o_199m9vaui14ib1cnu10di10pocoj4h.pdf

RESPONSIBILITY FOR DELAY 91
fresh outbreak. If they had had any such idea they
would certainly have made it known to the Ministry, and
would not have made speeches that were so well calculated
to stir up discontent in the fleet. Obviously their
motive in asking for information was simply to provoke
a discussion which would benefit their party and discredit
the government.
The ministry had little reason to anticipate the second
mutiny, and it would be unjust to blame them because
they had not the gift of prophecy. 1 Moreover, if the Act
had been passed at an earlier date, the authors of the
disturbances might still have found other pretexts for
renewing the mutiny. 2 In all probability historians
would have found no fault with the government if the
Whigs had not set the example by making the second
mutiny an occasion for moving a vote of censure.
If any blame is to be assigned for the delay of the Act,
it must rest with the Lords of the Admiralty for their
lack of judgement, because they had information which
was not known to other people. They knew that the
seamen in the " total and final answer " of 22 April had
given warning that they would not put to sea until the
And this warning was confirmed by a
act was passed.
letter from a captain in Plymouth saying that the crews
which had mutinied there "would return to their duty
and wait the event of three or four days, by which time
they had no doubt of having that confirmation they
wished for,"—that is the Act of Parliament. 3 And Sir
John Orde added a note which ought to have aroused
1. Cf . Pitt's defence in the debate on the vote of censure :
" The
question before the House was, whether there were grounds to believe
that government ought to have been possessed of the opinion, that unless
they had used considerable dispatch, those consequences which had
since happened would have been produced" (Pari. Hist., xxxiii, 405).
2. This argument was used by Dundas :
" Was the right hon. gentleman
(Fox) certain that the same diabolical tongues would not have
invented some other story calculated to promote the confusion which
they desired?" (ibid., 515).
3. Captain Squire to Sir John Orde, 27 April, enclosed with Orde's
letter, B 305, A.S.I. 311.