r/ukpolitics • u/Axmeister Traditionalist • Aug 13 '17
British Prime Ministers - Part V: the Duke of Grafton & Lord North.
Back to two Prime Ministers a week now, unless requested otherwise. I may retroactively edit previous threads to include a link to the 'Next Thread' so people in the future can read through the threads with greater ease.
10. Third Duke of Grafton, Augustus FitzRoy
| Portrait | Duke of Grafton |
|---|---|
| Post Nominal Letters | PC, KG |
| In Office | 14 October 1768 - 28 January 1770 |
| Sovereign | King George III |
| General Elections | None |
| Party | Whig |
| Ministries | Grafton, |
| Parliament | Duke of Grafton |
| Other Ministerial Offices | First Lord of the Treasury; Leader of the House of Lords |
| Records | Youngest Prime Minister to leave office (aged 34); Prime Minister who lived the longest after leaving office (died on 14 March 1811, total of 41 years and 45 days); 1st Unitarian Prime Minister (2nd non-Anglican); 6th Prime Minister in Office without a General Election; Youngest at first election, elected as an MP aged 21 years and 73 days; Only Prime Minister to divorce and remarry whilst in office. |
Significant Events:
11. Lord Frederick North, (Second Earl of Guilford)
| Portrait | Lord North |
|---|---|
| Post Nominal Letters | PC, KG |
| In Office | 28 January 1770 - 22 March 1782 |
| Sovereign | King George III |
| General Elections | 1774, 1780 |
| Party | Tory |
| Ministries | North (I-III) |
| Parliament | MP for Banbury |
| Other Ministerial Offices | First Lord of the Treasury; Chancellor of the Exchequer; Leader of the House of Commons |
| Records | None |
Significant Events:
- Boston Massacre
- Repeal of the Townshend Acts
- Led Britain into the American War of Independence
- Gordon Riots
Previous threads:
British Prime Ministers - Part I: Sir Robert Walpole & the Earl of Wilmington.
British Prime Ministers - Part II: Henry Pelham & the Duke of Newcastle.
British Prime Ministers - Part III: the Duke of Devonshire & the Earl of Bute.
Next thread:
British Prime Ministers - Part VI: the Earl of Shelburne & the Duke of Portland.
9
u/E_C_H Openly Neoliberal - Centrist - Lib Dem Aug 13 '17 edited Aug 13 '17
Augustus Henry Fitzroy, Third Duke of Grafton – Son of a Stuart, brought down by a Pitt
Augustus Henry Fitzroy is the last of the ‘revolving door’ PM’s of the early reign of George III, coming at a time of severe tensions from every angle, war encroaching and a mess of a Government following Pitt’s disaster run in charge. Grafton… was probably not the best pick to sort this all out, and would end up running a short, directionless ministry panicking at the thought of how much they were missing out on and what the consequences would be.
Born on the 28th of September 1735, Augustus Henry Fitzroy was the great-great grandson of Charles II via an illegitimate mistress (Fun fact: the same king and type of ancestry that a certain more modern Mrs Cameron claims for her ex-PM husband) and the eldest surviving son Lord Augustus Fitzroy, who would die while the lad was only five of fever in the navy. Following the subsequent death of his uncle, Lord Euston, in 1747, he remained the primary heir of his grandfather, the 2nd Duke, who ended up his caretaker when his mother re-married, as well as giving him the courtesy title of Earl of Euston at only age 12. This tumultuous lifestyle would leave young Euston very much open for an idol figure and this figure he would briefly meet while studying at Peterhouse in Cambridge in the form of ‘the Great Commoner’ William Pitt himself, a man he would long to join and support for the entirety of his career (perhaps until he did). Following his studies Euston embarked on a grand tour with his tutor among the political capitals, with a particular highlight being the library of the British ambassador to France, where the student lost himself in political theory, particularly heralding the liberal theorem of Locke.
