disliked placing Melville
at the Admiralty, a strangely prophetic instinct. Camden and Mulgrave
were also misfits. Hawkesbury did better work at the Home Office than
the Foreign Office; but on the whole, the new arrangement aroused
widespread grumbling and distrust. The result of it all was the
dissolution of the great national party formed in the year 1794 and the
formation of three groups, following Pitt, Addington, and Grenville,
the Addingtonians showing much bitterness at the treatment of their
chief, while the Grenvilles and Windham inveighed against the new
Ministry, as formed on the principle of excluding Fox.[677] The charge
was unfair; for at that crisis Pitt could not stand by and see the
national resources frittered away by Addington. The King's Government
had to be carried on; and, like Wellington a generation later, Pitt
consented to do so in the only way which was practicable.

The limitations of his power were soon obvious. The two unfriendly
groups eagerly criticized him at all times and accorded grudging and
doubtful support even on measures which they approved. This was
especially the case with regard to the Abolition of the Slave Trade.
Thanks to the untiring exertions of Wilberforce, Clarkson, and others,
that movement had made considerable progress during the interval of
peace. The outbreak of war in May 1803 darkened the outlook; for once
again the cry was raised that England must not cut off a trade which was
essential to the welfare of the West Indies, highly lucrative to British
shipowners, and a necessary adjunct to the mercantile marine.
Nevertheless, the accession of Pitt to power and the goodwill of the
majority of the Irish members inspired Wilberforce with hope. True,
Addington always strenuously opposed him; and among the younger members
of the Cabinet Castlereagh had declared his hostility; but at first all
went well. At the close of May 1804 Pitt and Fox united in expressing
approval of Wilberforce's proposals. Addington, in remarks which lasted
exactly forty seconds, scouted the measure, but carried with him only 49
members as against 124. The majorities were nearly as great at the
second and third readings.

In the Lords the omens were inauspicious. Some bishops were away in
their dioceses: the supporters of the West India and shipping interests
were at hand, using their utmost endeavours to delay, if not to defeat,
the measure. Pitt despaired of thwarting these dilatory tactics, ba