p-books.com
The History of England from the Accession of James II. - Volume 1 (of 5)
by Thomas Babington Macaulay
Previous Part     1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15
Home - Random Browse

[Footnote 198: The orator was Mr. John Basset, member for Barnstaple. See Smith's Memoirs of Wool, chapter lxviii.]

[Footnote 199: This ballad is in the British Museum. The precise year is not given; but the Imprimatur of Roger Lestrange fixes the date sufficiently for my purpose. I will quote some of the lines. The master clothier is introduced speaking as follows:

"In former ages we used to give, So that our workfolks like farmers did live; But the times are changed, we will make them know.

"We will make them to work hard for sixpence a day, Though a shilling they deserve if they kind their just pay; If at all they murmur and say 'tis too small, We bid them choose whether they'll work at all. And thus we forgain all our wealth and estate, By many poor men that work early and late. Then hey for the clothing trade! It goes on brave; We scorn for to toyl and moyl, nor yet to slave. Our workmen do work hard, but we live at ease, We go when we will, and we come when we please."]

[Footnote 200: Chamberlayne's State of England; Petty's Political Arithmetic, chapter viii.; Dunning's Plain and Easy Method; Firmin's Proposition for the Employing of the Poor. It ought to be observed that Firmin was an eminent philanthropist.]

[Footnote 201: King in his Natural and Political Conclusions roughly estimated the common people of England at 880,000 families. Of these families 440,000, according to him ate animal food twice a week. The remaining 440,000, ate it not at all, or at most not oftener than once a week.]

[Footnote 202: Fourteenth Report of the Poor Law Commissioners, Appendix B. No. 2, Appendix C. No 1, 1848. Of the two estimates of the poor rate mentioned in the text one was formed by Arthur Moore, the other, some years later, by Richard Dunning. Moore's estimate will be found in Davenant's Essay on Ways and Means; Dunning's in Sir Frederic Eden's valuable work on the poor. King and Davenant estimate the paupers and beggars in 1696, at the incredible number of 1,330,000 out of a population of 5,500,000. In 1846 the number of persons who received relief appears from the official returns to have been only 1,332,089 out of a population of about 17,000,000. It ought also to be observed that, in those returns, a pauper must very often be reckoned more than once. I would advise the reader to consult De Foe's pamphlet entitled "Giving Alms no Charity," and the Greenwich tables which will be found in Mr. M'Culloch's Commercial Dictionary under the head Prices.]

[Footnote 203: The deaths were 23,222. Petty's Political Arithmetic.]

[Footnote 204: Burnet, i. 560.]

[Footnote 205: Muggleton's Acts of the Witnesses of the Spirit.]

[Footnote 206: Tom Brown describes such a scene in lines which I do not venture to quote.]

[Footnote 207: Ward's London Spy.]

[Footnote 208: Pepys's Diary, Dec. 28, 1663, Sept. 2, 1667.]

[Footnote 209: Burnet, i, 606; Spectator, No. 462; Lords' Journals, October 28, 1678; Cibber's Apology.]

[Footnote 210: Burnet, i. 605, 606, Welwood, North's Life of Guildford, 251.]

[Footnote 211: I may take this opportunity of mentioning that whenever I give only one date, I follow the old style, which was, in the seventeenth century, the style of England; but I reckon the year from the first of January.]

[Footnote 212: Saint Everemond, passim; Saint Real, Memoires de la Duchesse de Mazarin; Rochester's Farewell; Evelyn's Diary, Sept. 6, 1676, June 11, 1699.]

[Footnote 213: Evelyn's Diary, Jan. 28, 1684-5, Saint Evremond's Letter to Dery.]

[Footnote 214: Id., February 4, 1684-5.]

[Footnote 215: Roger North's Life of Sir Dudley North, 170; The true Patriot vindicated, or a Justification of his Excellency the E-of R-; Burnet, i. 605. The Treasury Books prove that Burnet had good intelligence.]

[Footnote 216: Evelyn's Diary, Jan. 24, 1681-2, Oct. 4, 1683.]

[Footnote 217: Dugdale's Correspondence.]

[Footnote 218: Hawkins's Life of Ken, 1713.]

