Page images
PDF
EPUB

partisans. The four members for the city of London, in particular, were followed by large companies, wearing in their hats ribands, in which were woven the blood-stirring words, No Popery! No Slavery! The king also made a show of his strength. He entered Oxford in great pomp. His guards were regularly mustered; his party collected their force; and all things, on both sides, wore more the appearance of hostile opposition, than of civil deliberation or debate.(1)

Charles, who had hitherto addressed his parliaments in the most soothing language, on this occasion assumed a more authoritative tone. He reproached the former house of commons with obstinacy, in rejecting his proffered limitations he expressed a hope of finding a better temper in the present; and he assured both houses, that, as he should use no arbitrary government himself, he was resolved not to suffer tyranny in others.(2) The commons were not overawed by this appearance of vigour. As they consisted chiefly of the same members that sat in the last parliament, they chose the same speaker, and discovered the same violence as formerly. They revived the impeachment of Danby, the inquiry into the popish plot, and the bill of exclusion. The king, who was offended at the absurd bigotry of his brother, and willing to agree to any measure that might gain the commons without breaking the line of succession, permitted one of his ministers to propose, that the duke of York should be banished, during life, five hundred miles from England, Scotland, and Ireland; and that, on the king's decease, the next heir, namely, the princess of Orange, should be constituted regent, with regal power. This, as lord Bolingbroke humorously observes, was surely not to vote the lion in the lobby into the house: it would have been to vote him out of the house and lobby both, and only suffer him to be called lion still.(3) But the past disappointments of the popular party, and the opposition made by the court, had soured their temper to such a degree, that no method of excluding the duke, but their own, could give them satisfaction. The king's proposal was, therefore, rejected with disdain; and Charles, thinking he had now a sufficient apology for adopting that measure, which he had foreseen would become necessary, went privately to the house of peers, and dissolved the parliament. (4)

A sudden clap of thunder could not more have astonished the popular party, than did this bold step. Prepared for no other but parliamentary resistance, they gave all their towering hopes at once to the wind; and the great bulwark of opposition, which they had been so long employed in raising, quickly vanished into air. They were made sensible, though too late, that they had mistaken the temporizing policy of Charles for timidity, and his love of ease for want of vigour. They found, that he had patiently waited until things should come to a crisis; and that, having procured a national majority on his side, he had set his enemies at defiance. No parliament, they knew, would be summoned for some years; and, during that dangerous interval, they foresaw that the court would have every advantage over a body of men dispersed and disunited. Their spirit left them with their good fortune: fears for themselves succeeded to their violence against the crown. They were apprehensive that a prince, whom they had offended and distressed, would use his victory with rigour. And they were not deceived.

From this time forward, the king became more severe in his temper, and jealous in his disposition. He immediately concluded a secret money-treaty with France, in order to enable him to govern without parliamentary sup plies ;(5) and he published a declaration, in vindication of his late violent measure. That declaration was ordered to be read in all the churches and chapels in England: the eloquence of the clergy seconded the arguments of the monarch: addresses, full of expressions of duty and loyalty, were sent to him from all the legal societies in the kingdom; and the people in general seemed to congratulate their sovereign on his happy escape from parlia

(1) Kennet, vol. iii. James II. 1681.

Dissertation on Parties, Letter vii.
Dalrymple's Append. James II. 1681,

(2) Journals of the Lords, March 21, 1681. (4) Burnet, vol. ii.

ments!(1) The doctrines of passive obedience and non-résistance were revived; and the bench and the pulpit seemed to contend with each other, which could show most zeal for unlimited power in the crown.

This was a strange and sudden revolution in the sentiments of the nation: yet, had the king pushed his victory no farther; had he been contented to enjoy his triumph without violence or injustice, his past conduct might have admitted of some apology, and the abettors of the prerogative might have awakened resentment without kindling indignation. But Charles was unfortunately at the head of a faction, who seemed to think that the hour of retaliation was come; and as he had formerly temporized to quiet his enemies, he now judged it necessary to give way to the vehemence of his friends. In order to gratify the established clergy, a severe prosecution was commenced against the presbyterians, and other Protestant sectaries who had been the chief support of the exclusionists in the house of commons: and the whole gang of spies, informers, and false witnesses, who had been retained by the popular party in order to establish the reality of the popish plot, and whose perjuries had proved fatal to so many Catholics, were now enlisted by the court, and played off as an engine against their former patrons. The royalists, to use the expression of a nervous writer, thought their opponents so much covered with guilt, that injustice itself became just in their punishment.(2)

Every other species of retaliation but this, my dear Philip, may perhaps be vindicated, or admit of some excuse. Let force revenge the violences committed by force: let blood stream for blood; let the pillage of one party repay the depredations of another; let the persecuted, in their turn, become persecutors, and the fagot mutually flame for the purgation of martyrs:-these are but temporary evils, and may soon be forgot; but let not the fountain of justice be poisoned in its source, and the laws, intended to protect mankind, become instruments of destruction. This is the greatest calamity that can befall a nation, famine and pestilence not excepted: and may be considered as the last stage of political degeneracy.

