It was not long before the pain of war was felt in England. Pitt had based his confidence in a short period of war upon the pathetic belief that France would be financially incapable of sus taining a prolonged struggle. But the war advanced, and Pitt's subsidies were swallowed up upon the Continent by allies who made little or no return for them. The nation's debt mounted. The coalition crumbled. More money to buy more allies was needed. In 1795 after a season of bad harvests Pitt had to ask for a loan of 18 millions, and to increase the general taxation. Shortly afterwards followed the legacy duties. In 1797 taxation was increased by two millions ; the next year produced the income tax.
Ireland.—One of Pitt's major pre-occupations was still Ire land. He had failed in 1785, but he never ceased to plan for the final consummation of his hopes. In 1793 Pitt forwarded the passage in the Irish House of Commons of the Catholic relief bill; but in 1794 he suffered disappointment when Irish opinion was again alienated by the position he was forced to adopt against the antics of Lord Fitzwilliam, who had been made lord lieutenant as a concession to the Portland Whigs who had entered the min istry in that year. Fitzwilliam and his party were anxious for a broad policy of reform and emancipation ; but Pitt had laid down a cautious line of action, and it had been determined that Fitzwilliam should do nothing without the consent of the cabinet. But by "an open breach of a most solemn promise" he proceeded to dismiss the Irish Tory officials, and without authorization to promise widely the immediate prospect of a full emancipation. Fitzwilliam was recalled, and Ireland left to nurse an angry grievance. The whole bungling led directly to the disasters which followed; the state of semi-civil war in 1797 and the rebellion of 1798 and that disaffection which could welcome the French in vasion. The union of Ireland and England which he had sought earlier for the mutual benefit of both countries was now impera tive as a solution to a state of war. On Jan. 23, 1799, Pitt brought forward his proposals for a union of the two countries. Emanci pation was not promised (the hostility of George III.'s eccentric conscience precluded the suggestion) but the hope was held out that this would follow in due course. The bill was pressed through the Irish parliament by Cornwallis, the viceroy, and Castlereagh, the secretary for Ireland. The distribution of titles and money played some part in this and more than a million pounds was expended in compensation to the holders of suppressed rotten boroughs. However open to moral criticism the latter decision
may have been, it was essential to the support of the bill and it destroyed an entirely dishonest system of representation. As for the measure of the general corruption, that has at least been over-estimated, and in so far as material persuasion was adopted it must be remembered that bribery in the Irish parliament was a deeply respected tradition. Moreover it must have been patent to the guiding minds in Ireland that the present state of affairs was impossible, and the possible benefits of the union, for in stance to trade, were obvious. The bill having passed the Irish parliament in 1800, the first united parliament met in Jan. i8o1. Pitt had now to enlarge his policy, and once more the solution of Ireland's troubles was tragically postponed. Pitt had not promised emancipation, but those who had voted for the measure had been led to expect that it must follow. With a secrecy which was perhaps unwise but understandable in the circumstances Pitt drew up his preliminary suggestions for the abolition of religious tests, the commutation of tithes, and provision for Catholic and dissenting clergy. The plan was opposed in the cabinet, princi pally by Lord Loughborough, the chancellor, who reported the matter to the king. George was enraged, and adamant against the proposals, and on Feb. 5 accepted the resignation which Pitt had tendered on Feb. 3. Immediately afterwards the situation was complicated by the king's relapse. During his temporary in sanity, Pitt retained office until his recovery, finally resigning on March 14. Many bitter things were spoken of him. Once again he was accused of betraying his cause. But he had boldly brought forward his reforms, and his resignation followed upon their veto. Had he pressed his legislation, the king would have persisted in evitably in his opposition : moreover with the war going extremely ill it was not the moment to precipitate a domestic crisis. His promise to George never again to introduce the subject during the reign was sentimental, not necessary, and politically unwise. But he made it because the king had accused him of causing his illness and after all he might reasonably expect that the reign would be shortly finished. That Pitt intended to return to the fullest implications of his project is certain. But he himself had only five more years to live.