[Footnote 219: See the London Gazette of Nov. 21, 1678. Barillon and Burnet say that Huddleston was excepted out of all the Acts of Parliament made against priests; but this is a mistake.]

[Footnote 220: Clark's Life of James the Second, i, 746. Orig. Mem.; Barillon's Despatch of Feb. 1-18, 1685; Van Citters's Despatches of Feb. 3-13 and Feb. 1-16. Huddleston's Narrative; Letters of Philip, second Earl of Chesterfield, 277; Sir H. Ellis's Original Letters, First Series. iii. 333: Second Series, iv 74; Chaillot MS.; Burnet, i. 606: Evelyn's Diary, Feb. 4. 1684-5: Welwood's Memoires 140; North's Life of Guildford. 252; Examen, 648; Hawkins's Life of Ken; Dryden's Threnodia Augustalis; Sir H. Halford's Essay on Deaths of Eminent Persons. See also a fragment of a letter written by the Earl of Ailesbury, which is printed in the European Magazine for April, 1795. Ailesbury calls Burnet an impostor. Yet his own narrative and Burnet's will not, to any candid and sensible reader, appear to contradict each other. I have seen in the British Museum, and also in the Library of the Royal Institution, a curious broadside containing an account of the death of Charles. It will be found in the Somers Collections. The author was evidently a zealous Roman Catholic, and must have had access to good sources of information. I strongly suspect that he had been in communication, directly or indirectly, with James himself. No name is given at length; but the initials are perfectly intelligible, except in one place. It is said that the D. of Y. was reminded of the duty which he owed to his brother by P.M.A.C.F. I must own myself quite unable to decipher the last five letters. It is some consolation that Sir Walter Scott was equally unsuccessful. (1848.) Since the first edition of this work was published, several ingenious conjectures touching these mysterious letters have been communicated to me, but I am convinced that the true solution has not yet been suggested. (1850.) I still greatly doubt whether the riddle has been solved. But the most plausible interpretation is one which, with some variations, occurred, almost at the same time, to myself and to several other persons; I am inclined to read "Pere Mansuete A Cordelier Friar." Mansuete, a Cordelier, was then James's confessor. To Mansuete therefore it peculiarly belonged to remind James of a sacred duty which had been culpably neglected. The writer of the broadside must have been unwilling to inform the world that a soul which many devout Roman Catholics had left to perish had been snatched from destruction by the courageous charity of a woman of loose character. It is therefore not unlikely that he would prefer a fiction, at once probable and edifying, to a truth which could not fail to give scandal. (1856.)——It should seem that no transactions in history ought to be more accurately known to us than those which took place round the deathbed of Charles the Second. We have several relations written by persons who were actually in his room. We have several relations written by persons who, though not themselves eyewitnesses, had the best opportunity of obtaining information from eyewitnesses. Yet whoever attempts to digest this vast mass of materials into a consistent narrative will find the task a difficult one. Indeed James and his wife, when they told the story to the nuns of Chaillot, could not agree as to some circumstances. The Queen said that, after Charles had received the last sacraments the Protestant Bishops renewed their exhortations. The King said that nothing of the kind took place. "Surely," said the Queen, "you told me so yourself." "It is impossible that I have told you so," said the King, "for nothing of the sort happened."——It is much to be regretted that Sir Henry Halford should have taken so little trouble ascertain the facts on which he pronounced judgment. He does not seem to have been aware of the existence of the narrative of James, Barillon, and Huddleston.——As this is the first occasion on which I cite the correspondence of the Dutch ministers at the English court, I ought here to mention that a series of their despatches, from the accession of James the Second to his flight, forms one of the most valuable parts of the Mackintosh collection. The subsequent despatches, down to the settlement of the government in February, 1689, I procured from the Hague. The Dutch archives have been far too little explored. They abound with information interesting in the highest degree to every Englishman. They are admirably arranged and they are in the charge of gentlemen whose courtesy, liberality and zeal for the interests of literature, cannot be too highly praised. I wish to acknowledge, in the strongest manner, my own obligations to Mr. De Jonge and to Mr. Van Zwanne.]

[Footnote 221: Clarendon mentions this calumny with just scorn. "According to the charity of the time towards Cromwell, very many would have it believed to be by poison, of which there was no appearance, nor any proof ever after made."—Book xiv.]

