Adams J.T. Empire on the Seven Seas. The British Empire 1784-1939
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
RELIGION
AND THE
COMMON
MAN
small
degree
the
improved
morality
of
public
life
and
even
the
development
of
the
Civil
Service
which
were
to
come
with
the
Victorian era.
These
movements
got
under
way
as
the
Industrial
Revolution
was
beginning
to
change society,
but,
as
we
shall
see,
both
were
retarded
by
events
across
the Channel with
which
England
had
nothing
to do
but
the
effects
of
which
were
profoundly
disastrous
for her.
Before the hurricane
of
the French
Revolution
left
its
traces
on
all
Europe
there had been
for
some
decades
much
reform-
ing
zeal.
In
striking
similarity
to
today,
however,
there
were
two
theories of
the state.
Everywhere
on the Continent the
theory
prac-
tised was
that of
despotism,
benevolent
or
otherwise.
Reforms
in
many
countries
were
being
enacted,
but
in all
cases
they
were
ac-
complished by
enlightened
acts of
despots,
such
as
Frederick the
Great,
Catherine II
of Russia
and
others,
and not
through
any
organs
of
popular
opinion.
Indeed,
the
peoples
were not
supposed
to
be
capable
of
judging
what
was
for
their
own
good,
and
for
that
reason
and
because one-man
government
was considered
the
only
possible
efficient
method,
the
despots
flourished
everywhere
except
in
the British
Empire.
'It
had
been
the fear
that
in
trying
Boling-
broke's
experiment
of
a
Patriot
King,
George
III
might
extend the
Continental
system
of
despotism
to
his
own
realms,
which
had
ac-
counted for
much
of
the discontent
at home
and
the
revolt
of
America.
The
attempt
had not
succeeded,
thanks
to
public opinion
and
the
individualism
of both those who seceded and those who
re-
mained
within the
Empire.
It is too
soon
to
speak
of
democracy
in
Britain,
but
there
was
much of
the
democratic
process
at
work,
though
in
view
of
the
disorderly
elections,
the
squabblings
of
party,
and the
recent loss
of the
American
colonies,
that
process might
seem
to
many clumsy
and
inefficient
as
contrasted
with the smoother
working
of
the
neighboring despotisms.
It is not
without its reas-
surance
to
us
today,
however,
to recall that
in a
few decades
most
of
these
despotisms
were
overturned
and
their
efforts even at
re-
form
proved
unavailing,
while the
clumsy
popular
government
of
Britain
was
to
prove
the
enduring
victor.
15
EMPIRE
ON
THE SEVEN
SEAS
In
spite
of
all the
evils
of
the
unreformed
Parliament,
there
was
such
a
thing
in
England
as
public
opinion,
which
the
Tudors had
wisely
known
and
as
George
III found
out.
Moreover,
there was
extreme
individualism,
a sense of
personal
independence,
and
a
theory
of
the
state
at
the
opposite pole
from
that
held
by
the
despots.
Even if
few of the
English
and
scarcely
any
of the
Scots
at
this
time
could
vote,
the
state was
felt
to be
in
a real
sense a
commonweal
in the
old
English
meaning
of the
word.
This was
to
be
a
matter
of
prime
importance
when
the
Second
Empire
was
to
be established
as
the
Commonwealth of British
Nations.
The
impassable
gulf
which
separated
the
British idea
of
popu-
lar
government
from that
of the
despots,
as it still divides
the
democracies
from the
dictatorships,
was
implicit
in
the
pamphlet,
Fragment
on
Government,
published
by Jeremy
Bentham
in
1776,
though
the
years
of
his
wider
influence came
later.
In
this,
how-
ever,
he
outlined
his
thesis that
the end
of
society
was
"the
greatest
happiness
of the
greatest
number" with
the
corollary
that
"every
man
is
the
best
judge
of
his own
happiness,"
This
may
well
be
questioned,
but if
accepted
by
democracy,
it is evident
that
citi-
zens cannot
find
happiness
in
having
some
one
person
decide what
is best
for
them,
and
that
they
will
insist sooner
or
later on
having
a
voice
in
their own welfare
as
they
see
it.
