On 19 December 1783, William Pitt the Younger accepted King George III’s invitation to form a government. At just 24 years of age, he became Britain’s youngest ever prime minister.

Pitt’s ascension was the result of a constitutional coup orchestrated by the king to unseat the Fox-North coalition. This short-lived alliance, formed between the radical Whig Charles James Fox and the former Tory prime minister Lord North, was detested by George III. He regarded it as “the most daring and unprincipled act that the annals of this kingdom ever produced”.

The coalition was led by the Duke of Portland as prime minister.

***

The immediate trigger for the coalition’s dismissal was the East India Bill, introduced by Fox to place the East India Company under government control. The proposed legislation would have vested the East India Company’s affairs in seven commissioners. Of these commissioners, four were supporters of Fox and two were supporters of North. The seventh was North’s son.

Pitt opposed the bill in the commons, delivering a famous speech addressing the bill itself and the curious nature of the Fox-North coalition. He spoke of his “astonishment” at the “extraordinary coincidence of sentiment and conduct of men, who were known to have acted and professed principles so diametrically opposite”.

He suggested that if one judged Fox by his past principles, one would have expected him “to reprobate, not to propose, the system he had just divulged.”

Pitt characterised the bill as “an entire abrogation of all the ancient charters and privileges by which the company had been first established”.

Pitt pointed out that the seven proposed commissioners were to be “under the immediate appointment of no other than the minister himself.” Fox would “virtually be the governor of India” if the bill passed, Pitt declared.

The speech is remembered for Pitt’s assault on the philosophical justification for the bill.

He declared: “It was true, the bill was said to be founded on necessity; but what was this? Was it not necessity, which had always been the plea of every illegal exertion of power, or exercise of oppression?

“Was not necessity the pretence of every usurpation?

“Necessity was the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It was the argument of tyrants: it was the creed of slaves.”

He concluded by characterising the bill as “one of the most bold and forward exertions of power that was ever adopted by ministers.”

Fox responded by accusing Pitt of following “the headlong course of ambition”.

The bill passed the commons, where the Fox-North coalition possessed a majority. But its passage was sabotaged in the House of Lords by the sovereign.

George III authorised Earl Temple (George Grenville) to inform peers that “whoever voted for the India Bill was not only not his friend, but would be considered by him as an enemy.” On 17 December, the bill was defeated in the Lords by 95 votes to 76. The king responded by dismissing the coalition, which could now be characterised as too weak to govern.

George III then sent for Pitt.

***

Pitt’s appointment was initially ridiculed by the political establishment. In the commons, it was reportedly met with “derisive laughter.”

The Whig hostess Frances Crewe, a devotee of Charles James Fox, famously dismissed the new government as a “mince-pie administration”.

She predicted that Pitt “may do what he likes during the holidays, but it will be a mince-pie administration, depend upon it.”

The Rolliad, a contemporary satirical pamphlet, wrote of the new premier: “A sight to make surrounding nations stare; / A kingdom trusted to a school-boy’s care.”

Three days into his tenure as prime minister, Pitt suffered the resignation of Earl Temple as secretary of state. Temple’s resignation, though the subject of some debate, is generally viewed in light of his controversial role in felling the Fox-North coalition.

It came after the commons passed a resolution which declared that the circulation of the opinion of the king “upon any bill or other proceeding depending in either House of Parliament, with a view to influence the votes of the members, is a high crime and misdemeanour… a breach of the fundamental privileges of parliament, and subversive of the constitution of this country.”

Temple’s was the shortest cabinet tenure until July 2022, when Michelle Donelan resigned as education secretary after two days. Temple’s resignation, however, put some distance between Pitt and the constitutional infringement that precipitated his succession.

Pitt faced a hostile House of Commons dominated by antagonistic and resentful opposition. In a debate beginning on 12 January 1784, Pitt was forced to defend himself against accusations that he had attained power through “secret influence” and “backstairs intrigue”.

The commons voted against his administration, resolving that the continuance of the Pitt ministry was “contrary to constitutional principles and injurious to the interests of His Majesty and his people”.

Over the coming months, Pitt faced further parliamentary defeats and Foxite attacks that he was no more than a royal puppet.

