North’s ministry, 1770–82
- In full:
- George William Frederick
- German:
- Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
- Born:
- June 4 [May 24, Old Style], 1738, London
- Died:
- January 29, 1820, Windsor Castle, near London (aged 81)
- Also Known As:
- Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
- George William Frederick
- Title / Office:
- king (1814-1820), Hanover
- king (1801-1820), United Kingdom
- king (1760-1820), Ireland
- king (1760-1800), Great Britain
- Founder:
- Royal Academy of Arts
- House / Dynasty:
- House of Hanover
- Notable Family Members:
- spouse Charlotte
- father Frederick Louis, prince of Wales
- son Frederick Augustus, Duke of York and Albany
- son George IV
- son Ernest Augustus
- Role In:
- American Revolution
- On the Web:
- Scholars at Harvard - George III and the Law of Nations (Oct. 26, 2024)
In 1770 the king was lucky in finding a minister, Lord North, with the power to cajole the Commons. North’s policy of letting sleeping dogs lie lulled the suspicions of independent rural members who were always ready to imagine that the executive was growing too strong. As a result, 12 years of stable government followed a decade of disturbance.
Unfortunately, issues and prejudices survived from the earlier period that North could only muffle. America was the greatest and the fatal issue, and North could not avoid it because the English squires in Parliament agreed with their king that America must pay for its own defense and for its share of the debt remaining from the war that had given it security. George III’s personal responsibility for the loss of America lies not in any assertion of his royal prerogative. Americans, rather, were disposed to admit his personal supremacy. Their quarrel was with the assertion of the sovereignty of Parliament, and George III was eventually hated in America because he insisted upon linking himself with that Parliament. North would have had difficulty in ignoring the colonists’ insults in any case; with the king and the House of Commons watching to see that he was not weak, he inevitably took the steps that led to war in 1775.
By 1779 the typical English squires in Parliament had sickened of the war, but the king argued that though the war was indefensible on economic grounds it still had to be fought, that if disobedience were seen to prosper, Ireland would follow suit. He argued also, after the French had joined the Americans in 1778, that French finances would collapse before those of Britain. So the king prolonged the war, possibly by two years, by his desperate determination. The period from 1779 to 1782 left a further black mark upon the king’s reputation. By 1780 a majority in Parliament blamed North’s government for the calamities that had befallen the country, yet there was no responsible or acceptable alternative, for the opposition was reputed to be both unpatriotic and divided. At the time people believed that corruption alone supported an administration that was equally incapable of waging war or ending it. This supposed increase in corruption was laid directly at the king’s door, for North wearily repeated his wish to resign, thus appearing to be a mere puppet of George III. When North fell at last in 1782, George III’s prestige was at a low ebb. The failure of Shelburne’s ministry (1782–83) reduced George to the lowest point of all. North joined with the liberal Whig Charles James Fox to form a coalition government, and George even contemplated abdication.