George III

Elector of Hanover (1760-1814), king of Great Britain and Ireland (r. 1760-1820), and king of Hanover (r. 1814-1820)

• Born: June 4, 1738
• Birthplace: London, England
• Died: January 29, 1820
• Place of death: Windsor Castle, Berkshire, England

George III’s forty-year reign covered a period of remarkable political, economic, social, and cultural change. He was conservative in his views, but his efforts to prevent changes in the role of the monarchy were frustrated by forces beyond his control. By standing for traditional values, he helped make the changes of his time more acceptable to his people.

Early Life

George III was the eldest son of Frederick, prince of Wales, and Princess Augusta. In typical Hanoverian fashion, bitter antagonism arose between Frederick and his father, King George II. Frederick became a leader of the opposition to George II and his ministers, and he contributed to the fall of the king’s domineering minister, Robert Walpole. When Frederick died in 1751, George became prince of Wales and heir to the throne. At Leicester House, where he lived with his mother, he imbibed the ideas of Frederick. He grew up with the firm conviction that it was his duty to restore the constitutional power of the monarchy and set an example of propriety and morality in public and personal life.

When George II died on October 25, 1760, George III was proclaimed king. He immediately called upon Lord Bute, his tutor for many years, for advice. At that time, Great Britain was involved in the Seven Years’ War (1756-1763), which is known in American history as the French and Indian War (1754-1763). Great Britain was led by the imperious William Pitt the Elder, who directed the war to a series of magnificent victories, and the duke of Newcastle, who was a master of the politics of parliamentary and electoral management. Pitt had nothing but contempt for Newcastle’s kind of politics, and Newcastle feared the domineering manner of Pitt. George III and Lord Bute regarded both these ministers as obstacles to the restoration of the royal power, but in the tide of victory they could not be removed from office.

The young king and Lord Bute were convinced that the war should be ended as soon as possible. In September, 1761, Pitt wanted to attack Spain, for he had reason to believe that Spain was preparing for war. The cabinet, including Newcastle, rejected his proposal and Pitt resigned. A few months later Spain entered the war, which led to additional British victories and conquests. In April, 1762, the cabinet again showed its determination to end the war by refusing to agree to additional financial support for Great Britain’s hard-fighting ally, King Frederick the Great of Prussia. At this point, Newcastle resigned, for he insisted that the nation needed a continental ally. Bute became leader of the ministry. In this way, Pitt and Newcastle left office, but in both cases the king and Bute had the support of the cabinet.

As principal minister of George III, Bute’s major concern was to make peace with France and Spain. The peace treaty brought vast colonial acquisitions for Great Britain, including Canada, the area between the Appalachians and the Mississippi River, Florida, several West Indies islands, and a dominant position in India. Pitt and Newcastle criticized the treaty, but ineffectively. The treaty was approved overwhelmingly by Parliament, but by using the kind of political corruption that George III and Bute had criticized earlier. At this point Lord Bute resigned. He complained of ill health, but also he had no stomach for the difficult decisions and bitter disputes that occur in politics. For several years thereafter, George III occasionally turned to Bute for advice, but essentially he had “dropped the pilot” and was on his own.

In the meantime, the young king had married Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, a minor German principality. Charlotte was selected for George by his mother and Lord Bute, but he accepted her as a suitable consort and the marriage was a happy one. Her appearance was plain and her conduct modest and proper. They had fifteen children and were devoted parents.

Life’s Work

The major objective of King George III was to maintain the power of the monarchy as an independent and active factor in the British political process. The key was the right of the king to appoint his own ministers, for the powers of the Crown were exercised through ministers who were also members of the House of Lords or House of Commons. Under the rule of George I and George II, politicians had used their political support in Parliament to impose ministers and policies upon the king against his wishes. George III was determined to preserve his freedom of action in this respect. To accomplish his purpose he eventually found it necessary to build his own body of supporters in Parliament.

The king’s second concern was to establish his role as the leader and symbol of the nation. He was proud that he was the first of his family who was born in England and who spoke English as a native language. His responsibility in this respect, as he conceived it, was to be accessible to the public and to set a good example in his political and personal conduct. As such, he was a forerunner of Queen Victoria.

The first decade of the reign of George III was one of political instability, as one short-lived ministry followed another. Some of the responsibility lay with the king, for he lacked political experience, and he was inclined to judge ministries on personal grounds rather than political competence. In part, the responsibility lay with a group of contentious political leaders, who magnified their differences and reacted to the king in a testy manner. A major factor was the rise of divisive issues: popular radicalism at home, economic distress aggravated by poor crops and high food prices, resistance in the North American colonies, growing discontent in Ireland, and abuses of power by the British East India Company in India. France and Spain were awaiting their opportunity to avenge the defeats of the Seven Years’ War, and Great Britain lacked a reliable continental ally. Any government would have faced serious problems, but the situation was aggravated by a young, insecure, inexperienced, but determined king.

