39

CHAPTER III.

WILLIAM, EARL OF SHELBURNE, THE FRIEND AND patron of BARRÉ-1761. PLACES THE LATTER IN PARLIAMENT-BARRÉ ATTACKS MR. PITT-1763. LORD SHELBURNE IN OFFICE WITH GEORGE GRENVILLE-BARRÉ ATTAINS HIGH RANK AND DISTINCTION-SUPPORTS THE MINISTRY-UNPUBLISHED LETTERS BY JUNIUS IN THE POSSESSION OF THE GRENVILLE FAMILY-LORD SHELBURNE RESIGNSBARRÉ JOINS THE OPPOSITION-WILKES AND THE "NORTH BRITON," No. 45BARRE'S VOTE AGAINST GENERAL WArrants-DepRIVED OF HIS MILITARY APPOINTMENTS, AT THE INSTIGATION OF THE DUKE OF BEDFORD-1765. HIS SPEECH ON THE AMERICAN STAMP ACT-1766. ACCEPTS OFFICE UNDER PITT WITH LORD SHELBURNE-1767. JUNIUS BEGINS TO WRITE IN THE "PUBLIC ADVERTISER"-1768. PITT, SHElburne, and Barré resign OFFICE-1769-1772. THE LETTERS OF JUNIUS CONTINUED-THE PUBLIC CONDUCT AND SPEECHES OF BARRÉ COMPARED WITH THE OPINIONS AND LANGUAGE OF JUNIUS.

WILLIAM, second EARL OF SHELBURNE, was born in 1737, (eleven years after Barré). He had served in the army at Campen and at Minden; and returning to England at the close of the campaign, he was, on the 4th of December, 1760, appointed aid-de-camp to the young king, George the Third, with the rank of Colonel. His father being then alive, he sat in the House of Commons as Colonel Fitzmaurice, Member of Parliament for the borough of High, or Chipping Wycombe, in Buckinghamshire, his family being proprietors of a great part of that parish.

In the month of May, 1761, John, first Earl of Shelburne, died, and Colonel Fitzmaurice, as his eldest son and heir, took his seat in the House of Lords. A few months later Mr. Pitt resigned; and the

young Lord Shelburne, who had been graciously received by the King, was readily induced to adopt the politics of the Court, and to join the party of the Earl of Bute.

It appears to have been owing to Lord Shelburne's influence that on the 17th of October Lieutenant-Colonel Barré received a "letter of service" to raise as "Colonel proprietor" the 106th regiment of foot. Parliament assembled in November, and on the 28th of that month a new writ was issued for Chipping Wycombe, under which Lieutenant-Colonel Barré was elected in the place of his new patron, the Earl of Shelburne. It might be more accurate to say that he was nominated to sit in Parliament by his lordship, whose family had long controlled the representation of the Borough.

This is the first known event of importance in the history of Lord Shelburne's long friendship for and connection with Colonel Barré. Beyond the fact that they were both born in Ireland, and both officers in the army, the origin of their connection may possibly be found in the circumstances mentioned in the "Political Magazine" for 1776. In a notice of Colonel Barré, in that periodical, which is evidently written by one well acquainted with him, it is said, that he was a practised and skilful debater at the Court of Proprietors of the East India House; and that Lord Shelburne, who took much interest in that important branch of government affairs, hearing of his abilities, selected him as his nominee in Parliament, "purposely" to encounter Mr. Pitt, who was then in opposition to the ministry which his Lordship had engaged to support. There is every probability that this statement is correct. Barré was certainly a proprietor in the East India Company, and his attendance at their meetings in the year which had elapsed after his return from America, had doubtless sufficed to bring him into notice as an able and ready debater. A proprietorship in that distinguished company was then attainable at the price of 5007; and as Barré himself had risen rapidly in his profession between 1759 and 1761, whilst his father had advanced himself to opulence by trade, that sum of money was small, in proportion to the prospects which its

BARRE'S ATTACK ON MR. PITT.

41

investment in the Company necessarily afforded to the young and ambitious aspirant for fame. When Barré acquired celebrity in the House of Commons, he became the champion of Sullivan and other East India Directors; and Walpole says that it was even contemplated to send him to India instead of Lord Clive.*

Whatever may have been the reasons which induced the Earl of Shelburne to place the Colonel in Parliament, the immediate result justifies the notion that one of his objects was a direct and violent opposition to the views of Mr. Pitt; for within two days after taking his seat, Barré, in a speech in the House of Commons, vehemently abused that illustrious individual. The Earl of Bath, in a letter to George Colman, the elder, dated the 18th of December, 1761, thus alludes to his language on the occasion referred to.

