STE
years, under certain contingencies, the ex- chequers of the countries might be united. Mr. Lecky says : " The Union was em- phatically one of that class of measures in which the scope for statesmanship lies not in the conception but in the execution. Had Pitt carried it without oflfending the national sentiment — had he enabled the majority of the Irish people to look back on it with affection or with pride — had he made it the means of allaying discontent or promoting loyalty — he would indeed have achieved a feat of consummate states- manship. But in all these respects he utterly failed. There was, it is true, no small amount of dexterity of a somewhat vulpine order displayed in carrying the bill ; but no measure ever showed less of that enlightened and far-seeing states- manship which respects the prejudices and conciliates the affections of a nation, and thus eradicates the seeds of disaffection and discontent. . . The manner in which it was carried was not only morally scandalous ; it also entirely vitiated it as a work of statesmanship." Lord Com- wallis and Lord Castlereagh experienced almost as much difficulty in redeeming their promises as to the granting of peerages as they had in passing the mea- sure. The English cabinet stood aghast at the list presented ; and it was only by threatening to resign office that the Lord- Lieutenant and Chief-Secretary were able to secure the fulfilment of their pledges. The Catholics' however, found themselves completely betrayed. Their tacit assent, or at least quiescence, without which it would have been all but impossible to succeed, had been secured by assurances that the measure would be speedily fol- lowed by Emancipation. Pitt had astutely omitted to make this part of the negotia- tion known to George III. ; and when, after the Union, the King was approached on the subject, it was found he would never agree to such a change in the con- stitution — the very mention of it caused him to shed copious floods of tears, and unbalanced his mind for some time. To save appearances, Pitt resigned, and with him Lords Castlereagh and Cornwallis. In order not to further embarrass the Govern- ment, Lord Castlereagh refrained from seeking immediate advancement for him- self in recognition of his services in bring- ing about the Union. He represented" the County of Down in the United Parliament, where his administrative powers were soon recognized ; but he was, not un- naturally, regarded by the great majority of his fellow-countrymen and the English liberals with feelings of the deepest ran-
2H*
STE
.cour. Although he was nominally out of office, he gave every assistance to the Gov- ernment in carrying on its Irish policy. There are in his Correspondence some re- markable memoirs penned by him at this period for the guidance of the Ministry — urging the necessity of Catholic Emancipa- tion, the payment of the Catholic clergy, the substitution of a charge upon land for tithe, and the erection of military works of defence in Ireland. In July 1802 he was appointed President of the Board of Control, and Mr. Alison says : " From this time forward his main attention was directed to foreign affairs ; and his bio- graphy becomes the diplomatic history of Europe, down to the period of his death, twenty years afterwards." Lord Wel- lesley bears this testimony to his Indian administration : " The whole course of my public service, as far as it was connected with the public acts of that most excellent and able personage, affords one connected series of proofs of his eminent ability, spotless integrity, high sense of honour, comprehensive and enlarged views, sound practical knowledge, ready despatch of business, and perfect discretion and tem- per, in the conduct of the most arduous public affairs. , . He never interfered in the slightest degree in the vast patronage of our Indian empire ; and he took espe- cial care to signify this determination to the expectants by whom he was sur- rounded." He retained the Presidency of the Board of Control after Pitt's return to power in May 1804, and a year later was transferred to the head of the War Depart- ment. He lost this position on the death of Pitt in January 1 806, but was re-instated on the return of the Tories to power in April 1807, and remained in office until September 1 809. Mr. Alison thus eulogizes his administration : " He entered upon the direction of the War Office in April 1 807. . . When removed from office in September 1809, he had succeeded, by his unaided efforts, not only in securing the independence of his country, and arresting the torrent of Napoleon's victories, but he had set in motion that chain of events which in their final results produced his decline and fall. . . He had resusci- tated the contest on the Continent. . . He had fitted out an army, and appointed a commander whose exploits had already recalled the days of Crecy and Agincourt. . . He had established a military system for the defence of the country. . . Never was a minister who in so short a time had conferred such benefits on his country, or so quickly raised it from a state of imminent danger to one of com-
499
