Without that assent, as expressed by its Heads, it was scarcely possible or scarcely proper for any Prime Minister to move onward. A meeting of the Bishops was held at the Bounty Office, on a summons from the Archbishop of Canterbury, and at the request, as the Bishops were informed, of Mr. Pitt. The question laid before their Lordships was as follows:-"Ought the Test and Corporation Acts to be maintained?" Of fourteen Prelates present, only two -Watson of Llandaff, and Shipley of St. Asaph-voted in the negative; and the decision of the meeting was at once transmitted to the Minister.

'When, on the 28th of March, Mr. Beaufoy did bring on his motion, Lord North spoke in opposition to it, and Fox in its favour. Pitt rose and said that he did not think he could with propriety give a silent vote. He observed that some classes of the Nonconformists had injured themselves in the public opinion greatly, and not unreasonably, by the violence and the prejudices which they had shown. "Were we," he said, "to yield on this occasion, the fears of the members of the Church of England would be roused, and their apprehensions are not to be treated lightly. It must, as I contend, be conceded to me that an Established Church is necessary. Now there are some Dissenters who declare that the Church of England is a relic of Popery; others that all Church Establishments are improper. This may not be the opinion of the present body of Dissenters, but no means can be devised of admitting the moderate part of the Dissenters and excluding the violent; the bulwark must be kept up against all."' (Stanhope, vol. i. p. 336.)

Three years later Pitt opposed Fox's motion for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, with far greater vehemence, in a speech which embodied all the fallacies and fears that stood in the way of that measure of policy and justice for the next thirty-five years. Here again was an Act favoured by Pitt's better judgment, but abandoned in deference to the exactions of the very persons who conceived themselves to be interested in resisting to the utmost the just claims of their fellowcountrymen to an equality of civil rights.

One of the most remarkable proofs of the sagacity with which Mr. Pitt was prepared at that time to deal with the great problems of social reform, if his power had really been equal to his intelligence, is to be found in a letter addressed by him to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, which Lord Stanhope has discovered in the Rutland Papers. It deals with the whole question of tithe commutation, and anticipates precisely the remedy which was adopted nearly half a century later:—

"My dear Duke,

"Burton Pynsent, Nov. 7. 1786.

"I have thought very much since I received your letter respecting

the general state of Ireland, on the subjects suggested in that and your official letters to Lord Sydney. The question which arises is a nice and difficult one.. On the one hand, the discontent seems general and rooted, and both that circumstance, and most of the accounts I hear, seem to indicate that there is some real grievance at bottom, which must be removed before any durable tranquillity can be secured. On the other hand, it is certainly a delicate thing to meddle with the Church Establishment in the present situation of Ireland; and anything like concession to the dangerous spirit which has shown itself is not without objection. But on the whole, being persuaded that Government ought not to be afraid of incurring the imputation of weakness by yielding in reasonable points, and can never make its stand effectually till it gets upon right ground, I think the great object ought to be, to ascertain fairly the true causes of complaint, to hold out a sincere disposition to give just redress, and a firm determination to do no more, taking care in the interval to hold up vigorously the execution of the law as it stands (till altered by Parliament), and to punish severely (if the means can be found) any tumultuous attempt to violate it. I certainly think the institution of tithe, especially if vigorously enforced, is everywhere a great obstacle to the improvement and prosperity of any country. Many circumstances in practice have made it less so here; but even here it is felt; and there are a variety of causes to make it sit much heavier on Ireland. I believe, too, that it is as much for the real interest of the Church as for the land to adopt, if practicable, some other mode of provision. If from any cause the Church falls into general odium, Government will be more likely to risk its own interests than to serve those of the Church by any efforts in its favour. If, therefore, those who are at the head of the clergy will look at it soberly and dispassionately, they will see how incumbent it is upon them, in every point of view, to propose some temperate accommodation; and even the appearance of concession which might be awkward in Government, would not be unbecoming if it originated with them. The thing to be arrived at, therefore, seems, as far as I can judge of it, to find out a way of removing the grievances arising out of a tithe, or, perhaps, to substitute some new provision in lieu of it; to have such a plan cautiously digested (which may require much time), and, above all, to make the Church itself the quarter to bring forward whatever is proposed. How far this is practicable must depend upon many circumstances, of which you can form a nearer and better judgment, particularly on the temper of the leading men among the clergy. I apprehend you may have a good deal of difficulty with the Archbishop of Cashel; the Primate is, I imagine, a man to listen to temperate advice; but it is surely desirable that you should have as speedily as possible a full communication with both of them; and if you feel the subject in the same light that I do, that, while you state to them the full determination of Government to give them all just and honourable support, you should impress them seriously with the apprehension of their risking everything if they do not in time abandon ground that is ultimately

