93, et passim; Fox, Charles James, Memorials and Correspondence of Charles James Fox, ed. Russell, Lord John (4 vols.; London, 1853–1857), III 136–8,Google Scholar 144–7, 184–90, 197–200, for an account of the Fox Whigs in the period from 1797 to 1802. The best account of the political history of the period from 1802 to 1807 is now that of A. Aspinall in his Introduction to George III, The Later Correspondence, IV, ix–xliii.

31 Tierney, who had supported the suspension of the writ, publicly repented of his error in a speech in December 1798. See Olphin, Herbert K., George Tierney (London, 1934), p. 61.Google Scholar

32 Charles James Fox to [William Smith] (copy), St Anne's Hill, 15 November 1801, B.M. Add. MSS. 47569, ff. 107–9.

33 D.N.B. IX, 118; Derry, John, The Regency Crisis and the Whigs, 1788–9 (Cambridge, 1963), pp. 92–4,Google Scholar 189–90; and George, IV, The Correspondence of George, Prince of Wales, 1770–1812 (in progress; London, 1963–), III, 306–8,Google Scholar 350–4.

34 There is as yet no satisfactory treatment of the Carlton House interest in print, though the publication of the prince's correspondence now makes this a feasible project for investigation. For brief comments on this subject and relevant documents, see English Historical Documents, XI, 190–1, 302–7.

35 The most recent accounts of the negotiations are given in Olphin, George Tierney, pp. 73–8, and by Arthur Aspinall in George IV, Correspondence…1770–1812, IV, 186–8.

36 John Stuart (1774–1814), first Marquis of Bute. See D.N.B. XIX, 96.

37 Holland, Memoirs of the Whig Party, I, 88–93.

38 Canning to Frere, South Hill, 21 November 1801, B.M. Add. MSS. 38833, ff. 61–2.

39 Tierney to Charles Grey [London, 12 October 1801], and Tierney to Grey [London, 16 October 1801], both in The Earl Grey Papers, Department of Palaeography and Diplomatic, University of Durham, South Road, Durham (cited hereafter as The Earl Grey Papers, Durham). The meetings were held on Friday, 9 October and Sunday, 11 October.

40 Olphin, George Tierney, p. 74.

41 Ibid. pp. 74–5.

42 Tieiney to Grey [London, 12 October 1801], Tierney to Grey [London, 15 October 1801], Tierney to Grey [London, 22 October 1801], all in The Earl Grey Papers, Durham; and Olphin, George Tierney, p. 73.

43 Ibid. p. 75.

44 Ibid. pp. 75–6.

45 Ibid. pp. 76–7; George Grenville, 1st Marquess of Buckingham, to Thomas Grenville [n.p.], 15 December 1801, Grenville Papers, Buckinghamshire Record Office, Aylesbury.

46 Thomas Erskine to Charles Grey [London], [c. December 1801], and his ‘Account of Two Interviews with Henry Addington’ [c. December 1801], The Earl Grey Papers, Durham.

47 Samuel Whitbread to Grey, South Hill, 7 December 1801, and Whitbread to Grey, London, 28 January 1802, both in The Earl Grey Papers, Durham; and Olphin, George Tierney, p. 78.

48 Olphin, George Tierney, p. 78.

49 Canning to Frere, South Hill, 21 November 1801, B.M. Add. MSS. 38833, ff. 61–2.

50 Ibid. f. 62.

51 Canning to Sneyd, South Hill, 10 February 1802, printed in Bagot, George Canning and His Friends, I, 188–9; Canning to [General Sir] John Smith, South Hill, 1 January 1802, Canning Papers, Clements Library; Canning, MS. Diary, 21 January 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library; Canning to Leigh, South Hill, 22 January 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library; and Charles Ellis to Canning, Claremont, 26 January 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library. The multi–volume diary of Canning in the Sheepscar Library covers the years from 1792 to 1815, 1818 to 1821, and 1823, comprising 29 volumes in all.

