Page images
PDF
EPUB

112

Negotiations for peace

[1667

of Commons proceeded to claim the control of the finances of the State. Already in 1665, when the House voted the additional aid of £1,250,000, a proviso had been introduced into the Bill requiring that the money raised should be applicable only to the purposes of the war. But now, besides the right of appropriating supplies, it claimed the right of examining into their expenditure, and sent up a Bill nominating commissioners to inspect the public accounts. The King opposed it as an encroachment on his prerogative, and the House of Lords backed him. In the end, Parliament was prorogued before the Bill was perfected (February 8, 1667), and Charles, at the suggestion of the Lords, appointed commissioners of his own choice to carry out the proposed examination (March, 1667). With insufficient supplies and with a quarrel with the Commons on his hands, the King was left to face the difficulties of the next year's war.

In this extremity the King's Council adopted a plan full of peril. It was resolved to stand entirely upon the defensive; to lay up the great ships, and to send nothing but squadrons of light frigates to sea during the next year; to suffer the sailors who should have manned the fleet to take service on board merchantmen; to fortify Sheerness and other places in order to protect the ships in the river. No other course seemed open: there was no money in hand either to repair the ships, or victual them, or pay their crews. To the King and his political advisers it seemed a safe and economical way out of their difficulties. Peace seemed close at hand. Overtures had been made by the Dutch in the latter part of 1666, and in the spring of 1667 Charles had three negotiations on foot. There was a public one through the Swedish mediators, which ended on March 18, with an agreement for a general treaty to take place at Breda. There was a secret attempt set on foot by Lisola, the Imperial ambassador, to bring England and Holland to terms, in order that both might league themselves with the House of Habsburg for the defence of the Spanish Netherlands. Finally, through St Albans and the Queen-Mother, Charles was privately treating with France on the basis of the restora tion of the French conquests in the West Indies, in return for the complicity of England in the attack on the Netherlands. In April the two Kings concluded their bargain, and in May the French army invaded Flanders.

In the same month the negotiations at Breda began. It was agreed that both England and Holland should keep their conquests; and after Charles had at last abandoned the demand for the restoration of Pularoon nothing but minor questions remained to be settled. Over these questions the English envoys at Breda, Holles, and Coventry, haggled and delayed. The King felt secure. Now that he had agreed with France the Dutch would be obliged to come to his terms; and either Louis would prevent the Dutch fleet from putting to sea, or the preparations made would be sufficient to repel them. On the other hand the Dutch, who

1660-7]

Parliament and the army

113

had refused to agree to a cessation of arms, were eager for peace, and their eagerness was increased by the French invasion of the Netherlands. De Witt resolved, by a sudden and decisive blow, to prevent the prolongation of the negotiations, and enforce the conclusion of peace. The appearance of de Ruyter's fleet in the Thames, and the burning of the ships in the Medway on June 13, were the result not only of a strategic blunder but of diplomatic incompetence. The story of the disaster itself is told in a later chapter. Peace was signed at Breda six weeks later on the terms which the Dutch had offered in May (July 31, 1667). Charles had made up his mind to accept them before the Dutch fleet sailed, and de Witt with wise moderation did not attempt to raise his demands.

In England public feeling, exasperated by the national disgrace, demanded satisfaction. Men said in private that Clarendon and Arlington, who were responsible for the King's foreign policy, with Sir George Carteret and Sir William Coventry, who were responsible for the administration of the navy, were to be sacrificed. Nothing but some concession to the Nonconformists would put an end to domestic discontents; there must be a severe inquisition into the late miscarriages, and Parliament must take the whole management of affairs into its own hands. When Parliament met the first demand made was for the disbanding of the newly raised forces (July 15); for the fear of a standing army had become one of the dominant instincts of all English politicians. When the Cromwellian army was disbanded the intention was to leave Charles II with no forces but his guards and a few companies scattered through various garrisons. But Venner's rising in January, 1661, showed the need for more troops, and Monck's regiment was continued in arms under the name of the Coldstream Guards. The withdrawal of the garrison of Dunkirk added a second battalion to the King's own regiment, so that by 1663 Charles had a standing force of about 3400 foot and 1000 horse, quite apart from the troops in Scotland and Ireland and the garrison of Tangier. Each addition had excited the jealousy of Parliament, and the war caused a further increase. Three regiments of foot and 23 troops of horse were added during 1665 and 1666, while in June, 1667, 12,000 more foot and 2400 horse were raised to resist the threatened Dutch landing. Charles had over 20,000 armed men at his disposal, and it was freely reported that he meant to rule by a standing army, and to assimilate the government of England to that of France. Public opinion regarded the Duke of York as the man who had pressed this design upon the King, and Clarendon as his tool. There was some colour for the charge against the Chancellor. At the end of June, 1667, he had combated the proposal to summon Parliament, and had urged a dissolution and the calling of a new Parliament in the autumn. In Council he had advised that the newly raised forces should be supported by levying contributions on the counties in money or in