In those times of general corruption and abject servility, when all men seemed ready to prostrate themselves at the foot of the throne, the citizens of London still retained their bold spirit of liberty and independency. The grand jury had judiciously rejected an indictment against the earl of Shaftesbury, on account of the improbability of the circumstances, after perjury had gone its utmost length. Enraged at this disappointment, the court endeavoured to influence the election of the magistrates, and succeeded; but as that contest, it was perceived, might be to renew every year, something more decisive was resolved upon. A writ of Quo Warranto was accordingly issued against the city: that is, an inquiry into the validity of a corporation charter, which is presumed to be defective, or to have been forfeited by some offence to be proved in the course of suit. And although the cause of the city was powerfully defended, and the offences pleaded against it of the most. frivolous kind, judgment was given in favour of the crown.(3) The aldermen and common-council, in humble supplication, waited upon the king; and Charles, who had now obtained his end, agreed to restore their charter, but on such terms as would put the proud capital entirely in his power. He reserved to himself the approbation of the principal magistrates; with this special proviso, that should his majesty twice disapprove of the lord-mayor or sheriffs elected, he might, by his own commission, appoint others in their

room.

Filled with consternation at the fate of London, and convinced how ineffectual a contest with the court would prove, most of the other corporations in

(6) This remarkable change, as Burnet very judiciously observes, shows how little dependence can be placed on popular humours, which "have their ebbings and their flowings, their hot and cold fits, almost as certainly as seas or fevers." Hist. of his Own Times, vol. ii.

(2) Macpherson, Hist. Brit. chap. vi.

(3) Soon after the revolution, this judgment was reversed by act of parliament; and it was at the same time enacted, that the privileges of the city of London shall never be forfeited by any delinquency whatever in the members of the corporation. Stat 2 Will. and Mary.

England surrendered their charters into the king's hands, and paid large sums for such new ones as he was pleased to frame. By these means a fatal stab was given to the constitution. The nomination of all the civil magistrates, with the disposal of all offices of power or profit, in every corporation in the kingdom, was in a manner vested in the crown; and as more than three-fourths of the house of commons are chosen by the boroughs, the court was made sure of an undisputed majority. A perfect despotism was established.

In such times, when it was become dangerous even to complain, resistance might be imprudent; but no attempt for the recovery of legal liberty could be criminal in men who had been born free. A project of this kind had for some time been entertained by a set of determined men, among whom were some of the heads of the country party, though various causes had hitherto prevented it from being brought to maturity; particularly the impeachment of the earl of Shaftesbury, the framer of the plot, and his unexpected departure for Holland, where he soon after died. But the zeal of the conspirators, which had begun to languish, was rekindled by the seizure of the corporation charters, and a regular plan for an insurrection was formed. This business was committed to a council of six; the members of which were, the duke of Monmouth, the king's natural son, lord Russell, son of the earl of Bedford, the earl of Essex, lord Howard, the famous Algernon Sidney, and John Hampden, grandson of the illustrious patriot of that name.

These men had concerted an insurrection in the city of London, where their influence was great; in Scotland, by an agreement with the earl of Argyle, who engaged to bring the covenanters into the field; and in the west of England, by the assistance of the friends of liberty in that quarter. They had even taken measures for surprising the king's guards, though without any design of hurting his person; the exclusion of the duke of York, and the redress of grievances, which they had found could not be obtained in a parliamentary way, being all they proposed by rising in arms. Sidney and Essex, indeed, are said to have embraced the idea of a republic; but Russell and Hampden, the more moderate and popular conspirators, had no views but the restoration of the broken constitution of their country, and the securing of the civil and religious liberties of the nation.