52 Canning, The Speeches of the Right Honourable George Canning; with a Memoir of His Life, by Therry, R. (3rd ed.; 6 vols.; London, 1836), II, 5–6.Google Scholar

53 Canning, MS. Diary, 27 January 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library.

54 Cannnig to Sturges, South Hill, 1 February 1802, Canning Papers, Clements Library.

55 Ibid.

56 The Parliamentary Register, 3rd ser., XVI (1801–1802), 444–5.Google Scholar

57 Wilberforce and Wilberforce, The Life of William Wilberforce, III, 36.

58 Pitt to Wilberforce, Park Place, 4 February 1802, Ibid. III, 37.

59 Canning to Sturges, South Hill, 4 February 1802, Canning Papers, Clements Library. A rough draft of a ‘Petition on [the] Regulation of the slave trade to Trinidad’ forms an enclosure to the letter.

60 Canning to Sturges, South Hill, 4 February 1802, Canning Papers, Clements Library.

61 Ibid.

62 Ibid.

63 Canning to Sturges, South Hill, 7 February 1802, Canning Papers, Clements Library.

64 Ibid.

65 Canning, MS. Diary, 8 February 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library.

66 ‘Extract of a letter of George Canning to a friend [Sir Henry Mildmay?]in the country’, 9 February 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library; The Times, Tuesday, 9 February 1802; and The Parliamentary Register, 3rd ser., XVI (1801–1802), 480,Google Scholar 481, 484.

67 Canning, MS. Diary, 9 February 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library.

68 Ibid. 19 February 1802; and Ziegler, Addington, pp. 137–8.

69 Tierney to Grey [n.p.], 11 February 1802, the Earl Grey Papers, Durham.

70 Canning to Sneyd, South Hill, 10 February 1802, printed in Bagot, George Canning and His Friends, I, 188–9.

71 Wilberforce and Wilberforce, The Life of William Wilberforce, III, 30. Wilberforce had introduced his first abolition motion in 1789 and had revived the question at frequent intervals since that time.

72 Wilberforce to John Pennington, 1st Baron Muncaster, London, 16 February 1802, printed in Wilberforce and Wilberforce, The Life of William Wilberforce, III, 38–9.

73 Ibid. III, 41.

74 Canning, MS. Diary, 26–27 February 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library.

75 Canning to Charles Jenkinson, 2nd Lord Hawkesbury, South Hill, 7 March 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library.

76 Lord Hawkesbury to Canning, Downing Street, 10 March 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library.

77 Canning to Sturges, Whitehall, 12 March 1802, Canning Papers, Clements Library.

78 The Times, 3 April 1802; Journals of the House of Commons (hereafter referred to as J.H.C.), LVII (1801–1802), 293;Google Scholar and The Parliamentary Register, 3rd ser., XVII (1802), 405–6.Google Scholar

79 Canning, MS. Diary, 12 April 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library.

80 Ibid., 20 April 1802.

81 Ibid., 24 April 1802.

82 Bagot (ed.), George Canning and His Friends, I, 193–4.

83 Ibid. I, 190–1.

84 Canning, MS. Diary, 3 May 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library.

85 Canning, MS. Diary, 7 May 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library.

86 Ibid.,; Canning to Leigh, South Hill, 9 May 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library; The Times, 8 May 1802, and the important correction in the issue of 9 May. In the course of his remarks, Belgrave did pay particular tribute to Pitt, but this was a result of the Canningites' manoeuvres.

87 The papers requested by Canning from the government were presented on 15 April. See The Parliamentary Register, XVIII (1802), 78.Google Scholar

88 Canning, MS. Diary, 13 April 1802 and 14 May 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library; and The Parliamentary Register, 3rd ser., XVIII (1802), 364–449.Google Scholar Several Canningites opposed the treaty, but Canning prudently stayed away from the debate rather than risk the danger of being drawn into opposition. See Aspinall, , ‘The Canningite Party’. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 4th ser., XVII, 180–1.Google Scholar

89 William Pitt to George Canning, London, 18 May 1802; Canning, MS. Diary, 19 May 1802; and W[illiam] P[itt] to [Canning] [London?], 20 May [1802]; all in the Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library.