In this fluctuating political climate George III learned that he would have to play politics too, and gradually he collected about him a group of parliamentary politicians and hardworking administrators whose primary allegiance was to the Crown. One of the most able of this group was Frederick, Lord North, who became leader of the ministry in 1770. North was willing to accept the leadership of the king, and the king was willing to delegate extensive responsibility to North, whose loyalty and competence he trusted. As George III gained maturity and confidence, he became a strong and effective ruler, and under Lord North the Crown built a following in Parliament that guaranteed safe majorities on almost all issues.

The American Revolution presented George III with a crisis that seemed to destroy all he had worked to achieve. George III was determined that the unity of the British Empire should be preserved, for he and most of his people were convinced that the power and prosperity of Great Britain depended on the empire. The king and his ministers espoused a domino theory, which held that the loss of the thirteen American colonies meant that Canada and the British West Indies would soon follow. Ireland would then demand independence, British trade and seapower would decline accordingly, and Great Britain would be left a minor state comparable to Sweden. Since the Crown and Parliament had the legal right to govern the empire, it seemed essential to enforce that power against colonial resistance and mob violence.

After a decade of controversy, the Boston Tea Party (1773), in which Bostonians boarded a ship of the British East India Company and threw its cargo of tea into the harbor, was seen in London as the last straw. Coercive measures were taken against Massachusetts, the colonies joined together in the Continental Congress, and in April, 1775, shots were fired at Lexington and Concord. At first the American colonists insisted that their quarrel was with Parliament and the king’s ministers. The Declaration of Independence (1776), however, was directed against King George III, making it clear that the Americans were determined to break all ties with the mother country. In these disputes George III consistently advocated firm enforcement of royal authority. The king was determined to use military force to subdue the rebellion if necessary, although he was prepared to be generous to the colonists if they would admit the supremacy of the British crown.

The war that began in the American colonies became a general maritime war with the involvement of France (1778), Spain (1779), and the Netherlands (1780). In Ireland, the Volunteers, who were organized to defend the country against invasion, became a political pressure group seeking more self-government. In India, the British East India Company was fighting for survival against a coalition of Indian princes organized and supported by France. At home, the opposition, led by Lord Rockingham, criticized the North ministry for political corruption and bad management. In 1780, Edmund Burke’s plan of “economical reform” almost brought about the resignation of the North ministry.

Through all of these discouragements and defeats, George III was the constant advocate of courage and resolution, but as one crisis followed another, the country lost heart. In October, 1781, Lord Cornwallis surrendered his army at Yorktown, and in March, 1782, the House of Commons turned against the war. Lord North resigned, advising the king that his predecessors had often given way to the wishes of the House of Commons, and that it was necessary to do so again. This was not the message the king wanted to hear. George III had no choice but to accept a ministry led by Lord Rockingham and pledged to American independence. It was the most bitter defeat of his life, for he had lost his control of the appointment of ministries and the shaping of policy. He never forgave Lord North for abandoning him at that crucial moment.

The fall of North’s ministry brought a new period of political instability. The Rockingham ministry was determined to reduce the resources of patronage by which the Crown had developed a body of loyal followers in the House of Commons. The king accepted some of these measures, but he opposed Edmund Burke’s bill for control of the Civil List, which was the money provided for support of the king, the royal family, the royal household, and the civil government. The Civil List was voted to the king for life at the beginning of his reign, and it was regarded as uniquely personal to the king. As such, George III regarded Burke’s Civil List Act (1782) as a personal rebuke, although he had no choice but to sign it.

In June, 1782, Lord Rockingham died and George III had an opportunity to reassert his right to control the appointment of ministers. He offered leadership of the ministry to Lord Shelburne, who was formerly linked with Rockingham. Most of the followers of Rockingham, however, refused to support Shelburne and followed Charles James Fox, a strong critic of the king and of royal power. Shelburne advocated a generous peace treaty with the American colonists, and when the treaty was presented to Parliament, he was severely criticized for his concessions. Shelburne was forced to resign by a coalition of Fox and North. Shelburne’s first lord of the Admiralty, William Pitt the Younger, earned the respect and goodwill of George III by holding out a few weeks longer, but when Pitt resigned in March, 1783, the king again was forced to accept a ministry not of his own choosing.

The new ministry was based on a coalition of Fox, supported by most of the former followers of Rockingham, and Lord North, who still had the confidence of many who had supported his former ministry. George III detested Fox, and North’s alliance with Fox he regarded as a second betrayal.

Shortly, however, George III found the opportunity to rid himself of the hated Fox-North ministry. Fox introduced a bill for reform of the East India Company that was unpopular in both houses of Parliament. The king also learned that Pitt would lead a new ministry if he were guaranteed the open support of the king and an election to strengthen his position in the House of Commons. George III agreed, and in December, 1783, the Fox-North ministry was dismissed. Pitt took office as leader of a ministry, despite the opposition of a majority of the House of Commons.