On 2 February, a motion of no confidence, tabled by Foxite MP Thomas Coke, was carried by 223 votes to 204. The motion stated that “the Continuance of the present Ministers in their Offices is an Obstacle to the Formation of such an Administration as may enjoy the Confidence of this House, and tend to put an End to the unfortunate Divisions and Distractions of the Country.”

On 1 March, a second motion calling for Pitt’s removal passed by 201 votes to 189. It proposed to “beseech His Majesty, that He would be graciously pleased to lay the Foundation of a strong and stable Government, by the previous Removal of His present Ministers”.

By 8 March, a motion that threatened the withholding of supply passed by just 191 votes to 190.

Pitt, however, refused to resign. The prime minister did not derive his political strength from the commons, but from the support of the monarch and public opinion. George III refused to hand power back to the Fox-North coalition; in the country, the government led by “Honest Billy” was much-preferred to its predecessor .

In March 1784, Pitt requested a dissolution of parliament. The subsequent general election was a landslide. The “Pittites” secured an overall majority of approximately 120 seats.

Pitt’s premiership, far from falling during the immediate festive period, endured for 17 years. This unbroken run is only bested in British history by the government led by Robert Walpole, Britain’s first prime minister, from 1721 to 1742.

***

Pitt’s tenure, which followed a series of short and unstable premierships, defined his political era.

He restored the nation’s finances following the American War of Independence; government revenue rose from £12.7 million in 1783 to £18.6 million in 1792. He reorganised the government of India through the India Act 1784, which established dual control by company administrators and the government. The constitution created by the act lasted, without any major revision, until 1858.

In 1785, Pitt’s attempt to legislate for some measure of parliamentary reform was defeated by 248 votes to 174. His motion would have abolished 36 “rotten boroughs” (comprising 72 parliamentary seats) and transferred this representation to more populous areas.

In 1786, Pitt ordered the creation of a penal colony in Australia.

Following the outbreak of war with Revolutionary France in 1793, Pitt introduced Britain’s first income tax. The revenue-raising measure, introduced in 1798, helped fund the war effort.

That same year, on 27 May, Pitt fought a duel on Putney Heath against George Tierney, a Whig opposition figure associated with Charles James Fox.

The clash arose after a commons debate on increasing Royal Navy manpower. When Tierney suggested delaying the bill to allow for longer consideration, Pitt accused him of a “desire to obstruct the defence of the country”. The prime minister refused to apologise.

On the heath, both men fired and missed; neither was injured.

Pitt wrote to his mother: “The business concluded without anything unpleasant to either Party”

At home, Pitt’s government moved to suppress political radicalism and perceived threats to domestic security.

The Aliens Act (1793) regulated immigration from revolutionary France, for fear of Jacobin infiltrators hiding among royalist refugees; Habeas Corpus was repeatedly suspended under the Habeas Corpus Suspension Acts; the Treasonable Practices Act and Seditious Meetings Act of 1795 – the ‘Two Acts’ – dramatically curtailed free speech and assembly; the Unlawful Oaths Act (1797) targeted secret societies; the Newspaper Publication Act (1798) tightened press controls.

Pitt also championed the Acts of Union 1800, which merged the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of Ireland into a single political entity “by the name of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland”. The measure was proposed as a security response to the 1798 Irish Rebellion and fears of French revolutionary influence.

But the Acts of Union also led to Pitt’s resignation as prime minister in March 1801. He stepped down after George III refused to accept Catholic Emancipation, the abolition of various political restrictions under which Irish Catholics suffered.

Pitt believed this measure was needed to ensure the success and stability of the Anglo-Irish union.

***

Pitt returned to power in May 1804 as the threat of a Napoleonic invasion loomed.

He was the architect of the Third Coalition against France, made up of Austria, Russia and Sweden.

Pitt’s government oversaw the Battle of Trafalgar in October 1805. The French victory at the Battle of Austerlitz (December 1805), however, was a severe setback. Upon seeing a map of Europe following Napoleon’s famous victory, Pitt reportedly remarked: “Roll up that map; it will not be wanted these ten years.”

Pitt had long been in poor health. He died on 23 January 1806, aged just 46.

He reportedly exclaimed on his deathbed: “Oh, my country! how I leave my country!”

There is also a long-standing disputed account that Pitt’s last words were actually: “I think I could eat one of Bellamy’s veal pies”.