have thrown it out." If this bill, repealing the acts which made Romish ordination treasonable, allowed the milder penalty to be subject to the king's pleasure, it would certainly have become favourable to popery, should the king be a papist. The duke of York opposed even the former bill*, which was evidently meant as a substitute for exclusion. The conciliation of James, therefore, could not be the motive of Danby. The principle of rendering laws more effectual by the diminution of the penalties had scarcely reached the statesmen of this age. However, be the motive what it might, the measure was defeated, and the commons sent up a bill of their own to the lords, which was silently dropped. The house of commons was occupied, during this session, in a case in which Danby was accused of acting harshly at the council table towards one Harrington †, who professed to give information of the seduction of the king's subjects into the service of France. The accounts of this proceeding are incomplete, and as the commons dropped the inquiry, it is probable that they found no great cause of censure. It was during the interval occasioned by the adjournment of parliament in May 1677, that Danby (now adorned with the garter ‡) became, for the first time, a party in the negotiation with France for money. I trust that I have shown that he was not concerned in the arrangement of the preceding year, whereby Charles obtained the renewal of his pension; nor was he, I am satisfied, conusant of any thing that passed upon the subject until a very short time previously to the adjournment of July 1677.§ On the 21st of June, a letter had been addressed to the king by Montagu, from Paris ||, reporting to him * Protest in Lords' Journals, xiii. 75. † Ralph, i. 114. Parl. Hist. 845, April 21. 1677. When the houses met on July 16., in pursuance of the adjournment of May, they were immediately adjourned further to the Sd of December. Parl. Hist. p. 91. Danby Letters, p. 1. the disposition of the French court to increase Charles's pension during the war, and give him a round sum upor a peace. This he gathered from conversations with Ruvigni, who observed that "he found all the English ministers turning against France, and my lord treasurer, particularly, absolutely in the prince of Orange's interest; that he was afraid that Charles would be brought to join all the confederates, and abandon France." Montagu, who at this time, from motives which we shall presently appreciate, was making his court to Danby, observed, in replying to Ruvigni, that " my lord treasurer was the man the king now most trusted;" and he thus concluded his letter to the king of England; "Since I do not know which of the ministers you are willing to trust, I have taken the boldness to give yourself this trouble; and if you trust any, I had rather it were my lord treasurer, because I think he is the best judge of such an affair; and except you shall think it for your service that he sees this letter, I humbly beg my sister* may see it burnt, because M. de Ruvigni is concerned in it †, whose utter ruin the story I told you might be. And your majesty is so wise and just, that I in no manner doubt of the secrecy." Charles did communicate this letter to Danby, who thereupon wrote, on the 15th of July, the first of a series of letters, which led to his impeachment and disgrace. He conveyed to Montagu the king's commands to proceed in the negotiation, and get all the money he could. "Unless he can be then, at the peace, certain of the four millions, the addition of one million during the war will not be enough, it being impossible, with less than the value of 200,000l. sterling a year, whilst the war lasts, to support his affairs, in which he suffers so much for their sakes, as I confess, in my own opinion, * Mrs. Hervey. She was the wife of Mr., afterwards sir Daniel Hervey ambassador at Constantinople. + The letter mentioned Ruvigni's discontent with his own court. Danby Letters, p. 7. no money can recompense." He instructs him not to proceed, unless he sees his way clearly through. -- * Danby wrote on the next day a letter, apparently of a more private nature; "His majesty is very well satisfied to know these passages you writ him of M. de Ruvigni: but I confess, I wonder to find that his majesty has not had more than a million of livres a year, and that but for one year past ;" and he reiterates his opinion, that the loss of reputation belonging to these transactions outweighed the pecuniary advantage. "But so little faith have I in any of their promises, that unless you can secure what they promise, I shall expect the noise, rather than any benefit from them. I perceive by you that Mr. Chiffinch has been, and is to be, his receiver of whatever shall be had from hence, and I am very glad of it, being truly desirous of having as little to do with them in anything as I can, unless it were to cudgel them out of that contempt they have, not only for our nation, but the very person of the