VOL. CXVI. NO. CCXXXV.

K

untenable. To suggest the precise plan of commutation which might
be adopted is more than I am equal to, and is premature; but, in
general, I have never seen any good reason why a fair valuation
should not be made of the present amount of every living, and a rent
in corn to that amount be raised by a pound rate on the several tene-
ments in the parish, nearly according to the proportion in which they
now contribute to tithe. When I say a rent in corn, I do not actually
mean paid in corn, but a rent in money regulated by the average
value, from time to time, of whatever number of bushels is at present
equal to the fair value of the living. This would effectually prevent
the Church from suffering by the fluctuations in the value of money,
and it is a mode which was adopted in all college leases, in conse-
quence, I believe, of an Act of Parliament in the time of Queen
Elizabeth. I need not say that I throw out these ideas in personal
confidence to yourself; and I shall wish much to know what you
think of them, and whether you can make anything of your prelates,
before any measure is officially suggested. It seems material that
there should be the utmost secrecy till our line is decided upon, and
it must be decided upon completely before Parliament meets.
"Yours faithfully and sincerely,

(Stanhope, vol. i. p. 318.)
Similar views were entertained in 1798.

"W. PITT."'

Lord Auckland writes to Mr. Beresford in April of that year, 'Oh that it were 'possible to do something similar as to the liberation of tithes ' in both kingdoms! But the clergy would be alarmed.' Moore, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was even sounded on the matter, but he announced his decided opposition, and the scheme was abandoned. Another instance of a great improvement defeated by those whom it was most calculated to benefit.

Of all the measures of this period which do honour to Mr.. Pitt's courage and foresight, we assign the first rank to the commercial treaty with France. It was a triumph over the brutal doctrine of natural enmity between nations, the more remarkable, as only two years had elapsed since the conclusion of a peace on terms painful to the pride of this country. It was a triumph over the doctrines of commercial exclusion and protection, which had at that time an almost undisputed sway over the minds even of the most liberal statesmen. And as a measure of financial policy, it may be said to have been the first grand trial of that system which has only in very recent times been fully confirmed by experience.

The surrender of revenue for great commercial purposes,' said the First Minister, in his speech of the 12th February, 1787, is a policy by no means unknown in the History of Great Britain, but here we enjoyed the extraordinary advantage of having them returned to us in a threefold rate, by extending and legalising the importation of the articles. When it was considered that the increase must exceed

the concession which was made, it would no longer be an argument that we cannot afford this reduction. Increase by means of reduction, he was obliged to confess, once appeared a paradox, but experience had now convinced us that it was more than practicable.' (Pitt's Speeches, vol. i. p. 246.)

