981 



FOX, CHARLES JAMES. 



FOX, CHARLES JAMES. 



was carried by a majority of 19. On the 19th of March, the ministers 

 having shown for a short time a disposition still to cling to office, 

 resigned their situations. 



It is needless to say how much Fox's exertions had contributed 

 to this result. He had indeed risen by this time to be considered 

 the leading member of opposition, and to be more than any other 

 member of his party, " conspicuous in the nation's eye." At the last 

 general election, in the autumn of 1780, he had been solicited to 

 stand for Westminster, and had been returned in the teeth of every 

 court effort and every trick of private intrigue and intimidation. On 

 the formation of the new ministry under Lord Hockingham, Fox was 

 appointed secretary of state for foreign affairs. He immediately set 

 about negociations for peace. For this purpose he instructed 

 Mr. Orenville, the plenipotentiary at Paris, to propose in the outset 

 the independence of the United States of America, not making it a 

 condition of a general treaty. This he did in pursuance of a resolu- 

 tion which, upon his recommendation, had been passed in the cabinet, 

 and to which the king's assent had been obtained. l!ut Lord Shelburne, 

 who had been introduced by the king into the ministry, and between 

 whom and Lord Kockinghaui's friends there was no cordial co-opera- 

 tion, insisted that the offer of recognition of independence was a 

 conditional one ; and, after Lord Hockiugham's illness had rendered 

 him unable tu attend the deliberations of the cabinet, Lord Shelburne 

 succeed'. 1 in getting a majority to concur in this view. He was 

 afterward* discovered by Fox to be carrying on a communication 

 with Dr. Franklin. Fox now made up his mind to resign. Upon the 

 death of Lord Kockiugham, which took place in July, but four 

 months after the formation of the ministry, Fox and his friends pro- 

 posed the Duke of Portland to the king as Lord Rockingham's 

 successor, and upon the recommendation not being acceded to, 

 resigned ; and the same course was then taken by other friends of 

 Lord Rockingham, by Lord John Cavendish, the Duke of Portland, 

 and Lord Keppel. The Rockingham ministry was fast breaking up 

 when the king completed the wreck by appointing Lord Shelburne 

 lord treasurer. 



The Shelburne ministry, though, as regards its mode of formation, 

 it was but a modification of the old one, was yet essentially different 

 in character. Mr. Pitt, who had entered parliament on the occasion 

 of the general election in 1780, and who, during tlie short time that 

 he had had a seat, had fought by the side of Fox against the American 

 war and in favour of parliamentary reform, accepted the office of 

 chancellor of the exchequer in the new ministry. Other vacant offices 

 were filled up by old supporters of the war which Mr. Pitt had 

 opposed, men who had held subordinate places in Lord North's 

 administration. Lord North was himself excluded from the new 

 arrangements. Hence it came to pass that Fox and Lord North, who 

 for the last eight years had been violent antagonists, were found by 

 one another's side in opposition ; and that after a time, the great 

 question of peace or war with America, which had formerly divided 

 them having been settled, the similarity of their political positions 

 brought about a coalition. That coalition called forth at the time, 

 and has called forth since, much disapprobation. It may have been 

 ill-judged ; and the result indeed showed that the parties had not 

 formed a correct estimate of the public opinion, which was an import- 

 ant element in the problem to be solved. But there was certainly no 

 dishonesty in the transaction. The question being now no longer 

 whether there was to be peace or war with America, but in what way 

 peace was to be brought about, the two parties in opposition united 

 to pass a vote of censure on the terms of peace proposed by the 

 ministers. This was in February 1783. The ministers, unable to 

 obtain the king's consent to a dissolution, resigned ; and after gome 

 difficulties a ministry was formed on the 2nd of April, of which the 

 Duke of Portland was premier, and Lord North and Fox secretaries 

 of state. This again was a short-lived administration ; and, like that 

 of Lord Rockingham, it fell by the influence of court intrigue. The 

 principal measure which it attempted was that known by the name 

 of Fox's East India Bill, which went to vest the government of the 

 Eaat Indies in a board consisting of seven members, who were to be 

 appointed, the first time by parliament, but always afterwards by the 

 crown, for a period either of three or five years. The objections to 

 the bill were principally of two kinds, "violation of charter" (to 

 adopt Mr. fox's own mode of putting them) " and increase of influence 

 of the crown;" but there were others again who denounced it as 

 nig to diminish the influence of the crown for the aggrandisement 

 of the ministers, and who opposed it upon this ground. Such was 

 the view adopted by George III. himself. Accordingly, when the 

 bill hod passed through the Commons, and came on for the second 

 rending in the Lords, the king sent a message, through Lord Temple, 

 to all noblemen to whom his personal influence extended, that be 

 should consider those who voted for the bill not only not his friends, 

 but his enemies. The ministers were consequently left in a minority, 

 The next day they were dismissed ; and the ministry which had been 

 formed in April ended its career in December of the same year. A 

 new ministry was formed almost immediately under Mr. Pitt. 



