Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-05T02:11:19.978Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Was There a “New Toryism” in the Earlier Part of George III's Reign?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2014

Ian R. Christie
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The reissue after twenty years of G. H. Guttridge's study, English Whiggism and the American Revolution, is very welcome. In many of its judgments this lucid, aseptic dissection of the ideas, attitudes, and policies of the opposition groups in British politics during the period of the Revolution bids fair to stand the test of a much longer period of time than has elapsed since its first appearance in 1942. The virile political traditions (some still traceable in modern British practice) which Hanoverian England inherited from the whiggism of the seventeenth century contained not one but several potentially competing principles; and the great strength of this study lies in the author's exposition of the ways in which these divergent principles were taken up by different political groups, with the effect of determining the stand taken by each, both on the American question and on concurrent issues of domestic politics. In Locke's writings radicals found justification for the creed of personality as the basis of political rights. All groups drew from them a belief that Parliament had an essential role in maintaining “the contractual obligation of monarchy to preserve certain fundamental rights,” but more than one principle followed from this premise. In the minds of William Pitt, Earl of Chatham, and his friends, it was combined with pre-Lockeian concepts of fundamental law as an element in the constitution beyond the power of Parliament to alter. For the leaders and members of the Rockingham connection, Parliament's role was seen in, and secured by, its supremacy.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , November 1965 , pp. 60 - 76
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1965

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. Guttridge, G. H., English Whiggism and the American Revolution (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1963)Google Scholar.

2. Ibid., p. 11.

3. Ibid., p. 1.

4. Ibid., pp. 13-14.

5. Ibid., p. 16.

6. Ibid.

7. Ibid., p. 15.

8. Ibid., pp. 62, 105.

9. Thomas, P. D. G., “The Debates of the House of Commons, 1768-1774” (Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1958), p. 166.Google Scholar

10. Almon, John, Memoirs of an Eminent Bookseller (London, 1790), p. 45Google Scholar.

11. de Fonblanque, E. B., Political and Military Episodes … from the Life and Correspondence of … John Burgoyne (London, 1876), p. 421Google Scholar.

12. Russell, Lord John, Memorials and Correspondence of Charles James Fox (London, 1853–1857), II, 38Google Scholar.

13. Guttridge, , English Whiggism, pp. 16, 28, 45Google Scholar.

14. Lord Camden, 1765, cited in Costin, W. C. and Watson, J. Steven, The Law and Working of the Constitution: Documents, 1660-1914 (London, 1952), I, 307Google Scholar.

15. Gilbert Elliot to his father, Feb. 18, 1764, in Elliot, G. F. S., The Border Elliots (London, 1897), p. 391Google Scholar.

16. Costin, and Watson, , Documents, 1660-1914, I, 310.Google Scholar

17. “We have for a long time beheld the suffrages of the people wantonly sported with, not only by ministers, but by the avowed defenders of public liberty.” George Grenville, Mar. 7, 1770. Cobbett, W. (ed.), Parliamentary History of England … to 1803 (London, 1806–1820), XVI, 905Google Scholar. Cf. John, Lord Hervey, Some Materials towards Memoirs of the Reign of King George II, ed. Sedgwick, R. (London, 1931), I, 75–76Google Scholar, on the election of 1727.

18. Porritt, E. and Porritt, A. G., The Unreformed House of Commons (Cambridge, 1903–1909), I, 589–93Google Scholar.

19. SirHoldsworth, William, A History of English Law (London, 1903–1952), X, 680Google Scholar; and see his illuminating discussion of the whole subject, pp. 672-96.

20. See Mansfield's dicta in the case of Dryden Leach, cited in Costin and Watson, , Documents, 1660-1914, I, 296.Google Scholar

21. Tomlinson, J. R. G. (ed.), Additional Grenville Papers, 1763-1765 (Manchester, 1962), pp. 90–91Google Scholar. This parliamentary episode is fully discussed in Tomlinson, J. R. G., “The Grenville Papers, 1763-1765” (M.A. thesis, University of Manchester, 1956), pp. 77–101.Google Scholar

22. Taylor, W. S. and Pringle, J. H. (eds.), Correspondence of William Pitt, Earl of Chatham (London, 1838–1840), III, 439Google Scholar; Smith, W. J. (ed.), The Grenville Papers (London, 1852–1853), IV, 515–16Google Scholar; SirFortescue, John (ed.), The Correspondence of King George III (London, 1927–1928), IIIGoogle Scholar, Nos. 1403-05.