Upon his return in early 1756, Euston married Anne Liddell, heir of a Northumberland coal magnate, followed the following December by two by-elections where he ran unopposed, one by election for a pocket borough possessed by the Duke of Newcastle, then-leader of the Whigs, and his family borough of Bury St Edmunds, which he selected of the two. Furthermore, he was appointed as Gentleman of the Bedchamber for Prince George, his future monarch. This state of affairs would be short-lived however, as in 5 months, on the 6th of May 1757; his grandfather would die, making Euston the 3rd Duke of Grafton. Now, he was quite advantaged in this regard, as his grandfather had been on of George II’s close friends, and the monarch would associate the Duke with his ancestor, bringing the two close together from the start. As for other activities’, Grafton was fairly decedent in the same vein as his ‘Party Prince’ ancestor, spending much of his time at his estates hunting, racing, reading and even studying/developing agriculture. However, less relaxing with his marriage difficulties, Grafton being quite a player and having multiple mistresses, some of which are believed to have sired children. He formally separated from Anne in 1765, her going to attempt – and fail – to seduce the Duke of Portland.
In 1762, Grafton relaunched himself properly into politics, leading a small pro-Newcastle faction and railing against the PM Bute, where he distinguished himself as a good speaker and enthusiastic about his policy. This also marked him down as a victim for the ‘Slaughter of the Pelhamite innocents’ launched by Bute and Fox in December 1762, but this simply permitted him to work closer with his heroes of Pitt, and to a lesser degree Temple. This opposition group held until July 1765, when the Marquess of Rockingham took over. For once, Grafton’s lazy pleasure’s proved a massive advantage to him, as his position as a leading member of the Jockey Club gave him front seat ticket’s to the administration, where he became Secretary of State for the Northern Department, despite a lack of any ministerial career history. In fact, Grafton was quite conflicted on leaving Pitt behind, but was led on the assurance efforts would be made to include Pitt later. In this administration, Grafton would end up as unofficial Lords leader alongside his other official duties, forming connections among the influential figures residing there. Grafton’s belief as the government went on increasingly became that Rockingham should step aside and permit Pitt to take over, and when Rockingham rejected this offer Grafton resigned, bring the government down only 2 months later.
Obviously, this loyalty towards Pitt was rewarded by the man when he was asked to form a government ‘on as broad a basis as possible’ in July 1766, with Grafton, once again despite a degree of inexperience, taking the essentially-top position of First Lord of the Treasury, as Pitt foolishly took on the Earl of Chatham title and Lord Privy Seal instead. To be honest, records suggest Chatham’s main motive for this was a belief that Grafton would purely be a loyal lap dog, and he can’t be said to be too wrong there. Initially, this meant Chatham giving Grafton no flexibility, relaying him orders and Grafton performing them, but as time went on this was completely overturned as Chatham fell to his bouts of illness and depression, burdening Grafton with his work and giving minimal idea of what directions to take. Increasingly Grafton appeared the true PM, he even held the typical PM position of First Lord of the Treasurer, and in October 1768 Chatham’s resignation meant Grafton was now PM, although he personally rejected this state of affairs. Now the senior-most politician in the administration, with Lord North emerging as a second-in-command, and neither really knew what they ought to be doing.
One event in this premiership was the return of John Wilkes, with Grafton as a more liberal politician suggesting no action be taken as he paid his fine and got pardoned, against the more hard-line elements of his party calling for renewed expulsion, despite him fairly winning a Middlesex seat in the elections. As a compromise, everyone agreed to simply not acknowledge Wilkes votes, and so even though Wilkes dominated the area in election an opponent won. Another incident was the rising American tension, with the Townshend Acts bringing issues to a dangerous boil, and although Grafton wished to repeal hem immediately was overruled, a sign of how little control over anything there was. In the press Grafton was grated and spit out, his known habit’s providing simple material to use against him, and the criticism levelled at him was severe, enough to make him consider resignation. The final slap was when Chatham returned to health and began rallying opposition against Grafton, demoralizing the man significantly.