C. M. H. V.

8

112

a

ral

besi

exam.

mission
encroach.

In the en
(February
appointed co
examination
quarrel with t
the difficulties o

In this extrem
was resolved to st.
ships, and to send 1.
the next year; to sub
take service on board .

[ocr errors]

To

in order to protect the s there was no money in 1 or pay their crews. safe and economical way of hand. Overtures had bee 1666, and in the spring of 1 There was a public one throu March 18, with an agreement : There was a secret attempt se. sador, to bring England and Ho league themselves with the Hou Spanish Netherlands. Finally, th Charles was privately treating wi tion of the French conquests in the plicity of England in the attack on Kings concluded their bargain, an Flanders.

In the same month the negotia: that both England and Holland s Charles had at last abandoned the nothing but minor questions rer tions the English envoys at Brec delayed. The King felt secure. the Dutch would be obliged to con prevent the Dutch fleet from put would be sufficient to repel th

[graphic]
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][ocr errors][graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][merged small][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed]

114

The fall of Clarendon

[1667

provisions, so long as the present emergency lasted. The belief that Clarendon sought to alter the Constitution was without foundation; yet, since his constitutional ideas were incompatible with the claim which Parliament now made, its leaders were right in regarding him as their enemy. Appropriation of supplies, audit of accounts, control of the armed forces of the nation, all appeared to him encroachments which the King must resist to the last.

Clarendon was likewise regarded as the inspirer of the King's foreign policy, though in reality he was merely its instrument. English opinion attributed the Chatham disaster as much to French intrigue as Dutch arms, watched with rising hostility the progress of the French in the Netherlands, and blamed the Minister for subserviency to France. The ambassadors of Austria and Spain fanned the flame, and sought to overthrow one whom they regarded as the creature of Louis XIV. Had the Commons sat a day longer an address in favour of a league with the House of Habsburg and a war with France would have been presented to the King.

For the moment the sudden prorogation of Parliament (July 29) saved Clarendon from direct attack; but it still more embittered parliamentary feeling against him, because it seemed a personal insult to the members. It did not diminish the King's difficulties. Charles was obliged to disband the newly raised forces because the conclusion of peace left him no excuse for maintaining them. He was obliged to dismiss Clarendon because his retention would make peace at home impossible, and on August 30 the Chancellor, by the King's order, gave up the Great Seal. Clarendon, in his autobiography, attributes his fall to personal reasons. He had been too bold with his master; he had told him plainly that he had no prerogative to make vice virtue; the courtiers and the mistress had poisoned the King's ears; this phrase had been misconstrued and that act intentionally misrepresented. But the real reason lay much deeper. It was true that the King had outlived any personal attachment to his Minister, but he also perceived that the situation demanded Ministers who possessed the confidence of Parliament. It was not possible, he told Ormond, to keep Clarendon, "and to do those things with the Parliament that must be done or the government will be lost." Clarendon did not realise this. "Parliaments," he told Charles in his last interview, "were not formidable unless the King chose to make them so; it was yet in his own power to govern them, but if they found it was in theirs to govern him, nobody knew what the end would be." Nobody knew better than the King that the first half of the sentence was a fundamental misconception; as to the second, Charles felt that it was easier to out-manœuvre Parliament than to fight it. In the seven years which had passed since he re-entered London statecraft had come to mean not the steady pursuit of a well-considered policy, but the art of managing Parliament. And more and more Parliament signified the House of

« PreviousContinue »