While these important objects were in contemplation, but before any blow had been struck, or even the time fixed for such a purpose, the patriotic conspirators were betrayed by one of their associates, named Rumsey. Lord Howard, a man of no principle, and in needy circumstances, also became evidence for the crown, in hopes of pardon and reward. Others of less note followed the infamous example. On their combined evidence several of the conspirators were seized, condemned, and executed. Among these, the most distinguished were Russell and Sidney. Both died with the intrepidity of men who had resolved to hazard their lives in the field, in order to break the fetters of slavery, and rescue themselves and their fellow-subjects from an ignominious despotism.(1) Monmouth, who had absconded, surrendered on a promise of pardon; Essex put an end to his life in the tower; and sufficient proof not being found against Hampden to make his crime capital, he was loaded with an exorbitant fine; which, as it was beyond his ability to pay, was equivalent to the sentence of perpetual imprisonment.(2)

(1) Lord Grey's Hist. of the Rye-house Plot. State Trials, vol. iii. Law, if not justice, was violated, in order to procure the condemnation of Sidney, whose talents the king feared. Russell's popularity proved no less fatal to him. He was universally adored by the nation, and therefore a necessary victim in such times. Charles accordingly resisted every attempt to save him; for he scorned, on his trial, to deny his share in the concerted insurrection. In vain did lady Russell, the daughter of the loyal and virtuous Southampton, throw herself at the royal feet, and crave mercy for her husband; in vain did the earl of Bedford offer a hundred thousand pounds, through the mediation of the all-prevailing dutchess of Portsmouth, for the life of his son. The king was inexorable. And in order to put a stop to all farther importunity, he said, in reply to the earl of Dartmouth, one of his favourite courtiers, and lord Russell's declared enemy, but who yet advised a pardon-"I must have his life, or he will have mine!" (Dalrym ple's Append. and Mem. part i.) "My death," said Russell, with a consolatory prescience, when he found his fate was inevitable, "will be of more service to my country than my life could have been!" Id. ibid. (2) Burnet, vol. ii. The severity of Charles, in punishing these over-zealous friends of freedom, seems to have been intended to strike terror into the whole "opular party; and unfortunately for the criminals,

The defeating of this conspiracy, known by the name of the Rye-house Plot, contributed still farther to strengthen the hands of government, already too strong. The king was universally congratulated on his escape; new addresses were presented to him; and the doctrine of implicit submission to the civil magistrate, or an unlimited passive obedience, was more openly taught. The heads of the university of Oxford, under pretence of condemning certain doctrines, which they denominated republican, went even so far as to pass a solemn decree in favour of absolute monarchy. The persecution was renewed against the Protestant sectaries, and all the most zealous friends of freedom, who were persecuted with the utmost severity. The perversion of justice was carried to a still greater excess by the court; and the duke of York was recalled from Scotland, and restored to the office of high admiral, without taking the test.

This violation of an express act of parliament could not fail to give offence to the more discerning part of the nation; but the duke's arbitrary counsels, and the great favour and indulgence shown to the Catholics, through his influence, were more general causes of complaint. He indeed held entirely the reins of government, and left the king to pursue his favourite amusements; to loiter with his mistresses, and laugh with his courtiers. Hence the celebrated saying of Waller:-"The king is not only desirous that the duke should succeed him, but is resolved, out of spite to his parliament, to make him reign even in his lifetime.”

Apprehensive, however, of new conspiracies, or secretly struck with the iniquity of his administration, Charles is said seriously to have projected a change of measures. He was frequently overheard to remonstrate warmly with his brother; and on finding him obstinate in his violent counsels, he resolved once more to banish him the court, to call a parliament, and throw himself wholly on the affections of his people. While resolving this idea, he was seized with a fit, resembling an apoplexy; which, after an interval of reason, carried him off in the fifty-fifth year of his age, and not without suspicions of poison.(1) These suspicions fell not on the duke of York, but on some of the dutchess of Portsmouth's Roman Catholic servants; who are supposed to have been worked upon by her confessor, to whom she had communicated the king's intentions, or by those her confessor had trusted with the secret.(2)

