Page images
PDF
EPUB

VIII.

CHAP. reference to their opinions on that subject. But these were indirect means for the performance of the promise, doubtful in their operation, and to which the letter could not bind him.

1662.

It may be asked, to what extent did Charles endeavour to fulfil his promise. He had issued a declaration, the purport of which was comprehension, concession, and indulgence. He appointed a conference of divines of each party for the revision of the Liturgy. He appointed Presbyterian ministers to be his chaplains. To others of that sect he offered bishoprics. He had assumed the exercise of his dispensing power in favour of Non-conformists, by suspending the operation of an act of the 13th of Elizabeth. When the bill for uniformity was in progress through Parliament, attempts were made ineffectually to enable him to mitigate its rigour, by assigning provision for ejected ministers, and by dispensing with ceremonies offensive to the Presbyterians. These circumstances may exculpate Charles from having violated the letter of his promise, but they do not prove that he fulfilled its spirit. They were merely indications of a friendly disposition, which, if carried no further, tended only to pacify for a time, and, eventually, to deceive. For the unaccommodating spirit of the contending divines, -for the failure of the Savoy Conference, -for the harsh decision of the Convocation, Charles was not responsible. He was not strictly responsible for proceedings in Parliament. But when it is considered that the conduct of the High Church divines, in the Conference, and in the Convocation, was susceptible of influ

VIII.

1662.

ence from the King and the Chancellor; when, CHAP. also, the conduct of the King and the Chancellor with respect to the Bill of Indemnity is compared with their conduct on the Bill of Uniformity how earnestly in the former case the Parliament was entreated to complete the measure, and to be mindful of the King's pledged word and honour; while, in the latter case, a liberal measure, founded on his declaration, was opposed in the Commons by a Secretary of State, and thrown out on the second reading, it may be inferred that Charles and Clarendon, while anxious for the fulfilment of the former promise, were at least indifferent about the latter, and that, while avoiding the direct violation of an express condition, they were not unwilling that the fulfilment of it should become impossible.

[ocr errors]

It is probable that Clarendon must always have regarded the exercise of the King's dispensing power as a means for the fulfilment of the promise made from Breda. He knew how limited would be the King's sphere of independent action, and how few and uncertain were any other means which he could have at his disposal. There is no evidence that he would admit this dangerous power, except in ecclesiastical affairs: but he held that the Sovereign, by virtue of his supremacy, as head of the church, did certainly possess it in matters of religion. It had already been assumed in the declaration of October 25. 1660, framed by the Chancellor, wherein it was enjoined, "that "none be judged to forfeit his presentation or "benefice, or be deprived of it, upon the statute

CHAP.
VIII.

1662.

"of 13 Eliz. c. 12., so he read and declare his as"sent to all the articles of religion, and the doc"trine of the sacraments comprised in the book of "articles in the said statute mentioned:" and to this assumption of authority, which passed unquestioned by the House of Commons, Clarendon subsequently referred as a performance of the King's promise. When, complying with the intolerance of the new Parliament, the King assented to the Bill of Uniformity, Clarendon appears to have still intended that he should endeavour to perform his promise by a further exercise of his dispensing power. The following expressions in his speech, in May, on the prorogation of Parliament, when the King assented to the Act of Uniformity, are scarcely susceptible of any other interpretation: "You have done your parts," said Lord Clarendon, addressing the two Houses of Parliament, "like "good physicians, and made wholesome prescrip"tion for the constitution of your patients; well "knowing that the application of these remedies, the "execution of these sharp laws, depends upon the "wisdom of the most discerning, generous, and "merciful Prince, who, having had more experience "of the nature and humour of mankind than

any

prince living, can best distinguish between the "tenderness of conscience and the pride of con"science; between the real effects of conscience "and the wicked pretences to conscience,-who,

having fought with beasts at Ephesus,' knows "how to guard himself and the kingdom from the "assaults and violence of a strong, malicious, cor"rupted understanding and will, and how to se

66

"cure himself and the kingdom from the feeble "traps and nets of deluded fancies and imagin"ations. In a word, a Prince of so excellent a "nature and tender a conscience himself, that he "hath the highest compassion for all errors of that kind, and will never suffer the weak to undergo "the punishment ordained for the wicked; and "knows and understands better than any man that "excellent rule of Quintilian, Est aliquid quod "non oportet, etiamsi licet; et aliud est jura spec"tare, aliud justitiam. " *

So spake Lord Clarendon, who subsequently opposed the exercise of a power to which he had thus favourably adverted. After this period, therefore, it cannot be said that towards the Non-conformists his faith as a minister was maintained; and it becomes an important subject of inquiry, as regards the character of this statesman, what reason for the course which he pursued can be adduced in mitigation of censure. There was, indeed, a reason of no common weight; and it may be stated in few words. He became convinced of the existence of a design of applying this power to the encouragement of the Roman Catholics. He saw the seeds of that fatal scheme of establishing Popery, which was pursued through that and the succeeding reign, and ended in the expulsion of the House of Stuart. Our attention must be directed to the evidence of this design, its developement and progress, and its influence on the conduct and fortunes of Clarendon.

* Parl. Hist. iv. 252.

VIII.

1662.

CHAP. IX.

CHARLES'S SUSPECTED INCLINATION TO CATHOLICISM.—DIVI-
SIONS AMONG THE CATHOLICS.— CONDUCT OF CHARLES. —
BENNET BECOMES SECRETARY OF STATE. — CLARENDON'S
COMMUNICATION WITH BENNET RESPECTING THE DECLAR-
ATION OF INDULGENCE. CHARACTER OF THE DECLARATION.
-CLARENDON'S OPPOSITION TO THE KING'S INTENTIONS.-
CHARLES'S DISPLEASURE. INFLUENCE OF BRISTOL. — HIS
IMPRUDENT INTERFERENCE WITH THE COMMONS, AND WEAK
DEFENCE. HE CHARGES CLARENDON WITH HIGH TREASON.
-THE CHARGE IS REFUTED, AND BRISTOL DISGRACED. —
CONSEQUENCES INJURIOUS TO CLARENDON.

1661.

1661-1663.

CHAP. CHARLES was suspected, before the Restoration, IX. of having secretly embraced Catholicism: and though we may disbelieve the anecdote told by Carte, of his having been seen to attend mass†, or that a project for re-establishing Popery was seriously entertained at the treaty of the Pyrenees‡, yet sufficient evidence will remain, joined to admissions which lurk in the cautious language of Clarendon§, to justify belief that he was then decidedly biassed in favour of that sect. For some time after the Restoration this secret disposition in the King does not appear to have alarmed the

* Clar. State Papers, iii. 602.
+ Carte's Ormond, ii. 255.

Carte's Letters, ii. 264.

Kennet's Register, 852.

Kennet's History, iii. 237.
Life of Clarendon, ii. 105-109.

« PreviousContinue »