The new ministers very soon found themselves in a minority in 

 the House of Commons. Two resolutions, one for preventing the 

 payment of any public money from the treasury, exchequer, or bank 

 of England, in case of a prorogation or dissolution, unless the supplies 



hould be previously appropriated by acb of parliament; and the 

 )ther, postponing the Mutiny Bill, were moved by Fox and carried by 

 a considerable majority. The object of these resolutions was to 

 ender an immediate dissolution impracticable. Resolutions against 

 ;he ministers and against the mode of their appointment, together 

 vith addresses to the crown for their dismissal, followed. But the 

 majority against ministers, which at first had been formidable, fast 

 dwindled down ; and after the king had twice refused his assent to 

 ;heir dismissal, he dissolved the parliament. The laat effort of the 

 opposition had been the carrying of a repressntation to the crown, 

 which, written by Fox, pointed out at length the evils of an adminis- 

 ;ration that was at variance with a majority of the representatives of 

 e people. 



Fox was again elected for Westminster ; but Sir Cecil Wray, thn 

 unsuccessful candidate, having demanded a scrutiny, the high bailiff 

 ;ook upon himself to make no return of representatives for this city. 

 Fox was in consequence compelled to appear in parliament as member 

 'or a Scotch borough ; but the conduct of the high bailiff was one of 

 ;he first matters brought bafore the House on its meeting. The 

 Westminster scrutiny was one of the chief questions agitated for some 

 ;ime. Mr. Pitt aud his friends did all that party animosity could 

 suggest to prevent, or at any rate to delay, the announcement of Fox's 

 election for Westminster ; aud it was nob until after a struggle of a 

 year's duration that the scrutiny was stopped and the return ordered 

 to be made. In the beginning of the subsequent year, 1786, the 

 question of Mr. Hastings's Indian Administration was first brought 

 forward by Mr. Burke; but the trial did not begin before 1788. 

 From the commencement to the close of this affair, in all the pre- 

 liminary discussions, in the preparation of the articles of charge, aud 

 in the managing of the impeachment, Fox took a very active part. 

 Towards the end of the year 1788 the king's illness rendered it 

 necessary to resort to a regency. Fox now violently opposed the 

 course proposed to be taken by Mr. Pitt ; and while the latter con- 

 tended that it was for the two houses of parliament to appoint the 

 regent, Fox maintained that the regency belonged of right to the 

 Prince of Wales. Holding this opinion, he opposed a motion made 

 in the first instance by tha minister for a committee to inquire into 

 precedents, and subsequently a bill tending to limit the powers of 

 the regent. It so happened that the king's speedy recovery rendered 

 it unnecessary to bring the regency question to a conclusion ; but it 

 is clear that the ground taken up by Fox upon this occasion was even 

 less tenable than that taken up by the minister. The case which now 

 came before parliament was a new and unforeseen case, a case unpro- 

 vided for by the constitution. There was consequently no right in 

 the matter; there was neither a right attaching to the lords and 

 commons, as was maintained by Mr. Pitt, nor a right attaching to the 

 Prince of Wales, as was contended by Mr. Fox. The question to be 

 decided waa which of two courses was the more expedient, not which 

 was the legal one. 



In the session of 1789 Fox distinguished himself by the support 

 of a motion for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. A year 

 after he himself brought forward a motion for the same purpose. On 

 the dissolution of parliament in 1790 he was again returned for West- 

 minster, and at the head of the poll. On the meeting of the new 

 parliament an attempt was made to get rid of the impeachment of 

 Mr. Hastings, on the ground that it had abated by the dissolution, 

 aud that the new House of Commons could not proceed with what had 

 been begun by the old one. Fox made a powerful speech in opposi- 

 tion to this view ; he had on this occasion the support of Mr. Pitt, and 

 it was carried against the lawyers by a large majority. 



The discussions arising out of the question of the French Revolu- 

 tion, replete as they are with public interest, are also important in a 

 Ufa of Fox, on account of their having led to a termination not merely 

 of his political alliance, but also of his friendship with Mr. Burke. The 

 difference of their opinions on that great question had been shown so 

 early as in February 1790| during a discussion on the army estimates. 

 At this time however, each spoke of the other in terms of kindness 

 and regard. But it was not always thus. When on the 6th of May 

 1791, the Quebec Government Bill, or Bill for regulating the govern- 

 ment of Upper and Lower Canada, came under discussion, Mr. Burko 

 rose and was proceeding to deliver a violent diatribe against the 

 French Revolution, when, after he had been several times ineffectually 

 called to order, it was moved by Lord Sheffield, and seconded by Fox, 

 "that dissertations on the French constitution, and narrations of 

 transactions in France, are not regular nor orderly on the question ; 

 that the claims of the Quebec Bill be read a second time." The remarks 

 made by Fox in seconding the motion, though wearing an appearance 

 of candour and evm friendliness, were calculated to irritate his former 

 friend ; and when Burke rose to reply, he did so under the influence 

 of strong excitement, and complained bitterly that ho had not been 

 treated by Fox as one friend should be treated by another. He 

 observed, towards the conclusion of his speech, that it certainly was 

 indiscreet at his timo of life to provoke enemies, or give his friends 

 occasion to desert him ; yet if his firm and nteady adherence to the 

 British constitution placed him in such a dilemma, he would risk 

 all ; and, as public duty aud public prudence taught him, with his 

 last breath exclaim, " Fly from the French constitution." Fox here 

 whispered that there was 110 loss of friendship. " Yes, there is," 