Like the
Declaration
of
Independence,
it
was a
call
to
men
to be free and
to
make
the
most
of themselves
as individuals.
In
the
decades of reform which
we
are
noting
in
this
chapter
we
may
easily
discern
the
difference
between
Britain
and
the
Con-
tinent.
On the
latter,
reforms were
by
edict
of
the
despots.
In
Britain
they
were
the
work of
innumerable
individuals.
For ex-
ample,
the
movement for the
education
of
poor
children
working
in factories
was started
by
Robert Raikcs
of
Gloucester.
As the
only
free
day
in
the
week
for
the
children
was
Sunday,
the schools
were
called
Sunday
Schools,
though
not then
devoted
to
religious
education but
mostly
to
reading
and
writing.
The
work was soon
taken
up
by
the various
religious
bodies,
which
in time
opened
schools
for
other children on
week-days,
and
the
whole
vast
sys-
tem
which
in
time
grew
up
was
characteristically
British. It started
16
RELIGION
AND
THE
COMMON
MAN
with
a
private
individual,
appealed
to the
public
and was
for
long
carried
on
without
government
aid
or control.
In the
years
before
the
French
Revolution,
in
spite
of
the
dark
shadows,
a
few of
which
we have
suggested,
we
can feel fresh
winds
blowing,
and
if
it had
not
been for that
cataclysm,
the
history
of
England
and
the
Empire
might
have
been
quite
different.
The
Revolution,
in
fact,
did
not
come,
as is often
considered,
at
the
end of an
intolerable
period.
Reform
had
been in the air for
many
years
both
on the
Continent
and Britain.
It
had been
the
Tory
Parliament
of
Lord
North which had
carried
out
Howard's
prison
reforms
and,
in
spite
of
the
ghastly
game
laws
and
other
blots
or
blind
spots
in
the
English
social
legislation
and
outlook,
there was
a
growing
sense
of
social
responsibility
and of
tolerance,
as
wit-
nessed
by
the
Act
of
1779
which
released
Nonconformist
ministers
from
subscribing
to the
Thirty-nine
Articles
of the
established
Church.
The
laboring
class,
for
the most
part,
looked
backward to
their
former condition
as
the
promised
land,
and dreamed
of
a combina-
tion
of
agricultural
and industrial
work
as still
possible
rather than
of
combining
to
better the
new
and
inevitable
situation. There
was,
however,
a
growing
stirring
of
thought among
them,
and
one,
Thomas
Spence,
a
workman
of
Newcastle,
even
preached
na-
tionalization
of all
land,
though
Socialism
was
as
yet
an
unknown
word. Across the
Tweed,
Robert Burns was
writing
his
songs
of
lowly
life and
democracy,
and
many
who
probably
never
read
them
would
have
recognized
their ideas
as
their
own.
A
prince
can
mak*
a
belted
knight,
A
marquis,
duke,
and
a' that!
But
an
honest
man's
aboon his
might:
Guid
faith,
he
mauna fa*
that.
For
a' that
an' a'
that,
Their
dignities
an*
a*
that,
The
pith
o'
sense
an'
pride
of
worth
Are
higher
rank than
a' that
. . .
For
a'
that an'
a'
that,
It's
comin'
yet
for
a'
that,
That man to
man
the
world
o'er
Shall
brithers be
for
a'
that.
EMPIRE
ON THE
SEVEN
SEAS
The
upper
classes were
not
yet
alarmed
and
were
willing
to
go
some
way
toward
reforms.
In
England,
if the
representation
in
Parliament
was
fantastic
in its unfairness
to
much
of the
popula-
tion,
and
if
most of
the
boroughs
were "rotten"
and
in
control of
a
few
of the
great
families,
there were
some
that were
not,
and
there
were also
London
and
Westminster,
with their
democratic
franchise,
and the
counties,
in
which
all who
owned
land
to
the
value
of
forty
shillings
a
year
could
vote.