king, although he be so unhappy as not to believe it.” He then, in reference to the congress at Nimeguen, mentions the difficulty of persuading Charles "to change the character of mediator for that of arbitrator; but I fear," he continues, "his majesty will not do it, thinking himself to be tied up to such nice points of honour, as, I durst take the sacrament, would not be stood upon an hour by the king of France, if the condition of our master were his. I entertain you the longer upon this subject, because I think it our duty, by all the means possible, to convince the king of this truth. And if you, who have many opportunities of doing it, could send me some of those frequent instances, which I am confident there are, of that court's despising the counsels of this, it might be a means of saving us from being ruined by that nation, which, I believe, designs nothing so much as to be the ruin of this." He then alludes to a supposed underhand proceeding of the French at Nimeguen, in reference to a commercial Danby Letters, p. 9. treaty with Holland.... "I am so much a stranger to all the French counsels, that I neither know why M. Courtin is removed, nor upon what measures M. Barillon is sent; only I find, and I am not at all sorry for it, that I am likely to have no more of his conversation than I have had of M. Courtin." * After a letter of compliment and devotion, on the 7th of August, Montagu writes to Danby on the 12th, mentioning the proposals which he had made at the French court; but " M. de Pompone tells me this morning, that M. Courtin has agreed this matter with the king my master, and in your lordship's presence," and that Charles would be contented with less advantageous terms, with which Montagu is much disappointed, and assures Danby of his own cleverness in gaining a point; especially if he has the means of "making presents where it is necessary." He has engaged to make such presents now; requests lord Danby's directions as to the mode of remittance; and proceeds, "I am to beg your pardon, my lord, and I think shall easily obtain it, if without your knowledge I have received some propositions, made to me, of great advantage to your lordship. If you will please to use your interests with the king your master, to be contented with a less sum than is insisted upon, they taking it for granted, that it was your advice that raised the market; I tell you the very expression; and my answer was, you served too good a master, and was too good a servant, to receive any advantage from any body else, and there could be nothing so disobliging to you as the thoughts of offering it." — On the same day, he wrote another letter, complimentary to Danby : "I wish your king would have let this whole matter have been transacted by so wise and faithful a servant as yourself. He would have found the benefit, and either would have had nothing, or a larger sum than a million of livres a year." Danby's answer, of the 20th of August, is + P. 17. Danby Letters, p. 12. + P. 13. - remarkable. "The king is gone to Plymouth, and till his return I shall be able to say nothing to such surprising matter as your letter imparts in every part of it; for in the first place I never spoke to M. Courtin in my life, about that or any such affair, till since I received this last letter from you, so that all he has said was done in my presence, is utterly false. In the next place, I know nothing of the king's changes of mind in that business, only I know that he has more reason than ever to be positive in his resolutions; but I know not what to say in it, because, since I received your letter, I had some discourse with M. Courtin, who speaks much the same kind to me, that you had from M. Pompone; the truth of which must remain until his majesty's return, and then we shall both know what we are to do. In the mean time, I think it is not necessary to send any express, but I give you thanks for making that answer you did concerning any advantages to myself.” Although Danby acknowledges having concurred with Courtin on this affair, he was only partially informed of it. He was not aware of what had passed between Charles and Courtin, who had not only offered money to the king of England, but also troops. "His majesty (of France) being always ready to employ all his forces for the confirmation and augmentation of his (Charles's) authority, he would always be master of his subjects, and will never depend upon them."+ On Charles's part also, the offers were more specific and extensive. "On the 18th of July 1677, Courtin writes, that Charles had insisted for 800,000 crowns, in consideration of which he offered to prorogue the parliament till the end of April 1678." It would be inferred from Danby's own statement, palliating his concern in a subsequent affair of money, that he was not aware of this, or of any condition, except such as related to the terms of peace. The letters of Courtin are not Aug. 20. 16/7, p. 18." + Courtin to Louis. July 12. 1677. Dalrymple, i. 150. |