Speech on Conciliation with America by Edmund Burke

A Brief Introduction to the Author and the Speech

A Short Biographical Sketch of the Author

Edmund Burke was born on New Year’s Day, 1729, in Dublin. Since Ireland and England were at that time one country, it was natural for him to pursue a literary and political career in London after graduating from Trinity College, Dublin, in 1748. An energetic campaigner and exceptional orator, Burke was first elected to the House of Commons in 1765, and thereafter was one of the leading British parliamentarians for nearly thirty years, finally retiring from Parliament only in 1794.

When Burke was born, Dublin then was rising toward the height of its prosperity and fame. Even though he was the son of a successful lawyer, connected with Irish county families, no one could have expected, in 1729, the eminence that this boy would attain. It was an age of aristocracy, which the Tory statesman and philosopher Bolingbroke hoped would be dominated by men of “aristocratic virtue” influenced by humane learning. Relatively obscure, the Burkes were provincial, and not rich.

Like many Irish couples of that time, the elder Burkes had entered into a ‘mixed marriage,’ Edmund’s father being a member of the Church of Ireland – an Anglican, – and his mother a Catholic. With his two brothers, Edmund was reared as an Anglican; while his sister, Juliana, brought up in the “old profession,” remained all her life an ardent Catholic. One of Burke’s chief endeavors in Parliament, half a century later, was to effect the amendment of the “Penal Laws” that weighed down Irish Catholics. Burke’s early career s hampered somewhat by the suspicion of the Whig Duke of Newcastle, and others, that the rising young man was a secret Papist, draped him in a Jesuit habit. or even a Jesuit in disguise and political caricaturists later sometimes draped him in a Jesuit habit.

Despite these impediments, Edmund Burke was to become the most interesting of British political philosophers, one of the greatest of modern rhetoricians, the principal intellectual leader of the Whig party, and the most formidable opponent of the French Revolution and of “armed doctrine” generally. He drew up, in the phrase of Harold Laski, “the permanent manual of political wisdom without which statesmen are as sailors on an uncharted sea.”

Burke became a public man. His private life is sufficiently obscure, for he labored incessantly as a practical politician. But, it is the public Burke who matters. He was a gifted man who by the power of intellect and remarkable diligence rose to distinction in his time. Burke’s public life shows us the process by which, through the experience of the world and through the life of the mind, an Irish writer and political partisan made of himself one of the wisest men ever to meditate upon the civil social order.

As a practical politician, Burke did not succeed conspicuously. During the larger part of his career, he stood among the opposition. In the hour of his death, 1797 – Burke beheld the triumph of his denunciations of the Revolution in France, but only a triumph of dubious battle. But, Burke was more than a party leader and a man of his time. As the champion of what T. S. Eliot called “the permanent things,” Burke did not fail, nor is he archaic. He is still relevant.

Burke’s political views defy modern categories. On the one hand, he is often claimed to be the father of modern conservatism because he vociferously opposed Jacobinism, and argued in favor of the merits of tradition and status in the maintenance of social order. On the other hand, he was a hero to radicals on a variety of issues. He was an early and controversial critic of slavery. He was amongst the most popular writers of America’s constitutional founders and condemned British policy in America before and during the War of Independence.

Speech on Conciliation with America: A Brief Introduction

Burke’s “Speech on Conciliation with America” has been acknowledged by historians and critics as a hallmark in the tradition of Western oratory. They applaud the speech for its wealth of imagery, political insight, and humanity. It has been widely appreciated throughout the world for its aesthetic qualities. In fact, the speech is a formal piece of oration with classical rhetoric, which was delivered in the House of Commons. In the speech, Burke makes a fierce and imperishable campaign against the policy of trying to coerce the American colonies and upholds his policy of compromise. His purpose is to establish peace.

Political Situation leading to the Speech

In 1651 originated the policy which caused the American Revolution. That policy was one of taxation, indirect, it is true, but nonetheless taxation. The first Navigation Act required that colonial exports should be shipped to England in American or English vessels. This was followed by a long series of acts, regulating and restricting American trade. Colonists were not allowed to exchange certain articles without paying duties thereon, and custom houses were established and officers appointed. Opposition to these proceedings was ineffectual; and in 1696, in order to expedite the business of taxation, and to establish a better method of ruling the colonies, a board was appointed, called the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations. The royal governors found in this board ready sympathizers and were not slow to report their grievances and to insist upon more stringent regulations for enforcing obedience. Some of the retaliative measures employed were the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, the abridgment of the freedom of the press, and the prohibition of elections. But then, colonists generally succeeded in having their own way in the end and were not wholly without encouragement and sympathy in the English Parliament. It may be that the war with France, which ended with the fall of Quebec, had much to do with this rather generous treatment. The Americans, too, were favored by the Whigs, who had been in power for more than seventy years. The policy of this great party was not opposed to the sentiments and ideas of political freedom that had grown up in the colonies; and, although more than half of the Navigation Acts were passed by Whig governments, the leaders had known how to wink at the violation of nearly all of them.