23. Cited in Costin and Watson, , Documents, 1660-1914, I, 307.Google Scholar

24. For some pointers to this see Christie, Ian R., Wilkes, Wyvill and Reform: The Parliamentary Reform Movement in British Politics, 1760-1785 (London, 1962)Google Scholar, ch. i.

25. Guttridge, , English Whiggism, p. 15Google Scholar.

26. Ibid., p. 13.

27. Ibid., pp. 16, 32.

28. Ibid., p. 42.

29. Ibid., p. 117.

30. Ibid., p. 138.

31. Ibid., p. 1.

32. Owen, J. B., The Rise of the Pelhams (London, 1957), p. 69Google Scholar.

33. SirNamier, Lewis, England in the Age of the American Revolution (London, 1961), pp. 48–51Google Scholar.

34. Pares, Richard, King George III and the Politicians (London, 1953)Google Scholar.

35. Owen, , Pelhams, p. 36Google Scholar.

36. Fortescue, , George III, IGoogle Scholar, No. 179; Smith, , Grenville Papers, IV, 184.Google Scholar

37. Hervey, , Memoirs, II, 361;Google Scholar III, 904; and cf. I, 100-01; II, 341, 375, 378, 445-46, 456.

38. Owen, , Pelhams, pp. 188–89Google Scholar.

39. SirLodge, Richard (ed.), Private Correspondence of Chesterfield and Newcastle, 1744-1746 (London, 1930), p. xxxviiGoogle Scholar. See also SirLodge, Richard, Studies in Eighteenth-Century Diplomacy, 1740-1748 (London, 1930), pp. 370–74Google Scholar. Lodge's statement, although an exaggeration, is indicative of George II's active participation in policy-making.

40. James, Earl Waldegrave, Memoirs from 1754 to 1758 (London, 1821), p. 5Google Scholar.

41. Dobrée, B. (ed.), The Letters of Philip Dormer Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield (London, 1932), IVGoogle Scholar, No. 2019.

42. Walpole, Horace, Memoirs of the Reign of King George III, ed. Barker, G. F. R. (London, 1894), III, 66Google Scholar.

43. SirNamier, Lewis, “Monarchy and the Party System,” in his Crossroads of Power (London, 1962), p. 215Google Scholar.

44. Russell, , Fox, II, 38Google Scholar. My italics.

45. Some examples, in chronological order of subject are: Rashed, Z. E., The Peace of Paris, 1763 (Liverpool, 1951)Google Scholar; Sosin, J. M., Whitehall and the Wilderness: The Middle West in British Colonial Policy, 1760-1775 (Lincoln, Nebraska, 1961)Google Scholar; Sutherland, L. S., The East India Company in Eighteenth-Century Politics (London, 1952)Google Scholar; Donoughue, B., British Politics and the American Revolution: the Path to War, 1773-75 (London, 1964)Google Scholar; Mackesy, P., The War for America (London, 1964)Google Scholar; de Madariaga, Isabel, Britain, Russia, and the Armed Neutrality of 1780 (London, 1962)Google Scholar; Cobban, A., Ambassadors and Secret Agents. The Diplomacy of the First Earl of Malmesbury at the Hague (London, 1954)Google Scholar; Ehrman, J., The British Government and Commercial Negotiations with Europe, 1783-1793 (London, 1962)Google Scholar. It is not inappropriate to include the last two works, for in the view of the Whig opposition after 1783, Pitt was merely carrying on the bad old system of government by influence where North had let it drop, whereas, in fact, a continuity of a different kind can readily be traced. For a general survey of the procedures by which business was conducted, see Pares, , George III, pp. 148–63Google Scholar.

46. This seems to have happened at one stage in the diplomatic crisis over the Falkland Islands at the end of 1770: Fortescue, , George III, IIGoogle Scholar, Nos. 838-52; Goebel, J., The Struggle for the Falkland Islands: A Study in Legal and Diplomatic History (New Haven, 1927), pp. 289–325Google Scholar.

