to this bill, which was as unacceptable to the court, as it was to the zealots of the church of England. It had been intended to follow it up by another, excluding all who should not conform to the established church, from serving in the house of commons.* Shaftesbury and his col It may appear remarkable that, as if content with these provisions the victorious country party did not remonstrate against the shutting up of the exchequer, nor even wage any direct war against the king's advisers. They voted, on the contrary, a large supply, which, as they did not choose explicitly to recognize the Dutch war, was expressed to be granted for the king's extraordinary occasions. This moderation, which ought at least to rescue them from the charges of faction and violence, has been censured by some as servile and corrupt; and would really incur censure, if they had not attained the great object of breaking the court measures by other means. But the test act, and their steady Fall of protestation against the suspending prerogative, crushed the projects and dispersed the members leagues. of the cabal. The king had no longer any minister on whom he could rely, and, with his indolent temper, seems from this time, if not to have abandoned all hope of declaring his change of religion, yet to have seen both that and his other favourite projects postponed without much reluctance. From a real predilection, from the prospect of gain, and partly, no doubt, from some distant views of arbitrary power and a catholic establishment, he persevered a long time in clinging secretly to the interest of France; but his active co-operation in the schemes of 1669 was at an end. In the next session of October, 1673, the commons drove Buckingham from the king's councils; they intimidated Arlington into a change of policy; and, though they did not succeed in removing the duke of Lauderdale, compelled him to confine himself chiefly to the affairs of Scotland. + the lords' amendments had a tendency to let in popish, rather than to favour protestant, dissenters. Parker says that this act of indulgence was defeated by his great hero, archbishop Sheldon, who proposed that the non-conformists should acknowledge the war against Charles I. to be unlawful. Hist. sui temporis, p. 203. of the translation. It was proposed, as an instruction Parl. Hist. 608. 625 649. Burnet. solution - CHAPTER XII. Earl of Danby's Administration Opposition in the Commons- Frequently corrupt Character of Lord Danby - Connexion of the popular Party with France-Its Motives on both Sides - Doubt as to their Acceptance of Money Secret Treaties of the King with France His ImpeachFall of Danby ment Questions arising on it His Commitment to the Tower - Pardon pleaded in Bar Votes of Bishops — Abatement of Impeachments by DisPopish Plot Coleman's Letters - Godfrey's Death — Injustice of Judges on the Trials · Parliament dissolved - Exclusion of Duke of York proposed Schemes of Shaftesbury and Monmouth Unsteadiness of the King Expedients to avoid the Exclusion Names of Whig and Tory New Council formed by Sir William Temple - Long Prorogation of Parlia ment — Petitions and Addresses — Violence of the Commons Oxford ParFitzharris Impeachment of Commoners for Treason constitutional impeached-Proceedings against Shaftesbury and his Colleagues - Triumph of the Court Forfeiture of Charter of London And of other Places Projects of Lord Russell and Sidney Their Trials High Tory Principles of the Clergy Passive Obedience · Some contend for absolute Power Filmer Sir George Mackenzie- Decree of University of Oxford — Connexion with Louis broken off - King's death. liament Earl of THE period of lord Danby's administration, from 1673 to 1678, was full of chicanery and dissimulation on the Danby's ad king's side, of increasing suspiciousness on that of ministration. the commons. Forced by the voice of parliament, and the bad success of his arms, into peace with Holland, Charles struggled hard against a co-operation with her in the great confederacy of Spain and the empire to resist the encroachments of France on the Netherlands. Such was in that age the strength of the barrier fortresses, and so heroic the resistance of the prince of Orange, that, notwithstanding the extreme weakness of Spain, there was no moment in that war, when the sincere and strenuous intervention of England would not have compelled Louis XIV. to accept the terms of the treaty of Aix la Chapelle. It was the treacherous attachment of Charles II. to French interests that brought the long congress of Nimeguen to an unfortunate termination; and, by surrendering so many towns of Flanders as laid the rest open to future aggression, gave rise to the tedious struggles of two more wars. * In the behaviour of the house of commons during this mons. period, previously at least to the session of 1678, Opposition there seems nothing which can incur much repre- in the comhension from those who reflect on the king's character and intentions; unless it be that they granted supplies rather too largely, and did not sufficiently provide against the perils of the time. But the house of lords contained unfortunately an invincible majority for the court, ready to frustrate any legislative security for public liberty. Thus the habeas corpus act, first sent up to that house in 1674, was lost there in several successive sessions. The commons therefore testified their sense of public grievances, and kept alive an alarm in the nation by resolutions and addresses, which a phlegmatic reader is sometimes too apt to consider as factious or unnecessary. If they seem to have dwelt more, in some of these, on the dangers of religion, and less on those of liberty, than we may now think reasonable, it is to be remembered that the fear of popery has always been the surest string to touch for effect on the people; and that the general clamour against that religion was all covertly directed against the duke of York, the most dangerous enemy of every part of our constitution. The real vice of this parliament was not intemperance, but corruption. of the parliaClifford, and still more Danby, were masters in an art practised by ministers from the time of James I. (and which indeed can never be unknown where there exists a court and a popular assembly,) that of turning to their use the weapons of mercenary eloquence by office, or blunting their edge by bribery.