"You have no doubt heard of the rude and foul-mouthed attack made on Mr. Pitt in the House of Commons, by one Colonel Barré, whom all the world blames most extremely; so that I suppose the gentleman will be muzzled for the future."+

The speech in question has not been fully reported; but it evidently excited considerable attention, as we find it referred to in another private letter, dated 29th January, 1762, written by Sir Andrew Mitchell.

"Would you know a little of Parliament, and particularly with regard to Mr. Pitt? I must then tell you that Colonel Barré, a soldier of fortune, a young man, born in Dublin, of parents of a mean condition, his father and mother from France, and established in a little grocer's shop, by the patronage of the Bishop of Clogher, a child of whom the mother nursed (these particulars I have from Mr. Millar upon his own certain knowledge): this young man (a man of address and parts), found out, pushed, and brought into Parliament by Lord Shelburne, had not sat two days in the House before he attacked Mr. Pitt. I shall give you a specimen of his philippics. Talking of the manner of Mr. Pitt's speaking, he said, ‘There he would stand, turning up his eyes to Heaven, that

* "Letters to the Earl of Hertford," p. 112.

† Peake's "Memoirs of the Colman Family," vol. i.

witnessed his perjuries; and laying his hand in a solemn manner upon the table; that sacrilegious hand that had been employed in tearing out the bowels of his mother country.' Would you think that Mr. Pitt would hear this and be silent? or would you think that the House would suffer a respectable member to be thus treated? Yet so it is."*

This opening of Colonel Barré's political life is in itself very remarkable. Pitt had even then been great and powerful in office, and was generally more than respected, for he was admired even by many of the opposition, and it required the boldness of a Junius to break through the difficulties which would have paralysed ordinary opponents. It will be shown hereafter that vehemence was always a characteristic of the Colonel's eloquence; and it is said that he avowed a personal motive for this attack, on the ground of Pitt's previous rejection of his appeal from New York, and the subsequent delay of three months in preparing his commission as LieutenantColonel.

In the "Edinburgh Review" of October, 1839, are some remarks on this occurrence, in which the writer speaks of the "uniform attachment of Lord Shelburne to that great man (the Earl of Chatham), both in public and private life; with the most unvarying steadiness of which either friendship or faction is capable:" but the critic has overlooked the fact that such friendship had not commenced in 1761, at which time, on the contrary, the parties were unquestionably opposed to each other. Proceeding upon this erroneous assumption the reviewer infers that Lord Shelburne "ought to have ousted Barré from the seat to which he had elevated him, on the first opportunity, as the consequence of this brutal attack." But he qualifies his remarks by adding, "it deserves to be considered that we are unacquainted with what passed with him in private after he

Chatham Correspondence, quoting the original MS. in the Mitchell Papers, British Museum. Another interesting notice of this singular affair will be found in the addenda to Sir Henry Cavendish's Debates in Parliament, vol. i. See also Hansard's Parliamentary History, May, 1762, where it will be seen that Barré renewed the attack soon afterwards.

BARRE'S INFLUENCE AND INCOME.

43

had committed the outrage. The political adventurer may have shown a contrition as abject as his offence had been shameless; and the great man who was the object of his abuse may have been gained over to make his intercession, and prevent his ruin." The conjecture, however, is altogether groundless; Barré's abuse of Mr. Pitt was repeated; he continued to hold his seat for Wycombe; and both he and Lord Shelburne remained supporters of the ministry of Lord Bute, which Pitt opposed.

In that ministry, the Right Honourable George Grenville (the only politician to whom Junius manifested consistent attachment) had been some time Treasurer of the Navy; but in May, 1762, he accepted the more responsible office of Secretary of State.

In the debates on the articles of Peace, in December, 1762, both Lord Shelburne and Barré zealously advocated the measures of the government, which were carried in spite of the opposition of Pitt; and in the general reduction of the army which ensued, Barré's regiment was disbanded. On the 18th of March, 1763, he was compensated for that loss by the distinguished and lucrative appointment of Adjutant-General to the British Forces.

The Earl of Bute being unable to withstand the popular prejudice against him, resigned office in April; and George Grenville becoming Premier, introduced the Earl of Shelburne to office as First Lord of the Board of Trade. Barré was very soon amply rewarded for his support of the ministry, being on the 14th of May appointed Governor of Stirling Castle, in the room of Lord Loudon, deceased: and thus obtained both honorary and lucrative rewards for political services to the party he espoused, and for the losses inflicted by his opponents. Four years before, he had described himself as a friend

* Connected with these persons and events, it is of importance to notice the circumstance of Junius's constant advocacy or approval of Mr. Grenville; and it can hardly be doubted that the unpublished letters by Junius, said to be secretly preserved at Stowe, in a "mysterious box with three seals," would afford an explanation of this political friendship. The existence of certain letters from Junius to Mr. Grenville has been so fully acknowledged