Feuds of the Titans
In November 1788, George III went mad. The feuds of two giants of 18th century politics offer a flavour to Britain;s present Brexit woes. “ He is now a compleat lunatic”, wrote the Prince of Wales, after reports that is father had been shaking hands with a tree in Windsor Park, believing the old oak was the king of Prussia. The wags at court whispered that it is now a matter of time before parliament voted to make the Prince regent –monarch in all but name.
Charles James Fox and William Pitt the greatest of orators and the fiercest of rivals, each was a young son of distinguished fathers, who themselves had been bitter rivals for power a generation earlier and each came to prominence at a very young age. Fox was genial, tolerant gregarious, self indulgent rash and reckless gambler and a drinking companion of the Prince of Wales ( later the Prince Regent and George IV) while Pitt was cautious, self-controlled, calculating misanthropic and ruthless. Their fate were heavily influenced by their respective relationship with George III, who formed an insensate hostility to Fox, using unconstitutional means to exclude him from power while favouring Pitt whom he supported.
For William Pitt, the prime minister and Charles Fox the man who might replace him, this was no laughing matter. In the 18th century, there was no such thing as majority government in Britain as parties barely existed. Pitt who survived on temporary support, royal patronage and the force of persuasion. If the debauched prince became regent, he would out and Fox would come in. For six months, they debated relentlessly to win the confidence of the Commons. The King recovered his senses just in time to avert a full-blown constitutional crisis. Pitt survived and Fox, who had been all but measuring gup the drapes in Downing Street, slunk back to the opposition benches.
For 22 years Fox and Pitt eyeballed each other across the despatch box, the only place they ever cared to meet, given their shared animosity.
Dick Leonard and Mark Garnett paint Fox and Pitt as remarkable compromisers and persuaders – titanic parliamentarians whose agility and oratory sustained their careers and endures galling contrast with the dearth of frontbench talent on display today.
There was a mad king, a revolution in France, the threat of insurrection at home, and Britain fought a war of survival against Napoleon.
Fox and Pitt’s careers and political legacies were defined by aggressive attitudes towards these events, especially the French Revolution. While Fox was a gambler and philanderer, Pitt was a workaholic and alcoholic. When Bastille fell in 1789, Fox grew a grizzled beard in sympathy with the Parisian Sanculottes. Pitt by contrast railed against the “detestable principles” of the Revolution, rounding up seditious characters and shipping them off to Botany Bay. The Commons is a kaleidoscope of allegiances, but it is bereft of leaders who can think their way out of narrow party loyalties. Fox and Pitt were flexible and imaginative because their political apprenticeship took place in chamber that demanded those qualities.
Fox and Pitt died within months of each other in 1806. Walter Scott marked their passing with a lament that the nation had been left without any capable parliamentarians.
Titans: Fox Vs Pitt by Dick Leonard and Mark Garnett, IB Tauris £25, 336 pages.