Lecky's England in the Eighteenth Century

THE fifty years which elapsed between 1765 and 1815 cover the most memorable period in modern history, if not in the history of mankind and of human civilization. This half century is one of the great eras of history, like that of the Reformation. In the latter, men shook off the tyranny of the church ; in the former, they began the movement for social and political freedom. In the closing years of the eighteenth century, modern democracy, the greatest fact of our day, rose in its strength, bearing with it the principles of equality before the law, and of hostility to privilege in any and every form. It was the uprising of the people, who had been till then almost as much forgotten as the beasts of the field. This vast power had been so chained down that men had almost ceased to reckon upon it, and when it burst its bonds in France, and made Europe quiver from centre to circumference, every one was aghast at the mighty force which had slumbered hardly dreamed of at their side. The first effects of this unfettering of the popular strength and energy were of course terribly destructive, and then came the ebb of the tide; but the democratic movement has, through all, gone steadily forward, and is to-day the dominant impulse and influence in the affairs of men.

Upon this great period Mr. Lecky has now entered, in his History of England in the Eighteenth Century, and in the volumes just published ¹ he has described the first act in the drama, which, opening in a Massachusetts village, closed on the plains of Waterloo. The preceding volumes, thoroughly admirable in all respects, are still fresh in every one’s mind. They dealt with the early years of the century, when England and America were resting and drawing breath after the long period of political conflicts and dynastic wars, which may be said to have closed with the death of Anne. No one needs to be reminded of the masterly manner in which Mr. Lecky handled those years of sloth and inaction, the days of Walpole and Fleury. It is a time too little known and too little understood, or was so until Mr. Lecky took it up, and displayed it in its true character as a formative period, and showed beneath the sluggish stream of current events the gathering forces which, rising to a torrent, were to sweep on, as the century closed, with a blinding, maddening rush. There Mr. Lecky had the advantage of presenting to the public in a strong and novel manner the history of a time of which they knew comparatively little. He has now entered upon a period which is illustrated almost every week by some new and minute study of character and details, which is known like no other past time to every intelligent man, and on much of which it is impossible for any one to cast new light. Yet this period is so momentous, so grand in its incidents, in its actors, and in its effects, that it is impossible to tire of it. Mr. Lecky can touch nothing without adding to our knowledge of the subject which he discusses, or without helping us to understand it better; but the chief interest of these volumes lies in their disclosure of the author’s views upon an epoch of surpassing importance, with which we are particularly familiar. Mr. Lecky is, as we believe, one of the very small number of historians who make up that final judgment on past events which is known as the verdict of posterity. In this capacity his opinions are looked for with eagerness by all students, and excite the interest of the public from this as well as from other causes. The present volumes have a peculiar attraction for Americans, inasmuch as they cover the period of the war of the colonies for independence, and are chiefly occupied with that subject, on which Mr. Lecky has expended his best thought and exercised his utmost skill.