Immediately after the close of the French war, and after George III had ascended the throne of England, it was decided to enforce the Navigation Acts rigidly. There was to be no more smuggling, and, to prevent this, Writs of Assistance were issued. Armed with such authority, a servant of the King might enter the home of any citizen, and make a thorough search for smuggled goods. It is needless to say the measure was resisted vigorously, and its reception by the colonists, and its effect upon them, has been called the opening scene of the American Revolution. As a matter of fact, this sudden change in the attitude of England toward the colonies marks the beginning of the policy of George III, which, had it been successful, would have made him the ruler of an absolute instead of a limited monarchy. He hated the Tories only less than the Whigs, and when he bestowed favor upon either, it was for the purpose of weakening the other. The first task he set himself was that of crushing the Whigs. Since the Revolution of 1688, they had dictated the policy of the English government, and through wise leaders had become supreme in authority. They were particularly obnoxious to him because of their republican spirit, and he regarded their ascendancy as a constant menace to his kingly power. Fortune seemed to favor him in the dissensions which arose. There grew up two factions in the Whig party.

There were old Whigs and new Whigs. George played one against the other, advanced his favorites when the opportunity offered, and in the end, succeeded in forming a ministry composed of his friends and obedient to his will. With the ministry safely in hand, he turned his attention to the House of Commons. The old Whigs had set an example, which George was shrewd enough to follow. Walpole and Newcastle had succeeded in giving England one of the most peaceful and prosperous governments in the previous history of the nation, but their methods were corrupt. With much of the judgment, penetration, and wise forbearance which mark a statesman, Walpole’s distinctive qualities of mind eminently fitted him for political intrigue; Newcastle was still worse and has the distinction of being the premier under whose administration the revolt against official corruption first received the support of the public.

For nearly a hundred years, the territorial distribution of seats in the House had remained the same, while the centers of the population had shifted along with those of trade and new industries. Great towns were without representation, while boroughs, such as Old Sarum, without a single voter, still claimed, and had, a seat in Parliament. Such districts, or “rotten boroughs,” were owned and controlled by many of the great landowners. Both Walpole and Newcastle resorted to the outright purchase of these seats, and when the time came George did not shrink from doing the same thing. He went even further. All preferments of whatsoever sort was bestowed upon those who would do his bidding, and the business of bribery assumed such proportions that an office was opened at the Treasury for this purpose, from which twenty-five thousand pounds are said to have passed in a single day. Parliament had been for a long time only partially representative of the people; it now ceased to be so almost completely.

With, the support which such methods secured, along with encouragement from his ministers, the King was prepared to put into operation his policy for regulating the affairs of America. Writs of Assistance (1761) were followed by the passage of the Stamp Act (1765). The ostensible object of both these measures was to help pay the debt incurred by the French war, but the real purpose lay deeper, and was nothing more or less than the ultimate extension of parliamentary rule, in great things as well as small, to America. At this crisis, so momentous for the colonists, the Rockingham ministry was formed, and Burke, together with Pitt, supported a motion for the unconditional repeal of the Stamp Act. After much wrangling, the motion was carried, and the first blunder of the mother country seemed to have been smoothed over.

Only a few months elapsed, however, when the question of taxing the colonies was revived. Pitt lay ill and could take no part in the proposed measure. Through the influence of other members of his party,–notably Townshend,—a series of acts were passed, imposing duties on several exports to America. This was followed by a suspension of the New York Assembly because it disregarded instructions on the matter of supplies for the troops. The colonists were furious. Matters went from bad to worse. To withdraw as far as possible without yielding the principle at stake, the duties on all the exports mentioned in the bill were removed, except that on tea. But it was precisely the principle for which the colonists were contending. They were not in the humor for compromise, when they believed their freedom was endangered, and the strength and determination of their resistance found a climax in the Boston Tea Party.

