66 66 XVII. 1667. the management of the war, except in opposing CHAP. some unreasonable propositions, such as the payment of the seamen by tickets;" that with regard to negotiations with foreign powers, he never gave advice in private, nor sent any letter but such as had been read in council, or by the King and some others; that, far from being the sole manager of affairs, he had not, during the whole last year, been above twice with the King alone, and very seldom in the three years preceding; and, he added, "since the Parliament at "Oxford, it hath been very visible that my credit "hath been very little, and that very few things "have been hearkened to which have been pro 66 posed by me, but contradicted eo nomine, be"cause proposed by me." He solemnly denied that he had ever, "upon all the treaties or other 66 wise, received the value of one shilling from all "the kings and princes in the world, except the "books of the Louvre print, sent him by the "Chancellor of France, by that King's direction." He tells them that he should not have had so many enemies if, in the discharge of his duty, he had not been obliged to oppose many pretensions, and refuse to set the seal to many grants; and he concluded his address in the following terms: "This being my present condition, I do most humbly beseech your Lordships to retain a fa"vourable opinion of me, and to believe me to be "innocent from those foul aspersions, until the contrary shall be proved, which, I am sure, can "never be by any man worthy to be believed. 66 66 CHAP. 1667. 66 And, since the distemper of the time, and the "difference between the two Houses in the pre"sent debate, with the power and malice of my enemies, who give out that I shall prevail with "his Majesty to prorogue or dissolve this Parlia"ment in displeasure, and threaten to expose me "to the rage and fury of the people, may make me "looked upon as the cause which obstructs the 66 King's service, and the unity and peace of the "kingdom; I must humbly beseech your Lordships, that I may not forfeit your Lordships' "favour and protection, by withdrawing myself "from so powerful a persecution, in hopes I may "be able, by such withdrawing, hereafter to appear, and make my defence, when his Majesty's justice, to which I shall always submit, may not "be obstructed nor controlled by the power and "malice of those who have sworn my destruc❝tion."* 66 66 This paper had no other immediate effect than to exasperate still more the opponents of Clarendon, and to produce eventually some agreement between the conflicting Houses of Parliament. + Arlington, on whom it threw back a large share of the responsibility for past mischances, which his party had endeavoured to fasten upon Clarendon, spoke vehemently against it in the House of Lords, saying that "it was a libel," and that there was "not "a word of truth in it." The Lords, through the influence of Buckingham, communicated it to *Life of Clarendon, iii. 346. + Pepys, iii. 427. XVII. 1667. the Commons as "a scandalous and seditious paper. CHAP The Commons resolved that it should be burned by the hangman; and the Lords concurred with them in that act of impotent vengeance, that childish substitute for refutation, not uncommon in that century, and tacitly exploded by the better sense of succeeding times.* The withdrawal of Clarendon put an end to the stubborn contest between the Houses on the subject of commitment; and the Commons were contented with recording their resolution, "That, "when any subject shall be impeached of high "treason generally by the House of Commons "before the Lords in Parliament, and decreed to "be forthwith secured, such person impeached "ought, for the safety of the King and kingdom, "to be accordingly secured;" and they added this important and essential adjunct,— that, for avoiding delay in justice, "when such person "shall be secured, the Lords may limit a conve"nient time to bring his particular charge before them." t nishment. But the vengeance of the Parliament was not Bill of basatiated; and the reconciliation of the two Houses must be solemnised by a further concurrence in persecution. A bill for banishing and disenabling Lord Clarendon was passed by the Lords on the 12th of December, and by the Commons on the 18th. By this bill, unless he returned and sur * Commons' Journals, Dec. 4, 5. 10. Lords' Journals, Dec. 4. 6. 9, + Commons' Journals, Dec. 5. 1667. CHAP. 1667. rendered himself before the 1st of February, he was to be banished for life; disabled from ever again holding any office; subjected, if he afterwards returned to England, to the penalties of high treason; and rendered incapable of pardon without the consent of the two Houses of Parliament. It did not pass without opposition; and the third reading in the Commons was carried only by 65 to 42.* Nor did the measure pass the the Upper House without protests from Lords Strafford, Berkeley, Hollis, Lexington, and Colepepper; the former of whom, in a separate protest, stated that it seemed unjust to punish Lord Clarendon for only withdrawing himself, no legal charge being brought, no detention of his person being appointed; and that the bill appeared to encroach on the royal prerogative, in taking from the King the power to pardon. + It was the evident object of the promoters of this harsh and unjust measure to punish Clarendon without a trial, and to preclude all chance of his return to power by preventing his return to England. They debarred him from the possible ad 66 66 * Mr. Swinfen spoke against it, saying, "The Lords will neither secure nor summon him, but will condemn him unheard; and this they put you upon, which is against honour and justice, especially to do it upon reason of state." If reason of state be a motive of Parliament "to banish one man, so it may be for many." "The party is gone, apprehending, he says, the fear of the multitude, not of his trial; so, the "Lords not giving credit to your charge against him, he says he flies "not from justice. Now, if upon this bill you should banish him, it "would be said you could not make good your charge, and therefore "laid this sentence upon him. The precedent is also dangerous, if, "having gone so far in a judicial way, you should now go in a legis"lative." (Parl. Hist. iv. 399.) + Lords' Journals, Dec. 12. XVII. 1667. vantage of any compunctious visitings which CHAP. might subsequently influence the fickle King. It is true they summoned him to appear to take his trial before a specified day; but they named a day (the 1st of February) so near at hand, that Lord Clarendon, a wanderer on the Continent, without the means of obtaining early intelligence, and unfit, through illness, to travel rapidly, might probably be unable to obey it: and with what motive an early day was thus fixed is sufficiently apparent by the rejection of a proposition that the time should be extended to the tenth of that month.* It does not appear to me that these harsh proceedings, which were equivalent to outlawry, are susceptible of vindication by any supposed analogy to that process. It is true that, in an ordinary criminal suit, a process of outlawry goes against the accused who flies from justice; and his neglect to appear within a given time is equivalent, in cases of treason or felony, to a conviction of the offence. But, in the first place, Clarendon could not strictly be regarded as one who fled from justice, for he promised to appear and make his defence in that written address which constituted the sole evidence of his departure, on which the Parliament founded their proceedings; and, at the time of his departure, there was no legal writ or process issued, which could authorise his detention. The steps by which outlawry is preceded bear * Lords' and Commons' Journals, Dec. 18. 1667. + Hallam's Const. Hist. ii. 504. I am compelled to dissent, and, as before, with diffidence and reluctance, from the opinions expressed |