486 PITT AND WALPOLE. that the promotion of commerce and the reduction of the National Debt were the objects which he had at heart; and that, therefore, he was by conviction, as also, perhaps, by temperament, a Peace Minister. It will be seen that in the policy of his earlier and happier time he closely sympathised with that of Walpole. His financial schemes were based upon the same principles, his view of the true interests of the country was exactly the same. We may carry the parallelism further. His idea of the Church was as low as Walpole's. He shrank from interfering with its privileges; but he looked upon it simply as a State institution which helped to guarantee the social order and wellbeing of the kingdom. He desired to bestow its great offices on men of learning and party; but he wished also to render them available for strengthening his political influence. Like Walpole, he was in favour of toleration; but, like Walpole, he hesitated to grant it in opposition to the Church, and, therefore, when he found the bishops, or a majority of fourteen out of sixteen, inimical to the proposed repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, he procured its rejection. Like Walpole, he was willing to grant full liberty to the Press, and he gave his support to the reform of the Libel Law. But again, like Walpole, he was no patron of literature or of literary men. His neglect called forth the reproach of a contemporary satirist :-* "Pitt views alike, from Holwood's sullen brow,t (As near-observing friendship dares avow,) * Matthias, Pursuits of Literature,' pt. ii. + Pitt acquired the small estate of Holwood Hill, near Hayes, in 1785. THEIR NEGLECT OF LITERATURE. 487 The fount of Pindus or Boeotia's bog, -More spleen to Pitt; he's liberal, but by stealth. For all, but Burke, escape his searching eye. Lord Stanhope, Pitt's best, because his fairest, apologist, admits that the charge is well-founded. In some cases, he adds, it is no doubt very easy to offer an adequate defence. In the case of Porson, for instance, it must be owned that his intemperate habits, no less than his democratic views, unfitted him for preferment, notwithstanding his remarkable erudition. But in the case of many others, as, for example, the poet Cowper, no such plea can be alleged. It is true that Burns received an exciseman's place; but the gift came from Dundas, not Pitt. We are not of those, however, who think that Literature flourishes most strongly when sunned by a minister's smile; and we are content to accept Mr. Goldwin Smith's apology-"How can a statesmen have leisure to discriminate literary merit? And if he cannot discriminate, how can we desire that he should patronise? Of course he can be told what writers are on his own side in politics, and he can see who flatter him in the prefaces; but this is not what learning or the public wants. A munificent despot, such as Lewis the 14th, may foster a Court literature; a munificent party-chief, *The seal which Mecenas attached to edicts for the collection of taxes had the figure of a frog. 488 THE SECRET OF SUCCESS. such as the Whig leader in the reign of Anne, may foster a party literature. A healthy literature needs no fostering but that of freedom." On the other hand, we are free to confess that the relations of Peel and Gladstone to men of letters have been more honourable to themselves, and certainly less prejudicial to the interests of literature, than those of Walpole and Pitt. In the courage with which Pitt withstood opposition, in the tact with which he managed the House of Commons, in his attention towards the Court and Crown, in the faculty he possessed of detecting the right moment when to yield or when to maintain his ground, we see a resemblance to the great Minister of the two first Georges. We could fancy Walpole replying, as Pitt replied, to the question what quality was most required in a Prime Minister,-when one said Eloquence, and another Knowledge, and a third Toil,-"No, Patience." * For of Walpole's success, as of Pitt's, the secret was Patience, the patience of a clear strong intellect, a cool judgment, and a resolute will. But while drawing the parallel thus closely, we do not wish to forget that Pitt, as a man, has claims to our respect which Walpole cannot put forward. We would not omit to do justice to the purity of his life, to his unblemished personal integrity, to the goodness and gentleness of his temper, and to the sincerity of his religious belief. These qualities imparted to his public conduct an elevation which we do not perceive in that of Walpole; and, reflecting upon them, we may * Lord Brougham, ‘Historical Sketches of British Statesmen,' i. 278. THE TWO PITTS. 489 well be disposed to judge with leniency of his politica errors. "There was a singular contrast in the life of Lord Chatham and that of his son. The first Pitt was essentially a war minister, he seemed to require the sound of the clarion and the trumpet and the guns proclaiming victory from the Tower, to call forth the force and instincts of his genius. In peace he became an ordinary person. The second Pitt, on the contrary, was as evidently a peace minister. In quiet times his government had, been eminently successful. Orderly, regular, methodical, with a firm and lofty soul, and the purest motives for his guides, he had carried on the business of the country, steadily, prudently, and ably-heedless of the calumnies of envy, or the combinations of factions [surely few Ministers have met with so little "factious" opposition as Pitt!] but he wanted that imagination which furnishes resources in unexpected occasions. The mighty convulsion which made the world heave under his feet did not terrify him, but it bewildered him; and nothing could be more unfortunate, or even more wavering, than his conduct when he had to deal with extraordinary events."-LORD DALLING, Historical Characters,' ii. 242. |