« PreviousContinue »
accounts of the trial, if any such had been preserved, viz., that Monk's letters were not produced till after the evidence was finished on both sides, and the debate begun on the result ;-an irregularity, by the way, by much too gross to have been charged against a public proceeding without any foundation.
Mr. Rose's next observation is directed rather against Judge Blackstone than against Mr. Fox; and is meant to show that this learned person was guilty of great inaccuracy in representing the year 1679 as the era of good laws and bad government. It is quite impossible to follow him through the dull details and feeble disputations by which he labours to make it appear that our laws were not very good in 1679, and that they, as well as the administration of them, were much mended after the Revolution. Mr. Fox's or rather Blackstone's, remark is too obviously and strikingly true in substance to admit of any argument or illustration. *
The next charge against Mr. Fox is for saying that, if Charles II.'s minis. ters betrayed him, he betrayed them in return; keeping, from some of them at least, the secret of what he was pleased to call his religion, and the state of his connections with France. After the furious attack which Mr. Rose has made in another place upon this Prince and his French connections, it is rather surprising to see with what zeal he undertakes his defence against this very venial sort of treachery, of concealing his shame from some of his more respectable ministers. The attempt, however, is at least as unsuccessful as it is unaccountable. Mr. Fox says only that some of the ministers were not trusted with the secret; and both Dalrymple and Macpherson say that none but the Catholic counsellors were admitted to this confidence. Mr. Rose mutters that there is no evidence of this; and himself produces an abstract of the secret treaty between Louis and Charles, of May, 1670, to which the subscriptions of four Catholic ministers of the latter are affixed.
Mr. Fox is next taxed with great negligence for saying that he does not know what proof there is of Clarendon's being privy to Charles receiving money from France ; and very long quotations are inserted from the correspondence printed by Dalrymple and Macpherson, --which do not prove Clarendon's knowledge of any money being received, though they do seem to establish that he must have known of its being stipulated for
* Mr. Rose talks a good deal, and justly, about the advantages of the judges not being removable at pleasure: and, with a great air of erudition, informs us, that after 6 Charles, all the commissions were made quamdiu nobis placuerit. Mr. Rose's researches, we fear, do not often go beyond the records in his custody. If he had looked into Rushworth's Collection, he would have found that, in 1641, King Charles agreed to make the commissions quam. diu se bene gesserint; and that some of those illegally removed in the following reign, though not officiating in court, still retained certain functions in consequence of that appointment. The following is the passage, at p. 1265, vol. iii. of Rushworth:“After the passing of these votes (16th Dec. 1640) against the judges, and transmitting them to the House of Peers, and their concurring with the House of Commons therein, an address was made unto the King shortly after, that his Majesty for the future would not make any judge by patent during pleasure; but that they may hold their places hereafter quamdiu se bene gesserint: and his Majesty did really grant the same. And in his speech to both Houses of Parliament, at the time of giving his Royal assent to two bills, one to take away the High Commission Court, and the other the Court of Star-Chamber, and regulating the power of the Council Table, he hath this passage: If you consider what I have done this parliament, discontents will not sit in your hearts; for I hope you remember, that I have granted that the judges hereafter shall hold their places quamdiu se bene gesserint.' And likewise, his gracious Majesty King Charles the Second observed the same rule and method in granting patents to judges, quamdiu se bene gesserint: as appears upon record in the rolls: viz., to Sergeant Slide to be Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench, Sir Orlando Bridgman to be Lord Chief Baron, and afterwards to be Lord Chief Justice of Common Pleas; to Sir Robert Foster, and others. Mr. Sergeant Archer, now living, notwithstanding his removal, still enjoys his patent, being quamdiu se bene gesserint; and receives a share in the profits of the court, as to fees and other proceedings, by virtue of his said patent; and his name is used in those fines, &c., as a judge of that court."