If there
was
no
equality
of
any
sort between
classes,
there
was
a
certain
hilarious friendli-
ness
at
elections and on
other
occasions,
and the
nation,
if
stratified
socially,
was nevertheless
unified in
an
odd
fashion which
only
England
has been able
to
achieve.
Even with all
the
yet
unrealized
problems
of the
industrial
revolution
and
of the
new wealth and
the
ways
in
which
it
was
to
be
made,
the situation
might
have
been
worked
out. At
this
critical
moment
came
the
terrifying eruption
of
the volcano
which France
had
become.
CHAPTER II
THE
EMPIRE AND
THE
FRENCH
REVOLUTION
I.
PITT AND
Fox
FOR
FORTY-ODD
YEARS
after the death
of
Queen
Anne,
the
Tories
had
been excluded from
power,
and
the
Whig
Party,
which meant the
great Whig
families with
their adherents
among
the
Dissenters and
business
class,
had
had control of
the
government*
During
the
deadly
struggle
of the
Seven Years'
War,
they
had
been forced to
compromise
with the
elder
Pitt,
who
alone
could
snatch
victory
from the dreaded
defeat,
but when
George
III came to
the throne in
1760
he
had
decided to
rid
himself
of
the
Great Commoner and control the
government
himself
as
"Patriot
King."
For
the next
twenty years
or
so,
as soon as
Pitt,
who had become the
Earl
of
Chatham,
could be
dismissed,
the
monarch
employed every
means
of
bribery
and
corruption,
and
England
was
ruled
by
the
"King's
Friends."
After
the American
victory
at
Yorktown,
however,
the
Whigs
had
to be
called
back,
led
by
Rockingham
and
much chastened
by
their
years
in
the
political
wilderness.
Nevertheless,
the
King
con-
tinued
to
intrigue
in the
hope
of
getting
his
power
back, and,
hav-
ing
tried to
split
the
Whigs
by
favoring
Shelburne
against
Rock-
ingham,
he
made
him Prime Minister
on
Rockingham's
death.
Although
Shelburne
made
peace
with Britain's
enemies,
he
was
unfitted
by
temperament
and
abilities
for his
post,
and on his
ac-
cepting
it,
Burke,
Fox
and
most of the
leading
Whigs
resigned.
In
spite
of
his still
unrivalied
oratory,
the influence
of Burke was
19
EMPIRE
ON
THE
SEVEN
SEAS
beginning
to
decline,
and
although
he
had stood forth
as
the
cham-
pion
of
liberty
for
America,
Ireland
and
India,
he
was ere
long
to
show
the
worst
side
of
his
nature
in
the
impeachment
proceedings
against
Warren
Hastings
and in
his
intense
reaction
against
every-
thing, good
and bad
alike,
which
the
French
Revolution
signified
to
him.
It was
even
to
be
said
that his
noble
intellect,
one
of the
greatest
England
had
produced,
was
decaying.
On
the
other
hand,
Fox,
in
spite
of
his
gambling
and
other
no-
torious
faults,
was
the most
popular
man
in
his
party,
and
rightly
so. As
Burke,
of
humble
origin,
was
to become
more and
more
reactionary,
Fox,
the
aristocrat,
was
to
become
more and more
the
defender
of
liberty
and
reform.
Although
he
was
to blunder
badly,
England
owes
a
great
debt to
Fox
in
that
he,
almost alone
with
young
Grey,
kept
a
section
of the
Whig
Party
attached
to
the
liberal
principles
which
were
eventually
to make
Parliamentary
reform
possible
in
1832,
Fox made an
irretrievable
mistake,
how-
ever,
when Shelburne was
forced to
resign.