[Footnote 222: Welwood, 139 Burnet, i. 609; Sheffield's Character of Charles the Second; North's Life of Guildford, 252; Examen, 648; Revolution Politics; Higgons on Burnet. What North says of the embarrassment and vacillation of the physicians is confirmed by the despatches of Van Citters. I have been much perplexed by the strange story about Short's suspicions. I was, at one time, inclined to adopt North's solution. But, though I attach little weight to the authority of Welwood and Burnet in such a case, I cannot reject the testimony of so well informed and so unwilling a witness as Sheffield.]

[Footnote 223: London Gazette, Feb. 9. 1684-5; Clarke's Life of James the Second, ii. 3; Barillon, Feb. 9-19: Evelyn's Diary, Feb. 6.]

[Footnote 224: See the authorities cited in the last note. See also the Examen, 647; Burnet, i. 620; Higgons on Burnet.]

[Footnote 225: London Gazette, Feb. 14, 1684-5; Evelyn's Diary of the same day; Burnet, i. 610: The Hind let loose.]

[Footnote 226: Burnet, i. 628; Lestrange, Observator, Feb. 11, 1684.]

[Footnote 227: The letters which passed between Rochester and Ormond on this subject will be found in the Clarendon Correspondence.]

[Footnote 228: The ministerial changes are announced in the London Gazette, Feb. 19, 1684-5. See Burnet, i. 621; Barillon, Feb. 9-19, 16-26; and Feb. 19,/Mar. 1.]

[Footnote 229: Carte's Life of Ormond; Secret Consults of the Romish Party in Ireland, 1690; Memoirs of Ireland, 1716.]

[Footnote 230: Christmas Sessions Paper of 1678.]

[Footnote 231: The Acts of the Witnesses of the Spirit, part v chapter v. In this work Lodowick, after his fashion, revenges himself on the "bawling devil," as he calls Jeffreys, by a string of curses which Ernulphus, or Jeffreys himself, might have envied. The trial was in January, 1677.]

[Footnote 232: This saying is to be found in many contemporary pamphlets. Titus Oates was never tired of quoting it. See his Eikwg Basilikh.]

[Footnote 233: The chief sources of information concerning Jeffreys are the State Trials and North's Life of Lord Guildford. Some touches of minor importance I owe to contemporary pamphlets in verse and prose. Such are the Bloody Assizes the life and Death of George Lord Jeffreys, the Panegyric on the late Lord Jeffreys, the Letter to the Lord Chancellor, Jeffreys's Elegy. See also Evelyn's Diary, Dec. 5, 1683, Oct. 31. 1685. I scarcely need advise every reader to consult Lord Campbell's excellent Life of Jeffreys.]

[Footnote 234: London Gazette, Feb. 12, 1684-5. North's Life of Guildford, 254.]

[Footnote 235: The chief authority for these transactions is Barillon's despatch of February 9-19, 1685. It will be found in the Appendix to Mr. Fox's History. See also Preston's Letter to James, dated April 18-28, 1685, in Dalrymple.]

[Footnote 236: Lewis to Barillon, Feb. 16-26, 1685.]

[Footnote 237: Barillon, Feb. 16-26, 1685.]

[Footnote 238: Barillon, Feb. 18-28, 1685.]

[Footnote 239: Swift who hated Marlborough, and who was little disposed to allow any merit to those whom he hated, says, in the famous letter to Crassus, "You are no ill orator in the Senate."]

[Footnote 240: Dartmouth's note on Burnet, i. 264. Chesterfleld's Letters, Nov., 18, 1748. Chesterfield is an unexceptional witness; for the annuity was a charge on the estate of his grandfather, Halifax. I believe that there is no foundation for a disgraceful addition to the story which may be found in Pope:

"The gallant too, to whom she paid it down, Lived to refuse his mistress half a crown." Curll calls this a piece of travelling scandal.]

[Footnote 241: Pope in Spence's Anecdotes.]

[Footnote 242: See the Historical Records of the first or Royal Dragoons. The appointment of Churchill to the command of this regiment was ridiculed as an instance of absurd partiality. One lampoon of that time which I do not remember to have seen in print, but of which a manuscript copy is in the British Museum, contains these lines:

"Let's cut our meat with spoons: The sense is as good As that Churchill should Be put to command the dragoons."]