After this comes Mr. Rose's grand attack; in which he charges the historian with his whole heavy artillery of argument and quotation, and makes a vigorous effort to drive him from the position that the early and primary object of James's reign was not to establish Popery in this country, but in the first place to render himself absolute : and that, for a considerable time, he does not appear to have aimed at anything more than a complete toleration for his own religion. The grounds upon which this opinion is maintained by Mr. Fox are certainly very probable. There is, in the first place, his zeal for the Church of England during his brother's life, and the violent oppressions by which he enforced a Protestant test in Scotland ; secondly, the fact of his carrying on the government and the persecution of Nonconformists Lv Protestant ministers; and, thirdly, his addresses to his Parliament, and the tenor of much of his correspondence with Louis. In opposition to this, Mr. Rose quotes an infinite variety of passages from Barillon's correspondence, to show in general the unfeigned zeal of this unfortunate Prince for his religion, and his constant desire to glorify and advance it. Now, it is perfectly obvious, in the first place, that Mr. Fox never intended to dispute James's zeal for Popery ; and, in the second place, it is very remarkable that, in the first seven passages quoted by Mr. Rose, nothing more is said to be in the King's contemplation than the complete toleration of that religion. “The free exercise of the Catholic religion in their own houses,”--the abolition of the penal laws against Catholics,-"the free exercise of that religion,” &c. &c., are the only objects to which the zeal of the King is said to be directed ; and it is not till after the suppression of Monmouth's rebellion that these phrases are exchanged for a resolution to establish the Catholic religion," or "to get that religion established ;" though it would be fair, perhaps, to interpret some even of these phrases with reference to those which precede them in the correspondence ; especially as, in a letter from Louis to Barillon, so late as 20th August, 1685, he merely urges the great expediency of James establishing “the free exercise" of that religion.
After all, in reality, there is not much substantial difference as to this point between the historian and his observer. Mr. Fox admits most explicitly that James was zealous in the cause of Popery; and that after Monmouth's execution he made attempts equally violent and undisguised to restore it. Mr. Rose, on the other hand, admits that he was exceedingly desirous to render himself absolute; and that one ground of his attachment to Popery probably was its natural affinity with an arbitrary government. Upon which of these two objects he set the chief value, and which of them he wished to make subservient to the other, it is not perhaps now very easy to determine. In addition to the authorities referred to by Mr. Fox, however, there are many more which tend directly to show that one great ground of his antipathy to the reformed religion was his conviction that it led to rebellion and republicism. There are very many passages in Barillon to this effect; and, indeed, the burden of all Louis's letters is to convince James that “the existence of monarchy" in England depended on the protection of the Catholics. Barillon says (Fox, App. p. 125) that the King often declares publicly that all Calvinists are naturally enemies to royalty, and above all to royalty in England," and Burnet observes (Vol. i. p. 73) that the King told him, “that among other prejudices he had against the Protestant religion, this was one, that his brother and himself being in many companies in Paris incognito (during the Commonwealth) where there were Protestants, he found they were all alienated from them, and great admirers of Cromwell ; so he believed they were all rebels in their hearts." It will not be forgotten either, that in his first address to the Council, on his accession, he made use of those memorable words :-“I know the principles of the Church of Eng. land are for monarchy, and therefore I shall always take care to defend and support it." While he retained this opinion of its loyalty, accordingly, he did defend and support it; and did persecute all dissidents from its doctrine, at least as violently as he afterwards did those who opposed Popery. It was only when he found that the orthodox doctrines of non-resistance and jus divinum would not go all lengths, and that even the bishops would not send his proclamations to their clergy, that he came to class them with the rest of the heretics, and to rely entirely upon the slavish votaries of the Roman superstition.
The next set of remarks are introduced for the purpose of showing that Mr. Fox has gone rather too far in stating that the object both of Charles and James in taking money from Louis, was to render themselves independent of Parliament, and to enable them to govern without those assemblies. Mr. Rose admits that this was the point which both monarchs were desirous of attaining; and merely says that it does not appear that either of them expected that the calling of Parliaments could be entirely dispensed with. There certainly is not here any worthy subject of contention.
The next point is, as to the sums of money which Barillon says he distributed to the Whig leaders, as well as to the King's ministers. Mr. Rose is very liberal and rational on this subject; and thinks it not unfair to doubt the accuracy of the account which this minister renders of his disbursements. He even quotes two passages from Mad. de Sevigné, to show that it was the general opinion that he had enriched himself greatly by his mission to England. In a letter written during the continuance of that mission, she says, “ Barillon s'en va, &c. ; son emploi est admirable cette année ; il mangera cinquante mille francs, mais il sait bien où les prendre,” And after his final return, she says he is old and rich, and looks without envy on the brilliant situation of M. D'Avaux. The only inference he draws from the discussion is that it should have a little shaken Mr. Fox's confidence in his accuracy. The answer to which obviously is that his mere dishonesty, where his private interest was concerned, can afford no reason for doubting his accuracy, where it was not affected.
