WI William Pitt the Elder remained in good health longer?

Here's a thread for the July 4th weekend-

During the 1760s, the beginning of troubles between Great Britain and the American colonies, former Prime Minister William Pitt was an advocate of Imperial reforms that might have kept the colonies from rebelling. However, because of his declining physical and mental health, he returned to leadership as Lord Privy Seal in the House of Lords, and as such was unable to maintain tight control over the government to keep corrupt officials from advocating polices of taxation without representation in order to plunder the American colonies of their wealth-mainly to bail out the East India Company.

So what if Pitt had enjoyed better physical and mental health for say, between another 5 to 10 years? Would he have retired to lead the British government in the House of Commons once again, and could he have held the plunderers and reactionaries, as well as George III crown in check? And if so, might the American Revolution have never happened, and the American colonies remained part of a reformed British Empire?
 
It's not just the packet of reforms he might have got through, it's that he was trusted by leading colonials and he had the political heft to back down the monarch if need be.
 
George III appointed him Prime Minister, and allowed him to select his own men and to choose his own policies. He might not be faulted for what happened because of his illness, but he certainly could be faulted for choosing the men to serve under him, specifically Charles Townshend.

During his tenure as PM, the Townshend Acts would be passed that worsened relations with the colonies!

And he won't retire to the house of Commons, because he accepted being Lord Chatham and the office of Lord Privy Seal to lighten his workload. I don't see him being the man to give up his peerage and return to the house of commons, not at his age at that time.

Besides, George III's actions were within the constitutional framework of the time. He did nothing that was unconstitutional.He could appoint and fire ministers within reason, and even the great Pitt the Younger was dismissed and replaced with Addington when he disagreed with the king.

To get back to the point.

To me, Chatham was like Churchill. Both were great war leaders, but not that great at running the country during times of peace and debt.
 
It's too dicey to make a good prediction on. He could easily repeal the taxes one day, like Rockingham did, and inadvertently kick the American Revolution down the road a few decades. He could also do absolutely nothing that would cause any change, due to his political allies, as Tonifranz pointed out.

I think the Tories were destined to get back into power, as they had the support of George III, who also absolutely hated Pitt and only ever took him as Prime Minister as a last resort. I think he went down from a concerted attack from his political enemies as much as his ill health and mental state.

edit: For being eventually so crucial to the American Revolution, the taxes were enacted in a very haphazard way: First Charles Townshend designed them specifically to defray about half a million pounds in war debt from the Seven Years War, then the more opposition to them in the colonies grew, the more conservatives in the British political establishment became concerned about eventual de facto independence of the colonies from Great Britain and thus supported them. Then a couple years later the Marquess of Rockingham tried to please the Americans by repealing the Stamp Act, while pleasing British conservatives by passing the Declaratory Act explicitly stating that Parliament had legislative authority over the colonies on all matters whatsoever. Then a couple years later Townshend, not wanting to see his earlier plan fail, re-introduced the taxes under slightly different guise, which Chatham approved because he didn't want his ministry collapsing due to Townshend withdrawing. Then the "Boston Massacre" happened, and Parliament in response withdrew the taxes, except for the one on tea in order to affirm Britain's right to tax the colonies. Then in response to declining tea sales, the East India Company got Parliament to grant them a monopoly over the American tea trade by waiving their import duties, angering American tea merchants while keeping the tax, The Boston Tea Party happened, and then things got real interesting.
 
Last edited:
Top