William Pitt the Younger [Hardcover]

There was something astonishingly particular about Pitt the Younger. The second son of the Earl of Chatman (Pitt the Elder) was a child prodigy. He was admitted to Cambridge at age 14, elected to Parliament at age 21 and appointed Prime Minister at age 24. Twenty-two years later, of which twenty were spent as Prime Minister, Pitt died at age 46.

William Hague was something of a prodigy himself. He gave his first major political address at a Conservative Party Conference in 1977 at age 16. Hague was elected to Parliament at age 28 and became the Tory party leader at age 36, the youngest party leader in 200 years. Hague's rhetorical skills, like Pitt the Younger, are excellent. Some observers (not all of them Conservatives) believed that Hague regularly bested Labour P.M. Tony Blair in debates in the House of Commons. After losing the 2001 general election and the leadership of his party Hague was asked to write his Memoirs. He indicated that an autobiography was approximately 40 years premature and sat down to write the biography of his idol Pitt the Younger instead.

Hague has done an excellent job here. Although meticulously researched this is a readable, popular biography. Hague's prose style is precise and flows very smoothly.

Hague quickly takes us through Pitts early years and the events surrounding his first election to Parliament. His impact on Parliament was soon felt and within two years King George III twice asked Pitt to form a new government. It was only when Pitt was certain that he could maintain control of a new government that Pitt accepted the King's offer when it was made for the third time.

The first nine years of Pitt's leadership were turbulent but peaceful and it was as a peacetime leader that Pitt demonstrated enormous administrative skills. Pitt virtually created the mechanism by which any government oversees its finances. By the end of that nine-year period Britain's financial position was better than it had ever been before. It was this financial strength that facilitated Britain's survival during the three crises that marked the remaining years of Pitt's time in office: the madness of King George III, the foreign and domestic trials created by the French Revolution and the even greater trials created in the wake of the rise to power of Napoleon Bonaparte.

Hague's narrative style is straight forward and informative as he discusses Pitt's response to these crises. The complexity of the parliamentary and political system of 18th century Britain was Byzantine to say the least. However, Hague, because of his experience in Parliament, was able to explain those complexities without detracting from his narrative. This is no small accomplishment.

One of the most important aspects of the book for me was the discussion of the relationship between Pitt and his major adversary during his entire premiership, Charles James Fox. Hague's discussion of that relationship made Fox quite appealing in many respects. As Pitt steered Britain from crisis to crisis he turned increasingly to repressive measures (squashing free speech, toughening sedition laws and limiting the right to free assembly) to ensure Britain's security from perceived external threats to its security. The largest threat of course was that of the anti-monarchical forces unleashed by the French Revolution. Throughout Fox's years as the leader of the opposition he fought Pitt's repressive legislation every step of the way. Fox stood squarely on the side of free speech and was opposed to attempts to sacrifice his fellow citizens' freedoms on the mere declamation of a threat to security. He kept losing those battles but he did fight the good fight.

The battle over the balance between freedom and security is one that confronts us today. Hague's concluding analysis discusses this issue at some length. He is of course favorable to Pitt and defends him admirably. It takes nothing away from the quality of Hague's writing to note that I fell more squarely into the Fox camp.

Hague pays a good deal of attention to Pitt's personal life, particularly his drinking. He was reported to have downed three bottles of Port a day. There is little doubt that this undoubted alcoholism played a role in Pitt's early death. Hague also spends time discussing the lack of women in Pitt's life. He does not shy away from the issue and analyzes in some detail the close relationship he had with his male colleagues. I felt Hague's conclusions, that Pitt was one of those rare totally chaste people whose entire life was focused on one thing and one thing only, to be well founded if a bit speculative.

Hague has indicated that he intended and expected this book to be a popular history that could be enjoyed by any reader. This book lived up to Hague's expectations and also to mine. I recommend this book to anyone with any interest in British history. It is enjoyable and well worth reading. Read more ›

Pitt spent most of his life as Prime Minister, a remarkable feat even for the time. He initially presided over a peace dividend, but half way through his first term as Prime Minister entered war against France, leaving his financial legacy somewhat more ambiguous, though he certainly prevented the country from being invaded by the French.

Hague makes the political manoeuvrings interesting, and the section of his relationship with Addington when the latter was Prime Minister is particularly engrossing. The analysis he renders of Pitt's actions seems sounds, and Hague's telling is straightforward account - there are no massive revelations here, nor is it a revisionist history in any way.

He also makes the period seem suitably interesting when describing events and social conventions of the time. Obviously it was a completely different time, but it is easy to forget and a number of the points were jaw-dropping.

There are a number of flaws in this book. There is often little analysis of his motives, though decision he made during the war with French are better looked at that occurs in the first half of the book. Hague also fails to get to grip properly with Pitt as a person, though again he is better at some points, for example on his speculated homosexuality, than others. The writing is also slightly repetitive, though his editors can be considered equally at fault for these small points.

More worryingly, perhaps, is Hague's refusal to engage in his own past to offer insight. Jenkin's strength as a biographer was insights into politics resulting from his sheer volume of experience. Hague has always struck me as a shrewd operator, yet fails to add any personal colour into it the mix. If he is to grow in stature as a biographer, this is something he may want to tackle.

As a book Pitt is an enjoyable romp through the times with much fascinating detail added about the times in which he lived. As a writer, Hague just needs to add a little polish and he will be capable of becoming a respected biographer. However, as a first book this is a splendid achievement and well worth reading. Read more ›