In the concluding section of his remarks, Mr. Rose resumes his eulogium on Sir Patrick Hume,-introduces a splendid encomium on the Marquis of Montrose,-brings authority to show that torture was used to extort confession in Scotland even after the Revolution, -and then breaks out into a high Tory rant against Mr. Fox, for supposing that the councillors who condemned Argyle might not be very easy in their consciences, and for calling those who were hunting down that nobleman's dispersed followers “ authorised assassins.” James, he says, was their lawful sovereign; and the parties in question having been in open rebellion, it was the evident duty of all who had not joined with them to suppress them. We are not very fond of arguing general points of this nature ; and the question here is fortunately special, and simple. If the tyranny and oppression of James in Scotland—the unheard-of enormity of which Mr. Rose owns that Mr. Fox has understated—had already given that country a far juster title to renounce him than England had in 1688, then James was not “their lawful sovereign" in any sense in which that phrase can be understood by a free people ; and those whose cowardice or despair made them submit to be the instruments of the tyrant's vengeance on one who had armed for their deliverance, may very innocently be presumed to have suffered some remorse for their compliance. With regard, again, to the phrase of "authorised assassins," it is plain, from the context of Mr. Fox, that it is not applied to the regular forces acting against the remains of Argyle's armed followers, but to those individuals, whether military or not, who pursued the disarmed and solitary fugitives, for the purpose of butchering them in cold blood in their caverns and mountains.
Such is the substance of Mr. Rose's observations; which certainly do not appear to us of any considerable value—though they indicate, throughout, a laudable industry, and a still more laudable consciousness of inferiority, together with (what we are determined to believe) a natural disposition to liberality and moderation, counteracted by the littleness of party jealousy and resentment. We had noted a great number of petty misrepresentations and small inaccuracies ; but in a work which is not likely either to be much read, or long remembered, these things are not worth the trouble of correction
Though the book itself is very dull, however, we must say that the Appendix is very entertaining. Sir Patrick's narrative is clear and spirited; but what delights us far more is another and more domestic and miscellaneous narrative of the adventures of his family, from the period of Argyle's discomfiture till their return in the train of King William.' This is from the hand of Lady Murray, Sir Patrick's granddaughter, and is mostly furnished from the information of her mother, his favourite and exemplary daughter. There is an air of cheerful magnanimity and artless goodness about this little history which is extremely engaging; and a variety of traits of Scottish simplicity and homeliness of character which recommend it, in a peculiar manner, to our national feelings. Although we have already enlarged this article beyond its proper limits, we must give our readers a fev specimens of this singular chronicle.
After Sir Patrick's escape, he made his way to his own castle, and was concealed for some time in a vaut under the church, where his daughter, then a girl under twenty, went alone every night, with an heroic fortitude, to comfort and feed him. The gaiety, however, which lightened this perilous intercourse, is to us still more admirable than its heroism.
“She went every night by herself, at midnight, to carry him victuals and drink; and stayed with him as long as she could to get home before day. In all this time my grandfather showed the same constant composure, and cheerfulness of mind, that he continued to possess to his death, which was at the age of eighty-four; all which good qualities she inherited from him in a high degree. Often did they laugh heartily in that doleful habitation, at different accidents that happened. She at that time had a terror for a churchyard, especially in the dark, as is not uncommon at her age, by idle nursery stories; but when engaged by concern for her father, she stumbled over the graves every night alone, without fear of any kind entering her thoughts, but for soldiers and parties in search of him, which the least noise or motion of a leaf put her in terror for. The minister's house was near the church. The first night she went, his dogs kept such a barking as put her in the utmost fear of a discovery. My grandmother sent for the minister next day, and, upon pretence of a mad dog, got him to hang all his dogs. There was also difficulty of getting victuals to carry him, without the servants suspecting : the only way it was done, was by stealing it off her plate at dinner, into her lap. Many a diverting story she has told about this, and other things of the like nature. Her father liked sheep's head; and, while the children were eating their broth, she had conveyed most of one into her lap. When her brother Sandy (the late Lord Marchmont) had done, he looked up with astonishment and said, “Mother, will you look at Grissel; while we have been eating our broth, she has eat up the whole sheep's head.' This occasioned so much mirth among them, that her father at night was greatly entertained by it, and desired Sandy might have a share in the next.”-App. p. [v.]