† Some who had been once prominent in opposition, as sir Robert Howard and sir Richard Temple, became placemen; some, like Garraway and sir Thomas • Temple's Memoirs. Burnet says that Danby bribed the less important members, instead of the leaders; which did not answer so well. But he seems to have been liberal to all. The parliament has gained the name of the pensioned. In that of 1679, sir Stephen Fox was called upon to produce an account of the monies paid to many of Corruption ment. their predecessors. Those who belonged to the new parliament endeavoured to defend themselves, and gave reasons for their pensions; but I observe no one says he did not always vote with the court. Parl. Hist. 1137. North admits that great clamour was excited by this discovery; and well it might. See also Dalrymple, ii. 92. Lee, while they continued to lead the country party, took money from the court for softening particular votes*; many, as seems to have been the case with Reresby, were won by promises, and the pretended friendship of men in power.† On two great classes of questions, France and popery, the commons broke away from all management; nor was Danby unwilling to let his master see their indocility on these subjects. But, in general, till the year 1678, by dint of the means before mentioned, and partly no doubt through the honest conviction of many that the king was not likely to employ any minister more favourable to the protestant religion and liberties of Europe, he kept his ground without any insuperable opposition from parliament.‡ The earl of Danby had virtues as an English minister, which serve to extenuate some great errors and an entire want of scrupulousness in his conduct. Zealous against the church of Roman and the aggrandizement of France, he counteracted, while he seemed to Character of the earl of Danby. yield to, the prepossessions of his master. If the policy of England before the peace of Nimeguen was mischievous and disgraceful, it would evidently have been far more so, had Burnet charges these two leaders of opposition with being bribed by the court to draw the house into granting an enormous supply, as the consideration of passing the test act; and see Pepys, Oct. 6. 1666. Sir Robert Howard and sir Richard Temple were said to have gone over to the court in 1670 through similar inducements. Ralph. Roger North (Examen, p. 456.) gives an account of the manner in which men were brought off from the opposition, though it was sometimes advisable to let them nominally continue in it; and mentions Lee, Garraway, and Meres, all very active patriots, if we trust to the parliamentary debates. But, after all, neither Burnet nor Roger North are wholly to be relied on as to particular instances; though the general fact of an extensive corruption be indisputable. This cunning, self-interested man, who had been introduced to the house by lord Russell and lord Cavendish, and was connected with the country party, tells us that Danby sent for him in Feb. 1677, and assured him that the jealousies of that party were wholly without founda tion; that, to his certain knowledge, the king meant no other than to preserve the religion and government by law established; that, if the government was in any danger, it was from those who pretended such a mighty zeal for it. On finding him well disposed, Danby took his proselyte to the king, who assured him of his regard for the constitution, and was right loyally believed. Reresby's Memoirs, p. 36. "There were two things," says bishop Parker, "which, like Circe's cup, bewitched men and turned them into brutes; viz. popery and French interest. If men otherwise sober heard them once, it was sufficient to make them run mad. But, when those things were laid aside, their behaviour to his majesty was with a becoming modesty." P. 244. Whenever the court seemed to fall in with the national interests on the two points of France and popery, many of the country party voted with them on other questions, though more numerous than their own. Temple, p. 458. See, too, Reresby, p. 25. et alibi. the king and duke of York been abetted by this minister in their fatal predilection for France. We owe to Danby's influence, it must ever be remembered, the marriage of princess Mary to the prince of Orange, the seed of the revolution and the act of settlement a courageous and disinterested counsel, which ought not to have proved the source of his greatest misfortunes.* But we cannot pretend to say that he was altogether as sound a friend to the constitution of his country, as to her national dignity and interests. I do not mean that he wished to render the king absolute. But a minister, harassed and attacked in parlia ment, is tempted to desire the means of crushing his opponents, or at least of augmenting his own sway. The mischievous bill that passed the house of lords in 1675, imposing as a test to be taken by both houses of parliament, as well as all holding beneficed offices, a declaration that resistance to persons commissioned by the king was in all cases unlawful, and that they would never attempt any alteration in the government in church or state, was promoted by Danby, though it might possibly originate with others.† The king, according to James himself, readily consented to the marriage of the princess, when it was first suggested in 1675; the difficulty was with her father. He gave at last a reluctant consent; and the offer was made by lords Arlington and Ossory to the prince of Orange, who received it coolly. Life of James, 501. Temple's Memoirs, p. 397. When he came over to England in Oct. 1677, with the intention of effecting the match, the king and duke wished to defer it till the conclusion of the treaty then in negotiation at Nimeguen; but "the obstinacy of the prince, with the assistance of the treasurer, who from that time entered into the measures and interests of the prince, prevailed upon the flexibility of the king to let the marriage be first agreed and concluded." P. 508. [If we may trust Reresby, which is not perhaps always the case, the duke of York had hopes of marrying the princess Mary to the Dauphin; thus rendering England a province of France. Reresby's Memoirs, p. 109.-1845.] Kennet, p. 332. North's Examen, p. 61. Burnet. This test was covertly VOL. II. H It But meant against the Romish party, as well Meanwhile, schemes of comprehension were sometimes on foot; and the prelates affected to be desirous of bringing about an union; but Morley and Sheldon frustrated them all. Baxter, 156. Kennet, 326. Parker, 25. The bishops, however, were not uniformly intolerant : Croft, bishop of Hereford, published, about 1675, a tract that made some noise, entitled the Naked Truth, for the purpose of moderating differences. It is not written with extraordinary ability; but |