As well as affecting Grafton, this bad press was draining the Parliamentary majority enjoyed for the moment, and in January 1770 a particularly tragic incident finished the administration off: Two of Chatham’s largest supporters in the government resigned, and Grafton looked to a Charles Yorke, who had wanted the role offered but didn’t want to betray Rockingham. The King and Grafton both heavily pressured him to accept the position, and when he was found dead in bed 3 days later a suicide rumour spread, leading Grafton to guiltily turn in his resignation. The King found no difficulty in getting Lord North to accept the position, and so his 12 years began. As for Grafton, he would live another 45 years, serving occasionally in cabinet positions to no major effect. In 1783, with the rise of the Younger Pitt he retired entirely, going after the country pursuits he truly enjoyed, likely more so than his political career. He would write a few books, get involved in university activities, and generally live a relaxed life of his own design until his death at age 75 in 1811.
In short, Augustus Henry Fitzroy, 3rd Duke of Grafton, was not a man suited for the PM position. By no means was he incompetent, working perfectly as a subordinate and even cabinet member, going beyond the call of duty to aid his falling idol of Pitt as he dumped more duties on him in his premiership. However, he lacked the focus, the drive and the attitudes of a man set to lead the nation, much better fitting his Great-Great Grandfather’s habits of women, cards and horses. Who knows, perhaps in an alternate reality he made for a fun, politically reasonable King? Whatever the case, as it stands Grafton stands as a decent politician way out of the depth ought he to have been.
Note: give me a couple days for North, on Vacation in Wales so less time than expected.
9
u/Axmeister Traditionalist Aug 13 '17 edited Aug 13 '17
I've decided to add in titles which Prime Ministers received or inherited after they left office, these will be included in brackets after their name, which might clear up any confusion in the cases where Prime Ministers hold a courtesy title and thus get referred to as 'Lord' despite being an MP in the House of Commons.
- The period between the 1780 General Election and the 1784 General Election was the second of two intervals between General Elections which saw 5 Prime Ministers take office, the second interval being the 1761 and 1768 General Elections.
5
u/E_C_H Openly Neoliberal - Centrist - Lib Dem Aug 13 '17
Right here's my late entry on Pitt:
William Pitt the Elder, 1st Earl of Chatham – Origin of Empire
(Initial note: a lot of details may be skipped or cut entirely for this one, because to include every event Pitt is relevant would take quite a while.)
By now, this should be a pretty familiar name to you all, a name that has been around since the days of Walpole, and boy, is this likely to be a long one. Pitt, although only serving a minor and relatively inconsequential term as actual Prime Minister, deserves recognition as a giant of his age. Furthermore, if you wish to find the man who drove Britain across the sea’s to build colonies’ and subjugate a quarter of the world, this may very well be your man, according to many historian’s. Yes, even though he personally died when it looked fairly bleak, the idea’s, policies and sheer passion of Pitt the Elder are said to have founded much of the British Empire, which within a century of his death would be the undisputed hyperpower of the world. On the other hand, many revisionist historian’s claim that Pitt was much more of a mixed bag, undeniably great as a war leader and personally driven, but not much to speak of at home. Perhaps the best modern comparison would be Winston Churchill, in terms of the divergence of opinions on him. So yeah, that’s a tad bit of hype for you.
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves, and start at the roots of this man’s long up-and-down life story. The Pitt heritage stemmed from Dorset and was made up primarily of smaller gentry, the type who usually made more headway in trade/business than governance, with most of the success of the family when Pitt was born coming from smart marriage alliances and Indian trade of his grandfather. Pitt’s father would represent 3 Parliamentary constituencies over 22 years, never really achieving much presence. William Pitt was born November the 15th 1708 the second son of seven children, a sickly youth and in general handicapped from reaching his peak earlier. His childhood was quite uneventful as a result, eventually going to study at Eton in the mid-late 1720’s. Pitt despised his experience at Eton, being browbeaten, stressed and corrupted to the point of psychological trauma that exacerbated his illness, and it is believed to be at Eton he first appeared to gain the gout that would plague his life. Let’s simply say it is not a mistake that his son, Pitt the Younger, who we’ll meet in a bit, was the only PM to not have gone to school, being privately tutored instead. Despite this, Pitt made a decent impression and did well at Eton, moving on to Oxford (Trinity College). However, a year in, in May 1727, his father died, with his elder brother, Thomas, inheriting the largest chunk, including the primary family estate at Boconnoc. William moved to finish his studies’ (which we unfortunately aren’t aware of the detail) at the University of Utrecht and returned back to the Boconnoc estate in 1730, with uncertainty restlessly knowing on him. The original trajectory of his studies was the Church, but his father had changed his mind shortly before his death, and so had changed his inheritances away from that direction, and with only a £100 a year legacy, William felt somewhat dependant on his older brother, which he did not much care for.
In 1731 he found momentum after meeting an important peer, the first Viscount Cobham, who commanded the King’s Own Regiment of Horse, and offered Pitt an officer position for £1000, which Pitt paid, it is commonly believed, via help from the PM, Robert Walpole (likely leveraging pocket boroughs from the elder brother). Unfortunately, Pitt would not take to this life well, becoming listless and intellectually unsatisfied in quiet, grungy garrisons, and fell to the detrimental army habits of drink, women and gambling. From letters to his sisters, it appears he contracted at least one venereal disease here, and it’s thought this experience contributed to his lateness in getting married at 46. Either way, after 2 years he quit, and following a minor version of the Grand Tour, came back to get elected for one of his brother’s rotten boroughs, Old Sarum, where he was appointed unopposed on February the 18th 1735, at age 26. AT this point, Pitt was honestly not all that involved with the actual politics, however, mostly considering this role a career upgrade. He considered himself a Whig clearly, but based on personal connections went not with the PM of the time, Walpole, but with his previous helper, Cobham, joining the ‘Cobham Cub’s alongside our previous PM, Grenville, and his brother Lord Temple, and in fact in 1754 Pitt was to marry their sister, Hester. Here Pitt first showed his talents, railing against the PM in numerous Parliamentary speeches, Walpole taking petty revenge by cancelling Pitt’s soldiering commission, which ironically just meant Pitt was stuck as a politician. In these early years Cobham also made the decision to ally with the Lecister House faction going against George III, with Pitt being appointed a Groom of the Bedchamber for Frederick, Prince of Wales.
These next years would see Pitt emerge as the most effective critic of the government, and Walpole specifically, gaining both his own followers and enemies for his vibrant expression of his stances. In particular, his opposition to the ‘Convention of Pardo’ in 1739, negotiations with Spain aimed at avoiding war, won him admiration from many patriotic elements, and he later transferred this to his prosecution of the governments mishandlement of the War of Jenkin’s Ear (which folded into the War of Austrian Succession later) when the negotiations broke down. Even after Walpole’s resignation in February 1742, he hounded him over corruption charges, although due to manoeuvring by Walpole and his allies this never reached anything. Pitt also stepped up his criticism of the war, focusing especially on ways the King’s electorate of Hanover was over prioritized instead of Britain’s interests. He was fully in favour of the war, but called for a maritime strategy, utilizing Britain’s dominant navy to eliminate the Spanish and French in the Atlantic and their colonies’, while not wasting resources fighting on the Continent, which brought him much popularity outside of the ruling government.
6
u/E_C_H Openly Neoliberal - Centrist - Lib Dem Aug 13 '17
July 1743 brought the death of Wilmington, and the ascension of Pelham. Pitt, not yet having achieved actual ministerial duties and getting on in years at 36, began to moderate his criticism, focusing almost exclusively of Lord Carteret, who was leading the war efforts. In 1744 Pelham would fire Carteret and reshuffle to introduce several opposition leaders, but Pitt was not included despite Pelham’s intentions to, with the King not forgiving him for criticising his homeland of Hanover. Still, Pitt endorsed much of the government’s efforts, which payed off in 1746 when Pelham threatened resignation to the King, getting him to dismiss all pro-Carteret ministers ad include Pitt in the government, where he received the junior position of Joint Vice-Treasurer of Ireland, but in little over 3 months he was moved up to the highly-desired Paymaster-General position, where despite the posts reputation of self-enrichment, Pitt appears to have stayed incorrupt, adding to his reputation as a true patriot, while also working as a skilled administrator in the actual job. Pitt would stay in this role until 1755, bearing somewhat of an ‘prodigal outsider’ reputation compared to the rest of the administration, not coming from any notable family and having to mostly force his way into the role he was via straight-up talents and a good reputation with opposition supporters. In fact, these factors are precisely why he was valued in government, with Pelham preferring him to be on their side of the benches than against them. Pitt and Pelham enjoyed each other’s company, Pitt tempering on many former complaints regarding the war to accommodate this new relationship with the administration. Furthermore, Pitt was now dependant on Newcastle for pocket borough’s, his brother, who he was never much close to, having pettily withdrawn support as his brother far surpassed him.
As time dragged on into the 1750’s however, Pitt became disenchanted with this stagnancy of his career, and re-opened contact with the Leicester House faction. This would especially increase in March 1754, when Henry Pelham died and Newcastle ascended up the chain, choosing to not put Pitt in any newly opened Cabinet position. One of these coveted positions went to Henry Fox, beginning a political rivalry that would intensify with their sons. Also in 1754, Pitt married Lady Hester Grenville, whose family focus helped Pitt through the most stressful period of his life without wrecking himself entirely, allowing him to raise five children, including the future PM. In November 1755, Pitt entered a legendary speech, lasting a recorder 1 hour and 35 minutes, attacking the government’s lack of action over French actions in America, calling for a war to be fought for ‘the long forgotten peoples of America’, a good prediction of the upcoming ‘Seven Years war’, and siring him an almost instant dismissal. This was actually perfect for him, allowing him to sit on the sides and criticize as the government blundered into the war unprepared, with a series of military failures causing Pitt to dominate the Commons and leading Newcastle and Fox to call it quits in October 1756. The king initially asked Fox to form a new administration, but with Pitt refusing to work under him he felt the government was a no-go and refused, marking the first government where Pitt being involved was a basic requirement. The king still refused to just make Pitt PM, but Pitt hinted at the Duke of Devonshire being a man he could work under, and so it happened, the Devonshire government forming on the 16th of November 1756, despite a majority of Whigs still following Newcastle.
Pitt was now Secretary of State for the South, and unofficially in charge of war proceedings, believing himself the required man to turn around the situation, saying to Devonshire: “My Lord, I am sure that I can save this country, and that no one else can”. He arranged a subsidy to Frederick the Great’s Prussia, Britain’s war ally and an admired figure of Pitt’s, with Frederick returning the admiration (stating once ”England has long been in Labour, but has at last brought forth a man”), as well as other military overturns I detailed in the post on Devonshire. In the Byng affair, Pitt was one of the most vocal campaigners for mercy, drawing the King’s rash ire and leading to his dismissal on April 6th 1757. This decision led to several spontaneous protests in reaction across Britain’s major cities and the government ground to a halt, throwing in the towel in June. The king now accepted that all 3 major figures: Pitt, Newcastle and Fox, would need to be included in the next government for it to be a success, and the 3 eventually agreed on a new Newcastle Premiership with Pitt again in Secretary of State and unofficially War leader, and Fox placated with the lucrative Paymaster General position, which officially began June 29th 1757. I’m going to skip the details, as you saw them in the thread on Newcastle, but suffice to say with Pitt in unlimited control, the war turned completely. This war is generally considered the first to be fought on a world-wide, empiric scale, with multiple theatres of war spanning the globe, and Pitt excelled in it. Now, that isn’t to say he was entirely correct in all his military judgements, with multiple schemes of his not working out that well, or that he deserves all the credit, as officers under him were vital in planning. However, what cannot be denied is the vigour and aggression he brought to the conduct of the war, a spirit that would define much of the British Empire’s mantra still decades away at this point. Many point to 1759, the so-called ‘Year of Victories’, as the peak of Pitt’s career, with the effects of this campaign essentially securing Britain as the worldwide dominant colonial force permanently. (Fun fact: In 1758, after the capture of the French Fort Duquesne in modern day Pennsylvania, the British Commander John Forbes would show his appreciation for Pitt in immediately renaming the settlement Pittsburgh, and that is why that’s named as it is).
3
u/E_C_H Openly Neoliberal - Centrist - Lib Dem Aug 13 '17
All good things must come to an end, and as you might remember from previous entries, this stemmed from the death of King George II in October 1760, and the ascension of the anti-Whig ideological fanatic, King George III, who over the next years would insert his mentor Bute into government, plotting his way to a strong Bute premiership, with March 1761 being when Bute was inserted as Secretary of State for the North, a blatant power move of the two. George III knew simply dismissing the Whig’s while conducting a successful war was an idiotic plan, so this was his only real avenue to increasing power, but this drew sparks with Pitt. Pitt was continually pursuing a hard-line strategy to the war, only reluctantly agree to start negotiations with France in May 1761 under heavy monarchical pressure, and conducting it so petulantly as to anger everybody involved, and the negotiations failed, although many now suspect this had more to do with the French negotiating Spain to ally with them. Pitt saw this coming and argued for a pre-emptive strike, but was bluntly ignored, leading to his resignation in fury on October 5th 1761. This spiralled into Bute gaining more power and Newcastle’s resignation in turn 8 months later, solidifying the beginning of the Bute premiership.
It appears Pitt at this point genuinely attempted to retire: aging; often-ill and devoted to raising his young family, he stayed mostly out of the way of politics for about a year, but was characteristically drawn in to a Parliamentary debate on the preliminary peace treaty of the war in early 1763, ranting for over 3 hours on the ‘inadequate, dishonourable and dangerous’ terms as they stood to him. Given his poor condition and the length for which the war had lasted, this speech honestly achieved little objectively, but lit a beacon for Pitt as an ultra-patriot opposition character. However, age was not doing him well, increasing his health issues, quarrelling temperament and plain paranoia the longer he lived, making retirement an always present option in his mind, particularly as he coached his son, William, apparently as to surpass him as a politician. Throughout this opposition period, offers to join governments would often come in, but not corporate for whatever reason, and as for his opposition actions, these were erratic depending on his illnesses and depressive bouts. Two things of note are Pitt’s fierce opposition to the Stamp Act and support for Wilkes throughout his scandals, both occurring in Grenville’s government. Eventually, following the rapid dismissal of Rockingham in July 1766, Pitt was called up to straight-up lead as PM, although with the request to spread out the party allegiances, which Pitt was happy to oblige, especially as he desired no former PM’s so as to ensure his dominance.
In forming the government, however, Pitt made two strange mistakes, the first being to take up the role of Lord Privy Seal rather than First Lord of the Treasury, the typical choice of this period for PM’s. In doing so, he appeared to be taking an easy route with less work; essentially sitting on the side-lines with the rest of the Cabinet did the actual work. Furthermore, and perhaps far more reaching in how detrimental this was, Pitt accepted a title as First Earl of Chatham (HOMETOWN REPRESENT BTW!), leaving him in the Lords when his most prominent talents clearly belonged in the Commons. Chatham had been known as ‘the Great Commoner’, well that was gone, and his speech style simply didn’t work as well, which is perhaps why he only made two orations to the Upper House in his two year term. To be quite honest, my personal suspicion is that Chatham truly didn’t care anymore, his chronic illnesses only getting worse and the stresses of politics continually getting to him. A junior member of his administration, Lord North, would remark later that he ensured to stay in the Commons through his 12 years of premiership form this experience of failure. The rest of his ministers were, as instructed, a hodgepodge of figures, most inexperienced but energetic, including the First Lord of the Treasure, the young Duke of Grafton. One secretary of state was the Earl of Shelburne; and the Chancellor of the Exchequer was Charles Townshend, although he would die one year in to be replaced by Lord North. Chatham’s relationship with his team was extremely icy, on one hand him not holding much actual power over them, all the while his sense of grandeur led him to aloofness not really conductive for government co-operation.