[Footnote 243: Barillon, Feb. 16-26, 1685.]

[Footnote 244: Barillon, April 6-16; Lewis to Barillon, April 14-24.]

[Footnote 245: I might transcribe half Barillon's correspondence in proof of this proposition, but I will quote only one passage, in which the policy of the French government towards England is exhibited concisely and with perfect clearness.—— "On peut tenir pour un maxime indubitable que l'accord du Roy d'Angleterre avec son parlement, en quelque maniere qu'il se fasse, n'est pas conforme aux interets de V. M. Je me contente de penser cela sane m'en ouvrir a personne, et je cache avec soin mes sentimens a cet egard."—Barillon to Lewis, Feb. 28,/Mar. 1687. That this was the real secret of the whole policy of Lewis towards our country was perfectly understood at Vienna. The Emperor Leopold wrote thus to James, March 30,/April 9, 1689: "Galli id unum agebant, ut, perpetuas inter Serenitatem vestram et ejusdem populos fovendo simultates, reliquae Christianae Europe tanto securius insultarent."]

[Footnote 246: "Que sea unido con su reyno, yen todo buena intelligencia con el parlamenyo." Despatch from the King of Spain to Don Pedro Ronquillo, March 16-26, 1685. This despatch is in the archives of Samancas, which contain a great mass of papers relating to English affairs. Copies of the most interesting of those papers are in the possession of M. Guizot, and were by him lent to me. It is with peculiar pleasure that at this time, I acknowledge this mark of the friendship of so great a man. (1848.)]

[Footnote 247: Few English readers will be desirous to go deep into the history of this quarrel. Summaries will be found in Cardinal Bausset's Life of Bossuet, and in Voltaire's Age of Lewis XIV.]

[Footnote 248: Burnet, i. 661, and Letter from Rome, Dodd's Church History, part viii. book i. art. 1.]

[Footnote 249: Consultations of the Spanish Council of State on April 2-12 and April 16-26, In the Archives of Simancas.]

[Footnote 250: Lewis to Barillon, May 22,/June 1, 1685; Burnet, i. 623.]

[Footnote 251: Life of James the Second, i. 5. Barillon, Feb. 19,/Mar. 1, 1685; Evelyn's Diary, March 5, 1685.]

[Footnote 252:

"To those that ask boons He swears by God's oons And chides them as if they came there to steal spoons." Lamentable Lory, a ballad, 1684.]

[Footnote 253: Barillon, April 20-30. 1685.]

[Footnote 254: From Adda's despatch of Jan. 22,/Feb. 1, 1686, and from the expressions of the Pere d'Orleans (Histoire des Revolutions d'Angleterre, liv. xi.), it is clear that rigid Catholics thought the King's conduct indefensible.]

[Footnote 255: London Gazette, Gazette de France; Life of James the Second, ii. 10; History of the Coronation of King James the Second and Queen Mary, by Francis Sandford, Lancaster Herald, fol. 1687; Evelyn's Diary, May, 21, 1685; Despatch of the Dutch Ambassadors, April 10-20, 1685; Burnet, i. 628; Eachard, iii. 734; A sermon preached before their Majesties King James the Second and Queen Mary at their Coronation in Westminster Abbey, April 23, 1695, by Francis Lord Bishop of Ely, and Lord Almoner. I have seen an Italian account of the Coronation which was published at Modena, and which is chiefly remarkable for the skill with which the writer sinks the fact that the prayers and psalms were in English, and that the Bishops were heretics.]

[Footnote 256: See the London Gazette during the months of February, March, and April, 1685.]

[Footnote 257: It would be easy to fill a volume with what Whig historians and pamphleteers have written on this subject. I will cite only one witness, a churchman and a Tory. "Elections," says Evelyn, "were thought to be very indecently carried on in most places. God give a better issue of it than some expect!" May 10, 1685. Again he says, "The truth is there were many of the new members whose elections and returns were universally condemned." May 22.]

[Footnote 258: This fact I learned from a newsletter in the library of the Royal Institution. Van Citters mentions the strength of the Whig party in Bedfordshire.]

[Footnote 259: Bramston's Memoirs.]

[Footnote 260: Reflections on a Remonstrance and Protestation of all the good Protestants of this Kingdom, 1689; Dialogue between Two Friends, 1689.]

[Footnote 261: Memoirs of the Life of Thomas Marquess of Wharton, 1715.]

[Footnote 262: See the Guardian, No. 67; an exquisite specimen of Addison's peculiar manner. It would be difficult to find in the works of any other writer such an instance of benevolence delicately flavoured with contempt.]

[Footnote 263: The Observator, April 4, 1685.]

[Footnote 264: Despatch of the Dutch Ambasadors, April 10-20, 1685.]

[Footnote 265: Burnet, i. 626.]

[Footnote 266: A faithful account of the Sickness, Death, and Burial of Captain Bedlow, 1680; Narrative of Lord Chief Justice North.]

[Footnote 267: Smith's Intrigues of the Popish Plot, 1685.]

[Footnote 268: Burnet, i. 439.]

[Footnote 269: See the proceedings in the Collection of State Trials.]

[Footnote 270: Evelyn's Diary, May 7, 1685.]

[Footnote 271: There remain many pictures of Oates. The most striking descriptions of his person are in North's Examen, 225, in Dryden's Absalom and Achitophel, and In a broadside entitled, A Hue and Cry after T. O.]

[Footnote 272: The proceedings will be found at length in the Collection of State Trials.]

[Footnote 273: Gazette de France May 29,/June 9, 1685.]

[Footnote 274: Despatch of the Dutch Ambassadors, May 19-29, 1685.]

[Footnote 275: Evelyn's Diary, May 22, 1685; Eachard, iii. 741; Burnet, i. 637; Observator, May 27, 1685; Oates's Eikvn, 89; Eikwn Brotoloigon, 1697; Commons' Journals of May, June, and July, 1689; Tom Brown's advice to Dr. Oates. Some interesting circumstances are mentioned in a broadside, printed for A. Brooks, Charing Cross, 1685. I have seen contemporary French and Italian pamphlets containing the history of the trial and execution. A print of Titus in the pillory was published at Milan, with the following curious inscription: "Questo e il naturale ritratto di Tito Otez, o vero Oatz, Inglese, posto in berlina, uno de' principali professor della religion protestante, acerrimo persecutore de' Cattolici, e gran spergiuro." I have also seen a Dutch engraving of his punishment, with some Latin verses, of which the following are a specimen:

"At Doctor fictus non fictos pertulit ictus A tortore datos haud molli in corpore gratos, Disceret ut vere scelera ob commissa rubere."

The anagram of his name, "Testis Ovat," may be found on many prints published in different countries.]

[Footnote 276: Blackstone's Commentaries, Chapter of Homicide.]

[Footnote 277: According to Roger North the judges decided that Dangerfield, having been previously convicted of perjury, was incompetent to be a witness of the plot. But this is one among many instances of Roger's inaccuracy. It appears, from the report of the trial of Lord Castlemaine in June 1680, that, after much altercation between counsel, and much consultation among the judges of the different courts in Westminster Hall, Dangerfield was sworn and suffered to tell his story; but the jury very properly gave no credit to his testimony.]

[Footnote 278: Dangerfield's trial was not reported; but I have seen a concise account of it in a contemporary broadside. An abstract of the evidence against Francis, and his dying speech, will be found in the Collection of State Trials. See Eachard, iii. 741. Burnet's narrative contains more mistakes than lines. See also North's Examen, 256, the sketch of Dangerfield's life in the Bloody Assizes, the Observator of July 29, 1685, and the poem entitled "Dangerfield's Ghost to Jeffreys." In the very rare volume entitled "Succinct Genealogies, by Robert Halstead," Lord Peterbough says that Dangerfield, with whom he had had some intercourse, was "a young man who appeared under a decent figure, a serious behaviour, and with words that did not seem to proceed from a common understanding."]

[Footnote 279: Baxter's preface to Sir Mathew Hale's Judgment of the Nature of True Religion, 1684.]