47. E.g. over the proposed cession of Minorca to Russia in 1781 (de Madariaga, , Armed Neutrality, pp. 283–85Google Scholar); and over the Guelderland subsidy in 1787 (Cobban, , Ambassadors, pp. 123-24, 132–34Google Scholar).

48. The texts of the passages on which this conclusion is based would take two or three pages to quote in full. All the following include mention of the cabinet in terms bearing this implication: Spencer, F. (ed.), The Fourth Earl of Sandwich: Diplomatic Correspondence, 1763-1765 (Manchester, 1961), pp. 187, 190Google Scholar; Carter, C. E. (ed.), The Correspondence of General Thomas Gage with the Secretaries of State, 1763-1775 (New Haven, 1931–1934), II, 59, 65, 82, 88, 135Google Scholar; Barnes, G. R. and Owen, J. H. (eds.), The Sandwich Papers [Navy Records Soc] (London, 1932–1938), I, 25–26Google Scholar; Channing, E. and Coolidge, A. C. (eds.), The Barrington-Bernard Correspondence (Cambridge, Mass., 1912), p. 182Google Scholar; Hutchinson, P. O. (ed.), Diary and Letters of … Thomas Hutchinson (London, 1883–1886), I, 480Google Scholar; BM, Add. MSS, 28060, fols. 277, 333; ibid., 28064, fols. 130, 132, 134, 140.

49. Hutchinson, , Hutchinson Diary, I, 480.Google Scholar

50. Namier, , Age of the American Revolution, pp. 109, 110–13Google Scholar. See also SirNamier, Lewis, Structure of Politics at the Accession of George III (London, 1957), pp. 306Google Scholar and note 2, 391; and Bonsall, B., Sir James Lowther and Cumberland and Westmorland Elections, 1754-1775 (Manchester, 1960), pp. 20–30Google Scholar. Lord Hervey attests the King's (and the Queen's) concern about elections earlier in his reign. Hervey, , Memoirs, II, 417-20, 434–35Google Scholar.

51. Pares, , George III, p. 144Google Scholar.

52. Hervey, , Memoirs, I, 153Google Scholar; III, 771-72; Owen, , Pelhams, pp. 58–59Google Scholar; Namier, , Age of the American Revolution, p. 253Google Scholar.

53. Hervey, , Memoirs, II, 496, 668Google Scholar; Namier, , Age of the American Revolution, p. 23Google Scholar and note.

54. Coxe, W., Memoirs of the Life and Administration of Sir Robert Walpole, Earl of Orford (London, 1798), II, 630–31Google Scholar; III, 532-33; Owen, , Pelhams, pp. 100-01, 244, 248–49Google Scholar; The Earl of Ilchester, Henry Fox, First Lord Holland, His Family and Relations (London, 1920), I, 246–47Google Scholar; Dobrée, , Chesterfield Letters, I, 191Google Scholar; III, No. 1480; V, No. 1893; H.M.C., Egmont MSS, I, 374–75Google Scholar.

55. Smith, , Grenville Papers, II, 209–11Google Scholar; Lodge, , Chesterfield and Newcastle, p. 111Google Scholar.

56. Christie, Ian R., The End of North's Ministry, 1780-1782 (London, 1958), pp. 197–210Google Scholar.

57. North's conduct at this time is discussed in Christie, Ian R., “George III and the Debt on Lord North's Election Account, 1780-1784,” E.H.R., LXXVIII (1963), 715–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See too Pares, , George III, pp. 81–82Google Scholar. Members of a political group attached to Bute up to 1766 called themselves “King's friends,” and the term has sometimes been used by writers as synonymous with the “court and administration party” (ibid., pp. 107-08, 117 note), but neither of these corresponds with the postulated party created by the King and led by North. Unless clearly defined, the term “King's friends” is better avoided.

58. For the growth of the London press and the development of political and parliamentary reporting up to 1774, see Thomas, P. D. G., “The Beginning of Parliamentary Reporting in Newspapers, 1768-1774,” E.H.R., LXXIV (1959), 623–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar.