CHAPTER XLIII

THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION AND THE END OF THE PERSONAL ASCENDANCY OF GEORGE III (1770-1783)

The North Ministry and the Ascendancy of the King (1770-1782). - Contrary to expectation, North's Ministry, described as a "forlorn hope," remained in power longer than all the previous Ministries of the reign combined. George III to a large degree directed the policy of the Government, and his extensive use of patronage and corruption, the activity of his "Friends," together with the adroitness of North as a party leader and the dissensions between the Rockingham and Chatham Whigs, enabled him to maintain a "crushing and docile majority" in Parliament.

The Grenville Election Act (1770). Nevertheless, the Opposition. succeeded in carrying one or two measures of reform. First in importance was a Bill introduced by Grenville for trying disputed elections. Formerly such cases had been tried by a committee of the whole House, with the result that they had been invariably decided in favor of the candidate whose party had a majority in the Commons, quite regardless of the rights of the electors. According to the new arrangement forty-nine members were chosen by lot: from them each party removed one member alternately until the number was reduced to thirteen, and then added one member each. The body of fifteen thus constituted was sworn to act impartially and to render its decisions independently of Parliament. As each party would naturally seek to exclude the abler men among its opponents, the method of reduction was known as "knocking the brains out of the committee," but the Act, limited at first to seven years, worked so well in practice that in 1774 it was made permanent.1

The Struggle over the Reporting of Debates (1771). In the session of 1771 the Commons became involved in a quarrel with the press over the question of reporting debates. In view of the growing strength of public opinion, it was unwise to attempt to keep its proceedings

1 It remained in force till 1868, when the duties were handed over to the judges.

secret, and it was only natural that erroneous and unfair accounts of what was said and done should be spread abroad in print. The matter came to an issue when the House of Commons sought to arrest some offending printers, whom the Lord Mayor and aldermen of London undertook to protect. The result of the struggle was really another step in the direction of the freedom of the press, for, although the House still maintained that publication of debates was a breach of privilege, no further attempt was made to punish the reporters or printers. The great progress of the press as a political factor is one of the most significant features of this period: next to the failure of George's American policy it played the most important part in putting an end to the personal ascendancy of the Monarchy, which he had succeeded in reviving.

The Royal Marriage Act (1772). With his exalted ideas of royalty, it was a keen distress to George III when two of his brothers married below their station. To prevent such indiscretions for the future, which would inevitably lower the prestige of the kingly family and, in case of a secret alliance, might bring confusion to the succession, he procured the passage of the Royal Marriage Act. It provided that no descendant of George II under twenty-six years of age could contract a valid marriage without the consent of the Sovereign, nor after that age, except by the sanction of Parliament. While working hardship to individuals, the Act, which remains substantially in force today, has proved beneficial from the public standpoint.

The Boston Massacre (5 March, 1770). - Meantime, early in 1770, the first blood had been shed in the controversy between Great Britain and her American Colonies. For some time, the more unruly elements in Boston had been annoying the British troops until, on the evening of 5 March, they were provoked into firing upon their tormentors. Whoever was to blame, the "Boston Massacre" excited the fiercest indignation throughout the Colonies. Yet when the soldiers were brought to trial, leading patriots volunteered to defend them, and all were acquitted except two who received light sentences.

The Hutchinson Letters (1773-1774). Although the Government paid little attention to the Colonies for three years, the unrest there grew steadily. Extremists were active; mobs were frequent, loyalists were roughly handled, in some cases tarred and feathered; revenue officers were obstructed in the performance of their duties; and in 1773 Colonial committees of correspondence were formed which, in conjunction with local committees organized the previous year, furnished a complete system of machinery for united revolutionary action. Early in this year, Benjamin Franklin, who was acting as agent for

Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and two of the other Colonies, procured certain confidential letters written by Hutchinson 1 to a former secretary of Grenville, in which the methods which the British Government should employ in dealing with the Colonies were very frankly discussed. He sent them to Massachusetts to be handed about among a few of the leading patriots, on condition that they should not be published or even copied. Nevertheless, they soon found their way into print, were circulated throughout the Colonies, and aroused the greatest indignation. Franklin, who had occasion to appear before the Privy Council, 29 January, 1774, was denounced by Wedderburn, the Solicitor-General, in terms of studied insult. The Council roared with laughter while Franklin stood without moving a muscle. His methods of procuring the letters may have been questionable; but, since he was an old and eminent man, the treatment which he received was bound to turn him into an uncompromising opponent of the English Government, and to affect hosts of sympathizers in the same way.