No leader had a
ma-
jority,
but
Fox
could
control
90
votes in
the
Commons,
and
Lord
North
1
20.
In
view
of
the
bitter attacks
on
North
made
by
Fox
during
the American
War
a
coalition between
them seemed
in-
credible.
Nevertheless
it was entered
into,
and
the
King
had to
accept
the
new
Ministry.
George
III
never
forgave
North
for
what
he considered his
lack of
gratitude,
and Fox
never
fully
re-
gained
the
confidence of the
people
for
what
they
considered
his
lack
of
principles.
If
Fox
had
honestly
believed
that his
action
was the
only
way
to
prevent
the
Crown from
regaining
undue
power,
he
was
to
be
disappointed,
for
the new
government
accomplished
little before
its
unlamented fall
a
few months
later.
The
King,
after
straining
his
prerogative
in
plotting
to
defeat his
Ministers
in
the
House
of
Lords
on Fox's India
Bill,
dismissed
them
at the end
of
1783,
and
appointed
the
younger
Pitt,
then
only
twenty-five
years
old,
as
Prime Minister.
Young
as
he
was,
he
had
already,
at
twenty-
three,
served
as
Chancellor
of
the
Exchequer
under
Shelburne,
and
not
only
had
the
glamor
of
his
father's
great
name but was also
the
hope
of
the
reformers.
He
was
a
friend
and
admirer
of
Wilber-
20
PITT
AND
FOX
force
and
united
with him
in
his attack
on
the
slave
trade.
He had
twice
introduced
in
Parliament
measures
for
the
reform
of
the
franchise,
which
the
Coalition
Ministry
had
refused
to
consider.
He was
willing,
however,
to
accept
the
old
Tory
doctrine
that
Ministers could
be
appointed
by
the
King
and
not
the House
of
Commons,
and
he
therefore
agreed
to head
a
government
which
had an
overwhelming
majority
against
it
in
the
House.
Over
and
over he was
outvoted
on measures
but with
decreasing
majorities,
and
remained in
office,
trusting
to the
steady
decline
in
popularity
of the
Coalition
to
allow him
in
time
to
risk
a
general
election.
This
he
did,
in
April,
1784,
when the Coalition
forces
were
com-
pletely
routed
at
the
polls.
The
victory
which
was
his
might
have
been
Fox's had
that statesman been
willing
to
go
to the
country
the
year
before
instead
of
making
the
unholy
alliance with
North.
Fox
was
to
remain thereafter a
lonely
political figure,
while
Pitt
came to
believe that
he himself alone
could
save
the
country
and
that he must retain
power
at
any
cost.
In
1785
Pitt
introduced
a
bill
for
the
purpose
of
doing
away
with
seventy-seven
seats
privately
owned
by
paying
1,000,000
for
them,
and
if
he and
Fox could
only
have worked
together,
the
half
century
of
the
growing pains
of
political
and industrial
revolu-
tion
might
have
been much ameliorated
by
a
gradual
reform of
rep-
resentation.
As
it
was,
the
bill was
defeated,
and Pitt never tried
again.
He
had
not
only
striven for
Parliamentary
reform
and
that
of the
slave trade but
had also showed
how alive he was
to the
new currents
of
thought
by
his
efforts to
put
into
effect
the
doc-
trine
of Adam
Smith.
His
handling
of
the
government
finances was
sound,
and
in
his
India
Bill,
which we
shall note
later,
he had
to
a
considerable
extent
taken
appointments, except
that
of
Governor-General,
out
of
politics,
thus
reducing
still
further,
in
line
with Burke's
bill,
the
amount
of
corrupt
political management.