The king had succeeded only partially in restoring his own power. Pitt never forgot that he was the king’s man, but his ability and integrity gave him an independent position in Parliament that the king had to respect. The alternative to Pitt was Fox, however, so George III had little choice but to stand behind his young but able prime minister. Despite their differences on many issues, the king relied increasingly on Pitt. In 1788, George III suffered his first attack of mental illness. When he recovered, he learned that Pitt and the queen had loyally protected his interests, while the prince of Wales had behaved abominably, preparing to take power as regent and promising offices to Fox and his friends. Thereafter, George III reduced his activities to preserve his health, and his dependence on Pitt was even greater.

In 1789, a revolution broke out in France that soon became violent at home and aggressive toward neighboring states. Great Britain declared war in 1793, joining with most of the states of Europe to contain French militarism and revolutionary zeal. The war further diminished the political power of the king, for the Pitt ministry had to take responsibility for conducting the war. On the other hand, the role of the king as symbol of the nation was enhanced. Unlike the war of the American Revolution, the war against revolutionary France was popular, and for the first time, the king became an admired figure.

In 1801, a political crisis arose concerning the Act of Union, which joined Great Britain and Ireland. Pitt insisted that the measure could work only if Catholics received political rights. When George III refused to agree, Pitt resigned and the king suffered another attack of mental illness. Thereafter, mental breakdowns came more frequently, and by 1811, the king was permanently insane. His son, the prince of Wales, now overweight, cross, and petulant, exercised the royal powers as regent.

By this time, a different Great Britain was emerging. The long wars with revolutionary and Napoleonic France, the Industrial Revolution, and the Romantic movement were transforming British life and thought. A new empire was arising in India and Australia to replace the thirteen rebellious colonies, lost long before. Old, blind, mad, and lonely, George III wandered the drafty halls of Windsor Castle, wearing a skull cap and dressing gown, sometimes playing the organ, sometimes living with memories of the past. His faithful queen, who died the year before he did, was fearful of him and lived apart. When he died in 1820, King George III was little more than a memory.

Significance

George III’s long struggle to maintain the independent role of the monarch was frustrated by the growth of cabinet government and the increasing power of Parliament. Pitt’s long tenure of power helped establish the role of the prime minister as the effective national leader. George III could not stop the evolution of the British constitution, and the practices that began in the reigns of George I and George II became generally accepted in the long reign of George III.

When the king did intervene in the political process, he was often stubborn and wrongheaded. His inexperience contributed to the political instability of his first decade. He undoubtedly prolonged the American war and paid a political price for it. He resisted movements for parliamentary reform, religious toleration, and abolition of the slave trade. He made the union of Great Britain and Ireland unworkable by refusing to concede political rights to Catholics. On the positive side, his determination to fight the power and ideology of revolutionary France served the national purpose by strengthening resistance to a dangerous foe.

As a symbol of the nation, the personal conduct of George III gave dignity to the Hanover Dynasty that previously, despite its merits, had not been popular with the British public. George III’s John Bullnationalism was shared by his people, and he won respect by his probity of conduct and concern for his family. Even his personal quirks, such as his jerky mode of speech and his homespun hobbies, struck a sympathetic chord. His profligate sons, who succeeded him as George IV and William IV, aroused disdain. His true successor was Queen Victoria, who continued to give the British monarchy dignity and respect.

Bibliography

Ayling, Stanley. George the Third. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1972. A well-written and informative biography.

Brooke, John. King George III. London: Constable, 1972. A well-written personal biography by a leading scholar of the period.

Hibbert, Christopher. George III: A Personal History. New York: Addison-Wesley, 1997. Hibbert refutes the popular conception that George III was a tyrant, madman, or unsophisticated rube. Instead, Hibbert maintains the king was a hardworking constitutional monarch, a patron of the arts and sciences, and a loving husband and father.

Macalpine, Ida, and Richard Hunter. George III and the Mad Business. London: Pimlico, 1991. George III has often been depicted as a raging lunatic, with serious mental problems. The authors, two psychiatrists, examined the king’s medical records and concluded he suffered from porphyria, a rare blood disease that was not properly treated and was responsible for his odd behavior.

Namier, Sir Lewis. The Structure of Politics at the Accession of George III. 2d ed. London: Macmillan, 1957. Seminal study of parliamentary politics in 1760.

Pares, Richard. King George III and the Politicians. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 1953. The best study of the political role of the king.

Plumb, J. H. The First Four Georges. Rev. ed. Boston: Little, Brown, 1975. Interesting, well-written chapters on the Hanover monarchs by the outstanding authority on the period. Profusely illustrated.

Reitan, E. A. George III: Tyrant or Constitutional Monarch? Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath, 1964. Introduction and selections illustrating historical interpretations of the character and purposes of King George III.

Watson, J. Steven. The Reign of George III, 1760-1815. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 1960. A good general overview of the period.