The Boston Tea Party (16 December, 1773). -Meantime, the Government, by an ill-advised attempt to assist the East India Company whose affairs were in a bad way, opened the breach still wider. Among other measures of relief it was provided that a large amount of tea which the Company had on hand, should be sent from England free of duty and subject only to a tax of threepence per pound at the American ports. Since the tea sold in England was burdened with duties aggregating a shilling a pound, the Colonists were greatly favored over the home consumer. It has commonly been said that what they objected to was the principle of taxation involved, and that North would have done wisely to impose the duty at the time of export, leaving the Company to reimburse itself by a proportional increase of price on the sale of the goods in America; however, it has recently been shown that the objection was not so much to the tax as to the fact that the tea was consigned to friends of the Government, and that the resistance was instigated mainly by the English and American merchants, who resented being discriminated against in order that a great monopoly might be benefited. Toward the close of the year 1773, consignments of East India tea were shipped to Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Charleston. On the night of 16 December, a body of men, disguised as Indians, boarded the vessels which had recently arrived in Boston and emptied three hundred and forty chests into the harbor. The ships for New York and Philadelphia returned without landing their cargoes, while the consignment for Charleston was stored in the custom house, whence it was sold later.

1 He had been Governor of Massachusetts Bay since 1771.

The Acts of 1774. - The action at Boston, following upon the heels of the printing and circulation of the Hutchinson letters, determined George III to make an example of the town and at the same time to impose such coercion upon Massachusetts as would break its spirit and check further resistance. To that end, four "penal laws " were passed in 1774. The first closed the harbor of Boston and transferred the port to Salem until the losses of the East India Company should be made good. The second amended the charter of the Province, increased the power of the Governor, transferred to the Crown the nomination of councilors, and provided that town meetings, regarded as "nurseries of sedition," should not be held without the Governor's consent. The third enacted that all persons charged with a capital offense in executing the law in Massachusetts should be taken to Nova Scotia or to England for trial. The fourth was a new Quartering Act. The so-called "Quebec Act," passed the same year, extended the boundaries of Canada to the Mississippi on the west and to the Ohio on the south, granted freedom of worship to Roman Catholics, and allowed them to be tried by French law in civil cases, though in criminal matters the English law was to prevail. It provided, further, that the Governor-General should be assisted by a legislative council appointed by the Crown; there was to be no representative assembly, and taxation was reserved to the British Parliament. The measure, designed to deal with problems and promises arising from the Peace of 1763, was a wise and just one, for it gave the Canadians nine tenths of whom were French-what they expected and desired, and they showed their satisfaction by remaining loyal throughout the ensuing war. The American Colonies, however, were furious, for it seemed to them a design to cut them off from the western lands which they claimed, and to extend "Popery" and arbitrary government to their very doors. The First Continental Congress (5 September, 1774). The Ministry had calculated that the leaders would be intimidated by a show of force and that the other Colonies would not support Massachusetts. On the contrary, the repressive measures of 1774 called forth a determined and united opposition from north to south and led swiftly to the final crisis. On 5 September a Congress met at Philadelphia in which all the thirteen provinces, except Georgia, were represented. Doubtless the majority, while insistent on redress of grievances, hoped that some means of averting the conflict might be arranged. Owing, however, to the activity of the aggressive party, the Congress took a series of decided steps. It approved the "Suffolk Resolves " looking toward armed resistance in case of necessity; it demanded the revo

1 So called because they were passed in Suffolk County, Massachusetts.

cation of a number of recent laws, notably those of 1744; it drew up a declaration of rights; it framed general non-importation and nonexportation agreements; it sent a petition to the King and an address to the English people, after which it adjourned till May.

The Attitude in Parliament and in the Ministry. - Chatham, who had risen from a sick-bed in time to lift his voice against the last of the repressive Acts of 1774, rejoiced in the "manly wisdom and calm resolution of Congress." Yet he was anxious to avert a rebellion, foreseeing that France and Spain would seize the opportunity to avenge their defeat in the Seven Years' War. Moreover, both he and Burke were insistent on regulation of trade, failing to realize that the Colonies would now oppose that as strenuously as they had resisted the attempts to tax them. A few of the Ministers, including North, were also inclined to conciliation, though they were ready to do the King's will, while Parliament was, since the general election of 1774, more than ever under royal control. Nevertheless, the Opposition in Parliament kept up a zealous but futile agitation against coercion. Both Chatham and Burke, early in 1775, introduced conciliation schemes which failed to pass, and numerous petitions from the commercial towns were "shelved." On 20 March, North, with the consent of the King, did move a resolution, providing that if any Colony would pay its quota toward the common defense and the expenses of the civil administration no taxes would be imposed except for regulation of trade. Though it carried, it came too late.

The Outbreak of War; Lexington and Concord (19 April, 1775). — Already Massachusetts had been declared in rebellion. Soon after, on 19 April, occurred the memorable skirmishes of Lexington and Concord which opened the war that lasted until American independence was secured. The result was due to the courage and persistence of a resolute minority. Many were opposed to fighting at all. Others, who in the beginning put their hand to the plow, later sought to turn back. Spread through the Colonies there was a large and influential body of loyalists numbering from a third to a half of the population. In a minority in New England, it formed a majority in the Middle Colonies and fully equaled the patriot party in the South. In England, at the beginning of the war, the King and his agents not only controlled Parliament but were supported by the bulk of the nobility and landed gentry, the clergy of the Established Church and the legal profession. The opposition was confined to the merchants, the Dissenting preachers and the laboring classes.

Comparative Strength of the Combatants. The troops who enlisted on the Colonial side were mostly raw, insubordinate, and unwilling