He had the
public
behind
him,
and,
except
for a brief
time when the
King
had another
attack
of
insanity
and
it
was
feared the Prince of
Wales
might
have
to
become
Regent
(with
the
certainty
of his
replacing
Pitt
by
Fox),
his
hold
on
power
seemed
unquestioned
in
spite
of
occasional
EMPIRE
ON
THE SEVEN SEAS
adverse
votes
in
the
Commons. It
looked
as
though,
even
with
the
customary
English
slowness
and
dislike
of
anything
new,
the
changes
necessary
to
meet
altered
social and economic facts
might
be
made
in
usual
British
fashion*
To a
large
extent
Pitt
was
sup-
ported
by
the
new
manufacturing
class
against
the landed
Whig
families,
and
with
his
own
desire
for
reform,
it
seemed as
if
he
might
be the
man to
lead
the nation over the
great
divide
between
the
old
order
and
the
approaching
one.
As
we
have
said,
England
could
by
no
stretch
of
the
term
be
considered
democratic
in
1
789.
Yet
a
people
is
likely
to
remain sat-
isfied,
or at least
not
to
resort
to violent
revolution,
if
it
feels
that
the
privileged
classes
are
doing
something
for
the
common
welfare,
unless
living
conditions
become
intolerable.
This is
a
point
to
be
borne
in
mind
today
by
any
nation
which
wishes
to
maintain
private
liberty
and
property.
In
general,
in the
England
of
this
period,
though
there
was
ample
selfishness
among
the
privileged
classes,
whether
landed
aristocrat or new
rich
in
manufacturing,
there
was
also
ample
work
being
done
by
them
for the nation.
In
England,
almost
alone
in
that
day, public
service,
whether local
or
national,
had
become
traditional
among
the
upper
classes. If
they
were
rewarded
with
honors,
titles
and
wealth,
they
at
least
did
something
for
them.
Even
the new
business
class,
harsh
as
it
was in
its
dealings
with the
new
working
class,
was
considered
to
be
adding
to
the
wealth
and
so
to
the
power
and
prestige
of
the
nation.
Not
a
little of
England's
greatness
and
successful leader-
ship
in the
past
has
been
due to
her
resources of
wealth which
could
be
used
to subsidize allies
or wear
out
enemies.
II. THE
UPHEAVAL IN
FRANCE
In
France,
on
the other
hand,
the
privileged
had
long
since
ceased
to
be
usefuL The
people
suffered from
the
extortions of
the
landed
seigneurs
and
the
higher
clergy
with no
compensating
ad-
vantage.
At
last
the
social
storm
broke,
and
the
weak
though
well-
meaning
King,
Louis
XVI,
was unable
to
rule
or
guide
it.
When
the States-General was
called
to
meet
in
1789
for
the
first
time
in
175
years,
it
was
to raise
money
and not to
solve the
problems
of
22
THE
UPHEAVAL
IN
FRANCE
the nation.
When
the
people,
who had demanded
a
constitution,
realized
this,
the
mob
rose
in Paris
and
captured
the
grat
prison
fortress
of
the
Bastille,
July
14,
and
through
the
country
districts
the
peasants
burned
and
sacked
the
homes
of the
seigneurs.
The
following
month,
under
pressure,
the
new
National
Assembly
voted
away
all
the
special
privileges
of
the
clergy
and
nobility.
In the autumn
the
mob
marched on
Versailles,
captured
the
King
and
carried
him
off
to
Paris,
depriving
him of
all real
power
in
the new
doctrinaire
constitution
now
drawn
up.
On
the
Con-
tinent these events
presaged
to even the
most
reforming
of
the
despots
the
overthrow of
the
very
foundations of
social
order.
In
England,
however,
where
the
people
had
always
prided
themselves
on their
liberty
and,
in
spite
of
the
misery
of
many
of
them,
had
looked down
on
the
half
-starved
French,
the
early stage
of the
fateful movement
now under
way
was
regarded
as
a sort
of
coun-
terpart
to
their own
"glorious
revolution
of
1688."
Fox hailed
the
fall
of
the Bastille
as
the
greatest
and
best
event
in
the
history
of
the
world.
Burke,
on
the other
hand,
and he drew Pitt with
him
to
a
great
extent,
was
filled with
terror
at
the
possible
anarchy,
which
he
rightly
foresaw.