The reigns of the first and second Georges, closing with the brilliant episode of Pitt’s administration, form the preface to that of George III., which covers the whole of the great era of revolution and of change in politics and thought. Mr. Lecky begins his third volume with a sketch of the character of George III., who for fifty years was an important factor in English history. As we read the opening sentences of this analysis, it seemed as if Mr. Lecky were going to fall into the common English practice of dwelling on George III.’s domestic virtues, his manners, and his courage, of attributing his errors to stupidity, and counting his personal influence and liability to censure as of small moment. There was no danger of this. With true artistic sense, Mr. Lecky enumerates fairly and justly the good qualities possessed by George III. as an individual, and upon these, as a bright background, he paints in strong relief and with dark colors his vices as a public servant. The contrast thus obtained greatly heightens the effect. “All these things,” says Mr. Lecky, “ have contributed, very naturally, to throw a delusive veil over the political errors of a sovereign of whom it may be said, without exaggeration, that he inflicted more profound and enduring injuries upon his country than any other modern English king.” Then follows a list of the political misdeeds of George III., too long for quotation, but given with telling effect, and exhibiting his narrowness, treachery, and hostility to every good thing, until " insanity extinguished his powers of evil.” “ In a word,” this powerful passage concludes, “ there is scarcely a field of politics in which the hand of the king may not be traced,— sometimes in postponing inevitable measures of justice and reform, sometimes in sowing the seeds of enduring evil.” Cool, impartial, and perfectly candid, there is no one who has done such exact and terrible justice to George III. as Mr. Lecky. It is to be hoped that his summing up will destroy forever that utterly false view of George’s character, founded on respect for his domestic virtues and pity for the miseries of his old age, which has become so common, owing largely to the delicate sentiment and magic style of Thackeray. The truth is that George III ’s virtues were a great misfortune to his people, for they strengthened enormously his power of evil. This is always the case. The utter profligacy of Charles II. made him a far less dangerous man than either his father or his brother. The austere and rigid virtue of John C. Calhoun made him infinitely more evil in his influence than a shallow libertine like Aaron Burr. If a ruler or political chief is dangerous in his public principles, it is far better for the people whom he governs or leads that he should be a man of abandoned private character than one of strict virtue, because his power of ill is thus greatly diminished, and in the end generally destroyed.

It is impossible to follow Mr. Lecky through these elaborate and able volumes. We can only touch on one or two of the leading points. He shows at length and with great force, as no English historian has ever done before, the deliberate effort of George III. to extend his prerogative and break down constitutional government. The scheme was reasonable enough, and the king proceeded for a long time very well and with every prospect of success. To effect his purpose, George III. counted on the demoralization of the whig party, on the factions among the great family connections, and on unlimited corruption, and he did not reckon in vain. England drifted steadily toward personal government during the first twenty years of the reign. But as the king, representing the spirit of the past, grew Stronger, in appearance at least, the spirit of the future began to make itself felt. It was first heard in deep, inarticulate murmurs from a misgoverned and unrepresented people, little understood at the time by those who ruled the state. Then it broke out roughly, incoherently, but still full of meaning, with Wilkes and the Middlesex election. It was seen in the constant riots, the amount of crime, and the chronic disorder of the country, all of which Mr. Lecky has depicted and given meaning to in a way hitherto unknown. The same spirit of the future, of progress, liberty, and equality found vent in the press and in the savage diatribes of Junius. The expression was rude and imperfect, but there can be no doubt of the nature and magnitude of the cause. In the democratic societies of that day, historically neglected until now, but of which Mr. Lecky gives a very striking account, and in the utterances of advanced liberals, including many men of high rank, we find the same spirit rampant. While the king was straining prerogative and buying votes, while privilege seemed omnipotent, men could be heard publicly demanding annual Parliaments and manhood suffrage. The truth was that England was on the very verge of a terrible revolution. This great fact has been becoming more and more apparent with the progress of historical research, but it was reserved to Mr. Lecky to put it in the clearest and strongest light. That this revolution did not occur Mr. Lecky attributes to the influence of a growing and free press, and to the troubles in the colonies. Whatever the effect of the free press may have been, it was the second cause which was decisive. The revolution came in reality, but in the colonies instead of in the mother country. It is not a little striking that it should have broken out in the least oppressed and least taxed, the freest and best governed, portion of the British dominions. Laws which would have been borne without a murmur by the people of England lighted up a war in America. The colonists took arms on a question of principle, and, as Mr. Lecky points out very forcibly, and with that clearness of perception which distinguishes him from other English historians of this epoch, the severance of the empire was due to the blunders of a stupid ministry and of the king, was wholly unnecessary, and had nothing arising from the character or condition of the colonies to render it inevitable.