They then tried to secrete him in a low room in his own house ; and, for this purpose, to contrive a bed concealed under the floor, which this affectionate and light-hearted girl secretly excavated herself, by scratching up the earth with her nails, “ till she left not a nail on her fingers," and carrying it into the garden at night in bags. At last, however, they all got over to Holland, where they seemed to have lived in great poverty,—but in the same style of magnanimous gaiety and cordial affection of which some instances have been recited. This admirable young woman, who lived afterwards with the same simplicity of character in the first society in England, seems to have exerted herself in a way that nothing but affection could have rendered tolerable, even to one bred up to drudgery.
"All the time they were there (says his daughter), there was not a week my mother did
not sit up two nights, to do the business that was necessary. She went to market; went to the mill to have their corn ground, which, it seems, is the way with good managers there : dress't the linen; cleaned the house ; made ready dinner; mended the children's stockings, and other clothes ; made what she could for them, and, in short, did everything. Her sister Christian, who was a year or two younger, diverted her father and mother, and the rest, who were fond of music. Out of their small income they bought a harpsichord for little money (but is a Rucar*), now in my custody, and most valuable. My aunt played and sung well, and had a great deal of life and humour, but no turn to business. Though my mother had the same qualifications, and liked it as well as she did, she was forced to drudge; and many jokes used to pass betwixt the sisters about their different occupations."-P. ix.
“Her brother soon afterwards entered into the Prince of Orange's guards; and her constant attention was to have him appear right in his linen and dress. They wore little point cravats and cuffs, which many a night she sat up to have in as good order for him as any in the place; and one of their greatest expenses was in dressing him as he ought to be. As their house was always full of the unfortunate banished people like themselves, they seldom went to dinner without three, or four, or five of them, to share with them; and many a hundred times I have heard her say, she could never look back upon their manner of living there, without thinking it a miracle. They had no want, but plenty of everything they desired. and much contentment; and always declared it the most pleasing part of her life, though they were not without their little distresses; but to them they were rather jokes than grievances. The professors, and men of learning in the place, came often to see my grandfather. The best entertainment he could give them was a glass of alabast beer, which was a better kind of ale than common. He sent his son Andrew, the late Lord Kimmerghame, a boy, to draw some for them in the cellar: he brought it up with great diligence; but in the other hand the spiket of the barrel. My grandfather said, 'Andrew, what is that in your hand?' When he saw it he run down with speed; but the beer was all run out before he got there. This occasioned much mirth; though perhaps they did not well know where to get more.”-Pp. [x. xi.]
Sir Patrick, we are glad to hear, retained this kindly cheerfulness of character to the last : and, after he was an Earl and Chancellor of Scotland, and unable to stir with gout, had himself carried to the room where his children and grandchildren were dancing, and insisted on beating time with his foot. Nay, when dying, at the advanced age of eighty-four, he could not resist his old propensity to joking, but uttered various pleasantries on the disappointment the worms would meet with, when, after boring through his thick coffin, they would find little but bones.
There is, in the Appendix, besides these narrations, a fierce attack upon Burnet, which is full of inaccuracies and ill temper; and some interesting particulars of Monmouth's imprisonment and execution. We daresay Mr. Rose could publish a volume or two of very interesting tracts; and can venture to predict that his collections will be much more popular than his observations.
EDGEWORTH'S PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION.
(E. REVIEW, October, 1809.) Essays on Professional Education. By R. L. EDGEWORTH, Esq., F.R.S., &c. 4to, pp. 446.
London. 1809. THERE are two questions to be asked respecting every new publication-Is it worth buying? Is it worth borrowing ? and we would advise our readers to weigh diligently the importance of these interrogations before they take any decided step as to this work of Mr. Edgeworth ; the more especially as the name carries with it considerable authority, and seems, in the estimation of the unwary, almost to include the idea of purchase. For our own part, we would rather decline giving a direct answer to these questions; and shall content ourselves for the present with making a few such slight observations as may enable the sagacious to conjecture what our direct answer would be, were we compelled to be more explicit.
* An eminent maker of that time,