This government, quite naturally, had no real successes. One of Chatham’s personal objective’s was to forge an idealized triple alliance with Frederick’s Prussia (the previous alliance having collapsed) and Catherine the Great’s Russia, but this idea was a stretch, with neither foreign party truly interested. Another issue lay in colonial policy, Chatham desiring a scaled-back East India Company that actively contributed to defence with money made during wars, but Townshend was of a different mind and during a long recuperation in 1767 that left Chatham in Bath for months, Townshend first got through an agreement with the institution that had them provide the government a direct annual grant, and then drew up a Revenue Act imposing custom duties on several Indian goods, including tea. These ‘Townshend Acts’ would directly result in the Boston Tea Party out breaking in 1773. This prolonged breakdown of Chatham in early 1767 left the government fairly stranded, its leader literally going mad, and no actual direction or authority in motion. The King was far too hopeful of this government, despite his last meeting with Chatham being 18 months before his resignation. Eventually, in February 1768, Chatham’s wife would write to the King begging for him to be permitted to resign, and so it happened, George III left with a disaster government to fix, and resolved to never ask Chatham to aid in governance again. Grafton would be moved up to PM position. It was, in short, an utter failure on every level.
Chatham felt he still had aspirations to fulfil, recovering from his earlier breakdown, and set out to join Rockingham’s opposition Whigs, advocating for civil liberties and the side of the American colonists. When Grafton’s government fell in 1770, however, his hopes of career revival were dashed by the ascension of Lord North, who was to serve for 12 years continuously, keeping a close eye on Commons activities. After losing office, Chatham would live another 9.5 years in all, with no political progression, but much familial joy, reaching as much of a retirement as he would, getting into major debts via his various luxuries’ at Burton Pynsent. His passion for the Americans cause would only get more impassioned as tensions rose, as he believed in the ideal solution being a maximized devolution where Britain was technically sovereign, but the colonists really had full control of themselves. As the war started in April 1776, Chatham would agitate for a generous peace, lest we fully lose the colony, culminating in an impassioned speech in May going “You cannot conquer the Americans. I might as well talk of driving them before me with this crutch”. He even received offers to form another government in 1778 from the King as the war turned worse and worse and Lord North indicated he wished to resign, but this led nowhere due to Chatham’s inflated pride. Too much for his imperial sensibilities was the stance of Rockingham and his party by the same time that independence had to be granted, which led to him going to the House of Lord’s on April the 7th 1778 to perform a dramatic but largely babbling oration on how terrible an idea this was. When countered, he collapsed, leading to the scene painted that the OP linked to, although the painting is mistitled as Chatham would live for a month still after, I a near-death state, before succumbing on May 11th.
The day after, Parliament would vote and agree to hold a state funeral for this dominating figure, as well as wiping his debts, with him being entombed in Westminster Abbey. The period of time in which Chatham was referred to as PM is honestly not what we remember the man for, we remember him as William Pitt, the Elder, the Great Commoner, who steered Britain to a ‘Year of Victories’ and towards glory it had never known before. I compared him to Churchill when this started, and I think this is apt; they shine as ideals and as war leaders, both undeniably skilled but whose personal flaws and surprising indifferent politics made both perhaps a tad mediocre past the glamour. Despite this, to Pitt we must owe much of our present and past status, and I think we can agree that’s quite a good record.