In
spite
of the
magnificent
service
he
had
rendered to
liberty
in
the
past,
he was
now
completely
blind
to the causes
of
the
catastrophe.
In
1790,
in his
long
pamphlet,
Reflections
on the
French
Revolution,
the
publication
of
which
has
been
called
an
event
equal
in
importance
to
the
fall of
the
Bastille
itself,
he
set
forth
for all
time,
in his
unrivalled
rhetoric,
the
philosophical
foundations
of
the
ultra-conservative
point
of
view.
In
the
extraordinary
year
of
1776,
which
had
seen
the
issuance
of
the
Declaration
of
Independence
and
the
publication
of Adam
Smith's
Wealth
of
Nations
as well
as
Bentham's
Fragment
on
Government,
Gibbon
had
printed
the
first volume of his
Decline
and Fall
of
the
Roman
Empre.
In
that
and
the
succeeding
vol-
umes
of
his
immortal
work,
Gibbon had
for the
first time estab-
lished the
doctrine
of
society
as
a
growing
and
developing
organism
and
of
history
as
not
merely
a
series
of
disjointed
events
but
as a
flowing
stream
in
which
past, present
and
future
are
inevitably
and
EMPIRE
ON
THE
SEVEN
SEAS
inextricably
linked
together.
Burke
also
had
this historic
sense to
the
full,
and
realized
that
the
life
and institutions
of
a
nation
can-
not
be
suddenly
severed
from
the
past
5
in
a
word,
that
the
attempt
to
add
an r
to
evolution
is-
fatal
to
orderly
and
perhaps
even last-
ing
progress.
We
may
note,
for
example,
that
the success
of the
constitution
which
the
revolted
American colonies
at last framed
for themselves
as
a
nation
has
been
due
to
the fact
that,
with
one
or
two
exceptions,
there
is
nothing
in it
which the
people
had
not
been
accustomed
to
in their
earlier colonial
relations with
England
and
in
their
local
charters
and constitutions.
The one
attempt
which
England
herself
had
made
to
order
all
things
new,
under
Crom-
well,
had
ended
in
disaster
and
a return to
the old
forms,
reformed.
The truth
of
this
lent
persuasive strength
to
Burke's
pamphlet,
which
was
marred
on
the other
hand
by
his unwarranted
defense
of
the
old
order in France
and
by
the vindictiveness
with
which
the
defender of
liberty
now
appeared
to
oppose
not
merely
reform
but
any
change
whatever.
He had
not
become
simply
conservative
but
rigidly
and
dangerously
static.
In
spite
of the
soundness of
part
of
his
views,
the
extreme
and even
cruel
position
which
he
assumed
toward
aspirations
for
any
betterment on the
part
of
the
poorer
classes
called
for
counter-attack.
Among
the first
of the
pamphlets
issued
on
the
other side
was
Mary
Wollstonecraft's Vindication
of
the
Rights of
Man
(1790),
but
of
far
greater
importance
was
the
Rights of
Man
published
in
two
parts
(1791-92),
by
Thomas
Paine,
who had
been
the
great
pamphleteer
of
the American Revolution.
Although many
of
the
measures
advocated
by
him are on the statute books
today,
such
as
free
public
education,
a
graduated
income
tax,
old
age
pensions
and
others,
not
only
did
they
seem the
extreme
of
radicalism
in
his own
day,
but
in
demanding
the
abolition of all
hereditary
parts
of
the
constitution,
such
as the
House
of
Lords
and
the
Monarchy
itself,
he
made
reform
depend
on
republicanism
and
almost
pure
de-
mocracy.
He
may
be
considered as
the
founder of
the first real
movement
of
radicalism
among
the
working
classes,
but
his
book
was
suppressed
by
the
government,
and
Paine
himself
forced
to
flee
to
France.
If
Burke,
who
with
many
of the
Whigs
had
joined