Such language from a Minister of the Crown of that day, not dealing with a surplus revenue, but having, on the contrary, to restore a balance in disordered finances, was in the highest degree wise and sagacious. The whole speech is in the same admirable strain: and the only excuse for the factious and ignorant conduct of the Opposition is that that they did not understand what they were doing. Lord Stanhope has passed over this great transaction very cursorily, and we think it deserved a more complete notice, as one of the very largest conceptions of Mr. Pitt's political life. The instructions and correspondence of Mr. Pitt to Mr. Eden, with an account of the negotiation, are printed more fully in the first volume of the Auckland Papers (chapter v.). The recurrence of a similar treaty in our own times, after an interval of more than seventy years, has given fresh interest to the subject, and we have ourselves had occasion to notice it recently at considerable length. * Yet, even here, the fatality which attended all the designs of Mr. Pitt, even when he was most happily inspired, doomed this treaty to a premature and abortive termination. The distressed and agitated condition of France was ignorantly supposed to have been aggravated by the treaty with England; and in the great whirlpool of the Revolution which so soon followed, its provisions were annihilated, and for upwards of half a century the natural commercial relations of the two wealthiest nations in the world were almost entirely interrupted.

There can be no doubt that at this time Mr. Pitt was more thoroughly imbued with the doctrines of Free Trade and the principles of Adam Smith than any other statesman of his age, except Lord Grenville. He referred in 1792, in the House of Commons, to the writings of an author of our own times, now 'unfortunately no more (I mean the author of a celebrated 'treatise on the Wealth of Nations), whose extensive knowledge ' of detail and depth of philosophical research will, I believe, 'furnish the best solution to every question connected with the 'history of commerce or with the systems of political economy.' The financial policy which Mr. Pitt pursued from 1785 to the outbreak of the war was based on these principles, as we

* Ed. Rev. vol. cxi. p. 286.—Article on Commercial Relations with France.

shall presently show. But, alas! even here the strength of his convictions or the weight of his authority was no match for the dark and evil times in which his lot was cast. Perplexed and alarmed by the scarcity and high prices of the year 1800, Pitt himself lapsed into the fallacies of the Corn Laws, and thus called forth the following indignant protest from his own colleague, Lord Grenville :

Lord Grenville to Mr. Pitt.

Dropmore, Oct. 24. 1800. My dear Pitt,-Lord Buckingham's letter is nothing more than an exaggerated statement of my fixed and, I am sure, immutable opinion on the subject of all laws for lowering the price of provisions, either directly or by contrivance. That opinion you know so well, that it is idle for me to trouble you with long discourses or long letters of mine about it. We in truth formed our opinions on the subject together, and I was not more convinced than you were of the soundness of Adam Smith's principles of political economy till Lord Liverpool lured you from our arms into all the mazes of the old system.

'I am confident that provisions, like every other article of commerce, if left to themselves, will and must find their level; and that every attempt to disturb that level by artificial contrivances has a necessary tendency to increase the evil it seeks to remedy.

In all the discussions with which we are overwhelmed on this subject, one view of it is wholly overlooked. Every one takes it for granted that the present price of corn is in itself undue, and such as ought not to exist; and then they dispute whether it is to be ascribed to combinations, which they wish to remedy by such means as will destroy all commerce, or to an unusual scarcity which they propose to supply by obliging the grower to contend in the home market, not with the natural rivalship of such importation as the demand might and would produce of itself, but with an artificial supply poured in at the expense of I know not how many millions to the State.

Both these parties assume that the price is undue—that is, I presume, that it is more than would be produced by the natural operation of demand and supply counteracting each other. Now I know no other standard of price than this. But if the price be really so much higher, as is supposed, what prevents the increase of the supply at home? Or what bounty could operate so effectually to increase the quantity of wheat produced in the country, as the experience of the farmer teaching him that by the increased growth of that article he can make two or three times as great a profit as he can by any other? No man, with the least knowledge of the subject, will say that the country now produces all the wheat it could, if it answered to apply more capital to the produce. Give me my own price for it, and I will engage to produce more wheat in my kitchen garden than any farmer in this neighbourhood now does in his own farm. But the wheat so produced will have cost so much in labour and manure, that unless it were sold at two or three times more than even the present