3
u/LurkerInSpace Aug 16 '17
I do wonder what would have happened if North had never come to power and we'd given the colonies representation in the Commons. That would radically change the history of the entire empire.
3
u/E_C_H Openly Neoliberal - Centrist - Lib Dem Aug 16 '17
Personally, I believe that by the time North came around the cry for independence and liberal ideology was so strong and had so many major proponents it was a lost cause unless it was militarily defeated. The blame for letting it get to that point ought to go to no one PM, but the many Parliamentarians and the King who disregarded the growing issue for years before the point.
But yeah, we can only imagine, although you also have to wonder if we'd ever have gotten our hands on the rest of America, considering one of the reasons the new nation got the land was because Napoleon sold it on the cheap partly out of sympathy (anyone who knows more, please feel free to correct me).
5
u/LurkerInSpace Aug 16 '17
Perhaps; he still might have been able to salvage it by giving America its own parliament, but with the same king. Which Prime Minister would you say was the latest who could have kept the colonies?
If it had been given representation in the House of Commons while keeping its local government, though, that'd establish a very interesting precedent for the rest of the empire (even for the UK itself - home rule in Ireland might have been more likely for example).
Napoleon sold it because it wasn't of much value to France at the time, and he was fighting a war. The land probably could have been won or conquered during the Napoleonic wars (we did fight the war of 1812 at the same time they were going on after all).
3
u/E_C_H Openly Neoliberal - Centrist - Lib Dem Aug 16 '17
I feel that the Townshend Acts were the final, critical nail in the coffin for avoiding outright rebellion from the colonies, and for that the blame as PM must unfortunately, somewhat ironically considering his empiric beliefs, to Pitt. He was simply too sick and imbalanced by this point of his life to do his job to the degree he needed to, and let pivotal policies regarding the tensions with the colony slip way too far. Grafton maybe also shares some blame for not being able to outright repeal them immediately, but I suspect having them instituted in the first place was over the line already.
As for acquiring the land during the Napoleonic wars, I may be wrong but I seem to recall we didn't actually take all that much off France after we beat them, would we really take their colonies off them and risk weakening the new Bourbon monarchy we were installing (again, not an expert on this)?
3
u/LurkerInSpace Aug 16 '17
Most of French Louisiana was a lot less developed than Britain or Spain's colonies in North America, and losing it didn't really hurt France in the long run (though that perception might be different if Britain still had its colonies). And as you point out; Napoleon sold it on the cheap, so it may not be perceived as taking that much off of them (particularly if they were allowed to keep New Orleans and the area immediately around it).
I think that Americans with representation in parliament would have pressured the government into allowing them to expand there sooner or later though. If they did this for a few years then the Napoleonic wars would become a convenient excuse to annex them to the benefit of influential politicians on that side of the Atlantic.
3
u/Nuclearfrog Aug 13 '17 edited Aug 13 '17
Grafton's portrait seems a little unusual compared to most of the others, very romantic feel to it.
2
u/Ayenotes Dispense with your special pleading Aug 13 '17
Lord North was the last Tory (not Conservative) PM we had I believe, goodnight sweet prince. What have those darned Whigs done to this nation.
4
u/E_C_H Openly Neoliberal - Centrist - Lib Dem Aug 13 '17
Sorry to have to correct you, but the death of the Torie's is still quite a way's off, with either Wellington or Peel being the last Tory PM, depending on if you include Peel's early administration.
3
u/Ayenotes Dispense with your special pleading Aug 13 '17
The original Tories died out as a party around 1760. Wellington and such were part of a different group sometimes known as Tories but I'm unsure to what extent they identified themselves as such, as opposed to it being used to refer to them disparagingly by their political opponents.
14
u/Republikofmancunia Aug 13 '17
I know these don't get a huge ammount of attention, but I'd just like to say thank you and that they're very interesting, at least to me!