The great lines of Charles's character I have already had occasion to delineate. As a prince, he was void of ambition, and destitute of a proper sense of his dignity, in relation to foreign politics. In regard to domestic politics, he was able and artful, but mean and disingenuous. As a husband he was unfaithful, and neglectful of the queen's person, as well as of the respect due to her character. As a gentleman and companion, he was elegant, easy, gay, and facetious; but having little sensibility of heart, and a very bad opinion of human nature, he appears to have been incapable of friendship or gratitude. As a lover, however, he was generous, and seemingly even affectionate. He recommended, with his latest breath, the dutchess of Portsmouth, whom he had loaded with benefits, and her son, the duke of Richmond, to his brother: and he earnestly requested him not to let poor Nell starve !(3) This was Nell Gwyn, whom the king had formerly taken from the stage; and who, though no longer regarded as a mistress, had still served to amuse him in a vacant hour.(4) So warm an attachment, in his last moments, to the objects of an unlawful passion, has been regarded, by a great divine and popular historian, as a blemish in the character of Charles. But the philosopher judges differently: he is glad to find, that so profligate a prince was capable of any sincere attachment; and considers even this sympathy with the

a conspiracy of an inferior kind, which aimed at the king's life, being discovered at the same time, afforded him too good a pretext for his rigour. The assassination plot was confounded, on all the trials, with that for an insurrection.

(2) Id. ibid.

(3) Burnet, ubi sup.

(1) Burnet, vol. ii. (4) It may seem somewhat unaccountable that Charles, after so long an acquaintance, should have left Nell in such a necessitous condition, as to be in danger of starving. But this request must only be considered as a solicitous expression of tenderness.

objects of sensuality, when the illusions of sense could no longer deceive, as an honour to his memory.

The religion of Charles, and his receiving the sacrament, on his death-bed, from Huddleston, a popish priest, while he refused it from the divines of the church of England, and disregarded their exhortations, have also afforded matter of reproach and altercation. But if the king was really a Roman Catholic, as is generally believed, and as I have ventured to affirm on respectable authorities,(1) he could neither be blamed for concealing his religion from his subjects, nor for dying in that faith which he had embraced. If, as others contend, he was not a Catholic, his brother took a very extraordinary step, in making him die in the Romish communion. But if he was so weak, when Huddleston was introduced to him by the duke of York, as to be unable to refuse compliance; if he agreed to receive the sacrament from the divines of the church of England, but had not power to swallow the elements ;(2) these circumstances prove nothing but his own feeble condition, and the blind bigotry of his brother. The truth, however, seems to be, that Charles, while in high health, was of no particular religion; but that, having been early initiated in the Catholic faith, he always fled to the altar of superstition when his spirits were low, or when his life was thought in danger.

We must now, my dear Philip, return to the line of general history, and examine the farther progress of the ambition of Lewis XIV., before we carry lower the affairs of England.

LETTER XV.

A general View of the Affairs on the Continent, from the Peace of Nimeguen, în 1678, to the League of Augsburg, in 1687.

THE peace of Nimeguen, as might have been foreseen by the allies, instead of setting bounds to the ambition of Lewis XIV., only left him leisure to perfect that scheme of universal monarchy, or absolute sovereignty, in Europe at least, into which he was flattered by his poets and orators; and which, at length, roused a new and more powerful confederacy against him. While the empire, Spain, and Holland disbanded their supernumerary troops, Lewis still kept up all his: in the midst of profound peace, he maintained a formidable army, and acted as if he had been already the sole sovereign in Europe, and all other princes but his vassals. He established judicatures for reuniting such territories as had anciently depended upon the three bishopricks, Metz, Toul, and Verdun; upon Alsace, or any of his late conquests. These arbitrary courts inquired into titles buried in the most remote antiquity: they cited the neighbouring princes, and even the king of Spain, to appear before them, and to render homage to the king of France, or to behold the confiscation of their possessions.

No European prince, since the time of Charlemagne, had acted so much like a master and a judge as Lewis XIV. The elector palatine, and the elector of Treves, were divested of the signories of Falkenberg, Germersheim, Valdentz, and other places, by his imperious tribunals; and he laid claim to the ancient and free city of Strasburg, as the capital of Alsace. This large and rich city, which was the mistress of the Rhine by means of its bridge over that river, had long attracted the eye of the French monarch: and his minister Louvois, by the most artful conduct, at last put him in possession of it. He ordered troops to enter Lorrain, Franche-Comté, and Alsace, under pretence of employing them in working on the fortifications in these provinces. But, according to concert, they all assembled in the neighbourhood of Strasburg, to the number of twenty thousand men, and took

(1) Burnet, Halifax, Hume, &c. In confirmation of these authorities, see Barillon's Letter to Lewis XIV., Feb. 18, 1685, in Dalrymple's Append. (2) Macpherson, Hist, Brit. vol. i. chap. iv.

« PreviousContinue »