POLITICAL HISTORY

Intro: In the chaotic 1760s, as now, the country faced the entwined issues of debt and a geopolitical crisis

As America marks the 250th anniversary of their Declaration of Independence in 1776, we should hope they will remember the seven men who made it happen. I am not thinking of the Founding Fathers. No, I’m more reflective of the seven individuals or politicians who served as prime minister of Great Britain during the 1760s, the last of whom, the lachrymose Lord North, limped on until 1782 and oversaw events of the American War of Independence.

The 1760s are the last time that Britain had seven different prime ministers in a 10-year span, which is where we will be if the Labour Party dispenses with Sir Keir Starmer.

There are some important lessons from that time. In 1760, as students of history will recall, we (the Americans included) had a new King – George III, who came to the throne with the Earl of Bute, his former tutor, as very much the power behind the throne.

The prime minister of the day, the Duke of Newcastle, a veteran Whig statesman, had overseen the successful prosecution of the Seven Years War against France and Spain (resulting in British dominion over North America and much of India), but in 1762 he threw in the towel and his legacy was confined to the history books.

Lord Bute – who was also the King’s mother’s lover – then became prime minister. His tenure was an unmitigated disaster and was replaced in under a year by Lord Grenville, another Whig who lasted just two years but not before stoking up the North American colonies with his Stamp Act.

Grenville was replaced by the Marquess of Rockingham – best known now for commissioning Stubbs to paint his horse, Whistlejacket – in 1765. Rockingham’s administration expired with the Duke of Cumberland after just 13 months having attempted to conciliate the American colonies.

Pitt the Elder – “the Great Commoner” and the Churchill of his era – was the fifth PM of the decade. He held office for two years before resigning on grounds of health in 1768. By that time, though, his chancellor had passed the detested and draconian Townshend Acts, which included the imposition of taxes on imported glass, lead, and tea in America.

Running low on options, the King called on the Duke of Grafton and he lasted a year and 107 days before resigning in 1770 over France’s annexation of Corsica. Lord Noth came next.

George III bore some responsibility for this sustained imbroglio because of his inability to appoint someone who could command both his trust and the support of the Commons. But that’s only part of the story: underlying the crises was the burden of sky-high national debt, rising to a then lofty £144m.

It is to this we should pay special attention. Britain had emerged from the Seven Years War as the leading world power, with a vastly enlarged empire, particularly in America (having absorbed “New France”) that was expensive to maintain. Or, in other words, the trials of 250 years ago have some parallels with today: we’re also living with a massive national debt left over from the 2008 financial crisis and Covid-19 and confronting significant geopolitical challenges. Now, as then, it’s this combination of the two that is undermining the ability of the political class to rise to the challenges in hand.

Our level of debt stands at an extraordinary £111bn a year. If we could get that sorted – before it’s too late – we could, for instance, invest in more hard power and begin to claw back influence on global affairs again, rather than behaving like a geopolitical lobby group that no one takes any notice of.

As it was, the cackhanded efforts to balance the books and manage the enlarged empire in the 1760s and 1770s ended up driving a wedge between England and the formerly loyal American colonists. That led to another expensive war and the disastrous loss of what Churchill called the First British Empire.

Be grateful that in this case history cannot repeat itself.