CHAP. expressly and by name, the tea-duty in America; LVIL and as to the future it declared, “That from and 1778. "after the passing of this Act, the King and Par"liament of Great Britain will not impose any 66 66 duty, tax, or assessment whatever in any of His Majesty's (American) Colonies, except only such "duties as it may be expedient to impose for the "regulation of commerce, the net produce of such "duties to be always paid and applied to and for "the use of the Colony in which the same shall be "levied." Thus was the claim of Parliamentary taxation fully, at last, renounced. The second Bill was to enable His Majesty to appoint Commissioners with sufficient powers to treat with the insurgent colonies. These Commissioners were to be five in number, and their powers most extensive. They were to raise no difficulties as to the rank or legal title of the leaders on the other side, but were left at liberty to treat, consult, and agree with any body or bodies politic, or any person or persons whatsoever. They might proclaim a cessation of hostilities on the part of the King's forces by sea or land, for any time, and under any conditions or restrictions. They might grant pardons and appoint Governors. They might suspend the operation of any Act of Parliament relating to America, passed since the 10th of February, 1763. The Americans, said Lord North, had desired a repeal of all the Acts after that date; but this could be taken only as a loose and general expression, since LVII. 1778. some of the Acts passed, as in 1769, were for the CHAP. granting of bounties or the relaxation of imposts, and of such Acts the Americans could not be supposed to desire the repeal. Some choice and selection would, therefore, be required. As to those other Acts, such as the Massachusetts Charter Act, which had produced or inflamed the quarrel, Lord North explicitly stated his opinion that they ought to cease. Instead, however, of repealing them here without further delay, he deemed it best to refer the whole matter to the Commissioners upon the spot, since the Americans would consider Acts already repealed as merely the basis of a treaty, and might be tempted to raise some new demands upon it. The Commissioners, said Lord North, should be instructed to negotiate for some reasonable and moderate contribution towards the common defence of the empire when re-united; still this contribution was not to be insisted on as a SINE QUA NON; only if the Americans should refuse it, they were not to complain if hereafter they did not receive support from that part of the empire, any proportion of whose charges they had declined to bear. Upon the whole it was, not obscurely, intimated that the Commissioners might accept almost any terms of reconciliation, short of independence, and subject to confirmation by a vote of Parliament. The impression on the House that night, while Lord North was speaking, and after he sat down, is well described by the pen of a contemporary CHAP. no other, in all probability, than Burke: "A LVII. 1778. dull melancholy silence for some time succeeded "to this speech. It had been heard with pro"found attention, but without a single mark of "approbation to any part, from any description "of men, or any particular man in the House. "Astonishment, dejection, and fear overclouded "the whole assembly. Although the Minister "had declared that the sentiments he expressed "that day had been those which he always enter"tained, it is certain that few or none had under"stood him in that manner; and he had been "represented to the nation at large as the person "in it the most tenacious of those Parliamentary "rights which he now proposed to resign, and the "most remote from the submissions which he now "proposed to make.”* It may be said, indeed, that there was not a single class or section of men within the walls of Parliament to which the plan of Lord North gave pleasure. The Ministerial party were confounded and abashed at finding themselves thus required to acknowledge their past errors and retrace their former steps. Some among them, as William Adam, and Morton, Chief Justice of Chester, loudly protested against the holding forth to rebels terms like these, which they said would dispirit the people and disgrace the Government. Others called out that they had been deceived and be * Annual Register, 1778, p. 133. See also Gibbon's Letter to Holroyd, of February 23. 1778. LVII. 1778. trayed. In general, however, the majority acqui- CHAP. esced in sullen silence. On the other part, the Opposition were by no means gratified to see the wind, according to the common phrase, taken from their sails. They could not, indeed, offer any resistance to proposals so consonant to their own expressed opinions, but they took care to make their support as disagreeable and as damaging as possible. Fox began his speech by complimenting the Minister on his happy conversion, and congratulating his own friends on the acquisition of so powerful an ally. Above all, the continuance of the Minister in office, under such circumstances, was inveighed against with more truth than taste by several of the chiefs upon the other side. Did Lord North, it was asked, believe himself to wield the spear of Achilles, able to heal the wounds which itself had made? Could the same statesman who had provoked the war look for welcome as a peace-maker? Must not his proposals, whatever they might be, come to the Americans as from a tainted spring, - raise their jealousy as hollow and insincere, or keep alive their resentment as inadequate and worthless? In spite of such taunts, and far from friendly feelings on all sides, the Conciliatory Bills, as they have been termed, were not in reality opposed from any quarter. There was only one division on a clause moved by Mr. Powys to repeal expressly and by name the Massachusetts Charter Act. Lord North induced a large majority to LVII. 1778. CHAP. vote against that clause, but agreed that the object in view should be attained by a separate measure. A Bill for the purpose was therefore introduced by Mr. Powys, and passed through Parliament concurrently with the other two. In the House of Lords the same arguments were with little change renewed. Lord Hillsborough, and Chatham's own brother-in-law, Lord Temple, vehemently declaimed against the Bills on the high prerogative ground, as forming a most disgraceful capitulation. The Ministers, on the other hand, received some acrimonious support from the Duke of Richmond and Lord Rockingham. Lord Shelburne took occasion to declare his full concurrence in the sentiments of Chatham, expressing "the "strongest disapprobation of every idea that tended "to admit the independence of America," although acknowledging that future circumstances might create a necessity for such a submission. Lord Chatham himself was ill with gout at Hayes, and did not appear. There was no division; and on the 11th of March the King, seated on his Throne, gave to all three measures the Royal Assent. Only two days previously Lord North, who had opened his Budget on the 6th, had carried through his financial Resolutions in the House of Commons, involving a new loan of 6,000,000l., which was contracted on advantageous terms. Thus were funds provided to pursue the war, should that be requisite. Thus was an opening made for negotiations, should they be practicable. In either case |