To the colonies and to their revolt Mr. Lecky gives many chapters. It can be said without exaggeration that while in perfect candor no Englishman except Mr. Green has at all approached Mr. Lecky, there are but few historians, native or foreign, who, treating the subject in a large way, have written about the war for independence so thoroughly and so well. To the early leaders of the opposition to England, Mr. Lecky does scant justice, and fails to treat fairly their character and motives. This is especially true in the case of Samuel Adams, who was really a great revolutionary leader, and who is here wholly misconceived and misunderstood. Mr. Lecky also gives a great deal of space to showing that the loyalist faction was very large and respectable, that indifference was wide - spread in America, and that revolution was brought about and carried through by an active and energetic minority. In all this we are disposed to agree entirely with Mr. Lecky, but he is open to criticism in having failed to point out that these very facts which he emphasizes so strongly heighten the praise which is due to the patriot party for courage and persistence, and ought especially to excite and increase our admiration for the greatness of Washington. It would be impossible, probably, for any English writer to satisfy Americans with his estimate of Washington. Mr. Green did so when he said that “ no nobler figure ever stood in the forefront of a nation’s life.” Mr. Lecky is so cool and careful in all his judgments that, while we cannot say that he does not do justice to Washington, we yet do not feel fully contented with his elaborate sketch of that great leader.

As an instance, however, of Mr. Lecky’s candor and frankness we must refer to his treatment of the West Point treason. He is the first English historian who has had the moral and intellectual honesty to admit that, however much André was to be pitied, his execution was just. He is the first to admit the force of the obvious facts that André was a spy, and as such amenable to the severest laws of war ; that he was engaged in aiding the consummation of the blackest treachery ; and that he was fairly tried by a board of officers of the highest rank and character, among whom were three distinguished foreigners, and that there was no dissent from the justice of the sentence.

Nothing is better in Mr. Lecky’s work than his estimates of men. His opinions will not in all cases command universal assent, but they are singularly penetrating and impartial. The test of a man’s greatness in the period covered by these volumes seems to us the extent to which he appreciated the rising spirit of the age which was to dominate the future, and which represented the elevation of the people and the spread of the democratic principle. Mr. Lecky seems inclined to put Burke at the head of the statesmen of that time. Yet with all his profound philosophy and depth of political thought and reasoning, with all his brilliancy as an orator, his gorgeous rhetoric, and his fervid imagination, Burke was blind to the truth. He saw health and safety in a parcel of noble whig families, and he degenerated into a fanatical conservatism, insensible to all existing facts. He aimed at reform, but his reforms were skin deep, and he shrank with horror from the changes which were sure to come. He died hugging to his bosom the corpse of a worn-out political system, which rested on a handful of aristocratic whig “connections.” No man so gifted as Burke, who failed so terribly to grasp the essential needs of the time, and fell back so madly and blindly in his efforts to resist the truth, deserves to stand at the head of the great men of his epoch. With all his weaknesses, Chatham was nearer the light. The days of his glory were when he was known as the “great commoner,” and in the darkest times he still reverted to the people, and saw beyond kings and lords and squires a mightier force than either or all. In a still greater degree was this true of Fox, to whom Mr. Lecky fails to do justice, except when he sets forth very strikingly the correctness of Fox’s objects in seeking by the coalition to break down the royal influence. This work was done by the victor in that struggle, and Pitt, when he rode into power, destroyed prerogative as well as his rival could have done it. Pitt, then, was above Burke, and imbued partially at least with the truth, and so continued until he sold himself to retain office. But Fox, with all his short-comings, his hankering for whig “connections,” and his relapses in his brief tenure of office, was the great Englishman of the age. The spirit of the past and the spirit of the future contended in him, because he was typical of his time. But it was to the latter that he gave himself. He looked beyond the mob of lords and gentlemen, and was one of those rare men who represented great ideas. He was the first of modern English statesmen. He felt for humanity and for the people, and the fierce current of reaction swept by him in vain.

Let us say in conclusion that Mr. Lecky’s volumes are contributions of the first importance to the most difficult of sciences, the science of history or of human action. When we consider the period with which Mr. Lecky deals, we cannot praise him more highly than by saying that he has proved himself equal to his task.