In the meantime, Lord North, who was absolutely obedient to the King, had become prime minister. Five bills were prepared, the tenor of which, it was thought, would overawe the colonists. Of these, the Boston Port Bill and the Regulating Act are perhaps the most famous, though the ultimate tendency of all was blindly coercive.

While the King and his friends were busy with these, the opposition proposed an unconditional repeal of the Tea Act. The bill was introduced only to be overwhelmingly defeated by the same Parliament that passed the five measures of Lord North.

In America, the effect of these proceedings was such as might have been expected by thinking men. The colonies were as a unit in defiance, public officers in the king’s service were forced to resign, in support of Massachusetts. The Regulating Act was set at defiance, public officers in the king’s service were forced to resign, town meetings were held, and preparations for war were begun in dead earnest. To avert this, some of England’s greatest statesmen- Pitt among the number–asked for a reconsideration. On February the first, 1775, a bill was introduced, which would have gone far toward bringing peace. One month later, Burke delivered his speech on Conciliation with the Colonies.

Subject-matter of the Speech

Burke was an active member of Dr. Johnson’s literary club and almost all his speeches or writings are concerned with contemporary political situations or issues. His “Speech on Conciliation with America” is not an exception. It is a very fervent and sincere appeal to the members of the Parliament to be just and generous towards America. In the speech, he puts forward his plea and arguments for conciliation with the American people. America is an opulent colony and it would be too costly to lose such a wealthy colony. He prefers the policy of compromise and conciliation to force and coercion because “Nothing less will content me than whole America.” In this speech, Burke puts forward his justification for putting forward his resolutions of peace in the House of Commons. He makes a detailed analysis of the American colony and its population, its agriculture, commerce, and fisheries, which is based on facts and figures drawn from various sources. He is in favor of conciliation and against the use of force. He is in favor of the wise management of America.

Structure of the Speech

Burke’s speeches are the outcome of his superior knowledge and political sensibility. As an orator, he always moves with a plan. In the construction of his speeches, he strictly abides by classical principles. The plan and design are architectural. Structurally the speech may be divided into several parts. Burke has very carefully designed his speech and his move from one part to another is logical and planned. In the first part of the speech, Burke introduces the subject to his audience. He also puts forward his proposal of peace. After that, the speech progresses through three phases: an ostensibly objective review of America and the facts of her condition; an argument for restoring colonial loyalty through self-taxation; and a defense of the resolutions as the best course of future action. In the next part, Burke discusses the different methods of dealing with the discontent American people and shows that a policy of conciliation is the only solution. In the final part, Burke enumerates his proposals and resolutions, which he considers the best courses of future action. He enunciates his six fundamental resolutions, which he labels as resolutions of facts, and three corollary resolutions, which in his opinion, are resolutions of policy. He criticizes Lord North’s scheme and exposes its defects; makes a comparison between Lord North’s scheme and his own scheme and shows the superiority of his scheme. Burke concludes the speech by making a stirring appeal. Burke appeals to the parliamentarians by wishing that England elevates herself to the greatness of the trust that Providence has placed in her hands and extend to American English privileges and thus lay the foundation of lasting peace.

Burke’s Prose style in the Speech

Burke’s speeches are specimens of the great orations of a great rhetorician. His prose style is characterized by the extensive but natural use of rhetorical devices and figures. His language is rich and florid, ornate, and passionate. The language in which Burke speaks in the speech is vibrant and rich. Burke’s imagination is so rich that at times it appears that a poet is speaking in prose. He makes abundant use of poetic devices. His metaphors are brilliant; his imageries are fanciful and pleasing. As an orator, Burke adorns his speeches with rhetorical devices. He makes abundant but effective uses of the great devices of irony and sarcasm. In the speech, his prose is marked by alteration of periods and short sentences. The interplay between long and short sentences relieves the audience from the monotony of the deliberation. But, Burke’s style is not flawless; it has defects. He is not sweet in the ordinary sense. He is not even easy. There is little humor in his prose. He is at times pungent and even bitterly ironic.

In the “Speech on Conciliation with America,” Burke adopts the policy of compromise because he fully estimates the strength of the colonies and also the difficulty to govern those freedom-loving people from a great distance. He tries his best to stop the Government from driving the American colonies into rebellion. Unfortunately, the House turns a deaf ear to the appeal of this great the War of Independence, and a rapture between two English politicians. The results are not sweet for England – Britain’s defeat in speaking peoples. The subsequent historical happenings culminating in the independence of America show bitterly how right Burke was.