Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T05:47:17.343Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Party and Burke: The Rockingham Whigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Frank O'Gorman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

HISTORIANS OF I8TH-CENTURY ENGLAND ARE COMING TO RECOGnize that the Rockingham Whigs played a significant role in the establishment of ‘party’ and ‘opposition’ as political instruments in the life of the nation but they remain divided over the precise contribution which the Rockinghams made to the evolution of the party system. On dose analysis the party appears to be profoundly divided over some of the most fundamental political issues of the time. Its attitude towards the American colonies was at best ambiguous and unsatisfactorily thought out. It was deeply divided on reform. All too frequently its parliamentary performance was inept, its members absent and its public credit low. In office, the Rockinghams were unable to effect lasting political changes and were never able to survive for more than a few months. Because most historians have concentrated their studies on these aspects of Rockinghamite history they have tended to neglect, indeed almost to dismiss, the party ideology which emerged during the 1770s and have remained indifferent to the institutional changes which occurred a little later. Only when the theoretical and institutional developments have been analysed and their significance assessed can a balanced view of the Rockinghams emerge – and thus a more valid picture of party development in the later I8th century.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , 01 January 1968 , pp. 92 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 1968

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The favourable assessment of Foord, A. S. (His Majesty’s Opposition, 1714–1832, Oxford, 1964 Google Scholar) should be compared with the somewhat jaundiced attitude of J. Brooke (The Chatham Administration, 1956) and the cautiously non‐committal approach of I. R. Christie (The End of North’s Ministry, 1958). The account of the Rockinghams in Namier, L. B. and Brooke, J., The House of Commons, 1714–1790, H.M.S.O., 3 vols. 1964 Google Scholar, is a more satisfactory, though incomplete, sketch of the opposition to North.

2 See the interesting paper ‘On Opposition’ by Speaker Onslow, in H.M.C. Onslow, pp. 458–73Google Scholar. For an interesting discussion of the theoretical difficulties of oppositions see Foord, op. cit., pp. 103–9.

3 Mr Owen argues (The Rise of the Pelbams, p. 63), that the importance of the heir‐apparent cycle may have been exaggerated. Fewer than 20 MPs were attached to him (ibid., p. 79) and most opposition members had no connection with him at all.

4 Campbell, P., ‘An Early Defence of Party’, Political Studies, III, pp. 166–7;Google Scholar Robbins, C., ‘Discordant Parties’, Political Science Quarterly, 73 (1958), pp. 505–529;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Owen, J., The Rise of the Pelham:, pp. 62–3Google Scholar.

5 For Burke’s debt to earlier Whig theory see Foord, pp. 311–15.

6 Rockingham to Burke, 15 October 1769, The Correspondence of Edmund Burke, 1768–74, ed. L. Sutherland, Cambridge University Press, 1960, p. 92. See also Rockingham’s letter to Burke of 4 November 1769 (Ibid., p. 104): ‘I know pretty well from the conversations I have had with several ‐ that the Idea totally corresponds as much with their present sentiments, as it does with all their past conduct.’

7 Burke to Rockingham, 29 October 1769, ibid., pp. 100–2.

8 Burke to Shackleton, 6 May 1770, ibid., p. 136. In spite of the strictures of Brooke, J. (The Chatham Administration, pp. 233, 275–6Google Scholar), there are remarkably few instances of party men repudiating Burke’s views.

9 The Works of the Rt. Hon. Edmund Burke, 2 vols., 1834, I, p. 152. Thoughts on the Causes of the Present Discontents.

10 Ibid., p. 151.

11 Ibid.

12 Ibid., I, p. 119. Observations on … a Late State of the Nation.

13 Burke to Fitzwilliam, 2 September 1796, Wentworth Woodhouse MSS. Burke I. Sheffield.

14 ‘It is not every conjuncture which calls with equal force upon the activity of honest men; but critical exigencies now and then arise …’Works, I, p. 152. (Thoughts…)

15 Ibid., I, p. 120. Observations on … a Late State of the Nation.

16 Burke, to Weddell, , 31 01 1792 , Correspondence of Edmund Burke, ed. Fitzwilliam, Earl and Sir Rourke, R., 4 vols., 1852, III, p. 388 Google Scholar; Works, I, pp. 220–1, Letter to the Sheriffs of Bristol, 1777; Pocock, J. A., ‘Burke and the Ancient Constitution’, Historical Journal, III, No. 2, 1960, pp. 125–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Works, I, pp. 152–3Google Scholar, Thoughts…

18 Sutherland, L., ‘Edmund Burke and the First Rockingham Ministry’, English Historical Review, XLVII, pp. 46–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 Works, I, pp. 140 Google Scholar, Thoughts…

20 Burke remarked that the ministry ‘ was removed upon a plan settled by the Earl of Chatham’, Works, I, p. 75:Google Scholar A Short Account of a Late Administration.

21 Norris, J., Shelburne and Reform, London, 1963, pp. 8, 96 Google Scholar.

22 The Political Memoranda of Francis, Duke of Leeds, ed. Browning, O., 1884, pp. 190–1Google Scholar.

23 Cf. Phillips, N. C., ‘Edmund Burke and the County Movement’, English Historical Review, LXXVI, pp. 254–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24 Burke, to Pitt, , Autumn 1794, Stanhope’s Miscellanies (2 vols., 1861, 1864), I, pp. 45–8Google Scholar.

25 Burke, to Baker, , 12 10 1777 , The Correspondence of Edmund Burke, 1774–1778, ed. Guttridge, G., 1961, p. 389 Google Scholar.

26 Burke, to Rockingham, , 29 12 1769 , Correspondence of Edmund Burke, ed. Sutherland, L., pp. 175–6.Google Scholar

27 Burke, to Rockingham, , 6 01 1777 , Correspondence of Edmund Burke, ed. Guttridge, G., p. 311.Google Scholar

28 Burke, to Rockingham, , 11 01 1773 , Correspondence of Edmund Burke, ed. Sutherland, L., p. 411 Google Scholar.

29 Rockingham to Dowdeswell, 20 October 1769, Rockingham Papers, Sheffield City Library, q. Foord, op. cit., p. 315.

30 Ibid., not quoted in Foord.

31 For their loyalty and consistency in the face of ministerial inducements, see Christie, I. R., ‘The Marquis of Rockingham and Lord North’s Offer of a Coalition’, English Historical Review, LXIX, 07 1954 .Google Scholar

32 Foord, op. cit., p. 344.

33 Nevertheless there was a considerable number of members whose attachment to the party was voluntary and based on principle. See I. R. Christie, The End of North’s Ministry, pp. 107–8, 210–12.

34 Foord, op. cit., pp. 353–6Google ScholarPubMed.

35 Namier and Brooke, The House of Commons, I, p. 74.Google Scholar

36 Foord, op. cit., pp. 342–3Google Scholar.

37 Ibid., pp. 359–60; Olsen, A., The Radical Duke, Oxford, 1961, pp. 35–6Google Scholar

38 For a full discussion of relations between the Rockinghams and the Radicals see Christie, I. R., Wilkes, Wyvill and Reform, London, 1961 Google Scholar, and Rudé, G., Wilkes and Liberty, Oxford, 1962 Google Scholar.

39 For this topic see Ginter, D., ‘The Financing of the Whig Party Organisation, 1783–93’, American Historical Review, LXXI, 01 1966 Google Scholar, and my own The Whig Party and the French Revolution, 1967.