90 Canning, MS. Diary, 26 May 1802; and William Wyndham Grenville, 1st Baron Grenville, to Thomas Grenville, Dropmore, 26 May 1802, B.M. Add. MSS. 41852, fo. 119.

91 The speech is printed in full, or nearly so, in several sources. See Canning, The Speeches of the Right Honourable George Canning, II [I]–38, and The Parliamentary Register, 3rd ser., XVIII (1802), 535–54.Google Scholar

92 The Parliamentary Register, 3rd ser., XVIII (1802), 550–3.Google Scholar

93 J.H.C., LVII (1801–2), 513.

94 The Parliamentary Register, 3rd ser., XVIII (1802), 554–63;Google ScholarThe Parliamentary History of England, XXXVI (1801–1803), 876–81.Google Scholar

95 Addington was less than candid in this statement. See the report of his remarks of 2 February printed in The Parliamentary Register, 3rd ser., XVI (1801–1802), 445.Google Scholar

96 The Parliamentary Register, 3rd ser., XVIII (1802), 562.Google Scholar

97 97 Canning, The Speeches of the Right Honourable George Canning, II, 40–1.

98 Pitt to Wilberforce, Walmer Castle, 31 May 1802, printed in Wilberforce, William, Private Papers of William Wilberforce; collected and edited, with a Preface, by Wilberforce, A.M. (London, 1897), 31–2.Google Scholar

99 Canning, MS. Diary, 27 May 1802, Canning Papers, Sheepscar Library.

100 The Times, 29 May 1802. Canning gave the attendance as ‘820’. See Festing, John Hookham Frere and His Friends, p. 78.

101 Harris, Diaries and Correspondence of James Harris, IV, 75–85.

102 Ibid. IV, 111–17.

103 Ibid. IV, 126.

104 The Grenvilles had already begun to drift away and were now speculating on Lord Buckingham's chances of becoming first minister. See ibid. IV, 90.

105 Foord, His Majesty's Opposition, pp. 425–31.

106 It has been argued that the Pittites finally became a party after their leader's death. See Foord, His Majesty's Opposition, pp. 434–9, where the aged courtier, the Duke of Portland, is regarded as the head of the Pittite party! Surely the significance of Portland's coalition with the Pitt ministry in 1794 is that an opposition whig was becoming a court whig, not that Portland was joining a tory connexion under the leadership of Pitt. The agreement to stand together against the Grenville ministry which the opposition leaders reached in July 1806 was made possible by their awareness that the Grenville ministry did not have the king's complete confidence. It was essentially an agreement of independent connexions and did not signify, in this author's opinion, the emergence of a united tory party of Pitt's followers, as the split in 1809 between Canning and Castlereagh reveals. For a recent study of the Whig party which sees the events of 1794 as a ‘real party coalition’ and accepts Foord's interpretation that the Pittites became a party in 1806, see O'Gorman, F., The Whig Party and the French Revolution (London, 1967).Google Scholar

107 How quickly this party emerged, under Peel's leadership, is suggested from a reading of Stewart, Robert, ‘The Ten Hours and Sugar Crises of 1844: Government and the House of Commons in the Age of Reform’, The Historical Journal, XII, no. 1 (1969), 35–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

108 Aspinall, ‘The Canningite Party’, Transactions of The Royal Historical Society, 4th ser., XVII, 177.

109 The author would like to thank Dr John A. Woods and Professor Paul W. Schroeder for reading this article in manuscript and making helpful suggestions, and the Penrose Fund, American Philosophical Society, for support in his anti-slavery research.