[Footnote 280: See the Observator of February 28, 1685, the information in the Collection of State Trials, the account of what passed in court given by Calamy, Life of Baxter, chap. xiv., and the very curious extracts from the Baxter MSS. in the Life, by Orme, published in 1830.]

[Footnote 281: Baxter MS. cited by Orme.]

[Footnote 282: Act Parl. Car. II. March 29,1661, Jac. VII. April 28, 1685, and May 13, 1685.]

[Footnote 283: Act Parl. Jac. VII. May 8, 1685, Observator, June 20, 1685; Lestrange evidently wished to see the precedent followed in England.]

[Footnote 284: His own words reported by himself. Life of James the Second, i. 666. Orig. Mem.]

[Footnote 285: Act Parl. Car. II. August 31, 1681.]

[Footnote 286: Burnet, i. 583; Wodrow, III. v. 2. Unfortunately the Acta of the Scottish Privy Council during almost the whole administration of the Duke of York are wanting. (1848.) This assertion has been met by a direct contradiction. But the fact is exactly as I have stated it. There is in he Acta of the Scottish Privy Council a hiatus extending from August 1678 to August 1682. The Duke of York began to reside in Scotland in December 1679. He left Scotland, never to return in May 1682. (1857.)]

[Footnote 287: Wodrow, III. ix. 6.]

[Footnote 288: Wodrow, III. ix. 6. The editor of the Oxford edition of Burnet attempts to excuse this act by alleging that Claverhouse was then employed to intercept all communication between Argyle and Monmouth, and by supposing that John Brown may have been detected in conveying intelligence between the rebel camps. Unfortunately for this hypothesis John Brown was shot on the first of May, when both Argyle and Monmouth were in Holland, and when there was no insurrection in any part of our island.]

[Footnote 289: Wodrow, III. ix, 6.]

[Footnote 290: Wodrow, III. ix. 6. It has been confidently asserted, by persons who have not taken the trouble to look at the authority to which I have referred, that I have grossly calumniated these unfortunate men; that I do not understand the Calvinistic theology; and that it is impossible that members of the Church of Scotland can have refused to pray for any man on the ground that he was not one of the elect.—— I can only refer to the narrative which Wodrow has inserted in his history, and which he justly calls plain and natural. That narrative is signed by two eyewitnesses, and Wodrow, before he published it, submitted it to a third eyewitness, who pronounced it strictly accurate. From that narrative I will extract the only words which bear on the point in question: "When all the three were taken, the officers consulted among themselves, and, withdrawing to the west side of the town, questioned the prisoners, particularly if they would pray for King James VII. They answered, they would pray for all within the election of grace. Balfour said Do you question the King's election? They answered, sometimes they questioned their own. Upon which he swore dreadfully, and said they should die presently, because they would not pray for Christ's vicegerent, and so without one word more, commanded Thomas Cook to go to his prayers, for he should die.—— In this narrative Wodrow saw nothing improbable; and I shall not easily be convinced that any writer now living understands the feelings and opinions of the Covenanters better than Wodrow did. (1857.)]

[Footnote 291: Wodrow, III. ix. 6. Cloud of Witnesses.]

[Footnote 292: Wodrow, III. ix. 6. The epitaph of Margaret Wilson, in the churchyard at Wigton, is printed in the Appendix to the Cloud of Witnesses;

"Murdered for owning Christ supreme Head of his church, and no more crime, But her not owning Prelacy. And not abjuring Presbytery, Within the sea, tied to a stake, She suffered for Christ Jesus' sake."]

[Footnote 293: See the letter to King Charles II. prefixed to Barclay's Apology.]

[Footnote 294: Sewel's History of the Quakers, book x.]

[Footnote 295: Minutes of Yearly Meetings, 1689, 1690.]

[Footnote 296: Clarkson on Quakerism; Peculiar Customs, chapter v.]

[Footnote 297: After this passage was written, I found in the British Museum, a manuscript (Harl. MS. 7506) entitled, "An Account of the Seizures, Sequestrations, great Spoil and Havock made upon the Estates of the several Protestant Dissenters called Quakers, upon Prosecution of old Statutes made against Papist and Popish Recusants." The manuscript is marked as having belonged to James, and appears to have been given by his confidential servant, Colonel Graham, to Lord Oxford. This circumstance appears to me to confirm the view which I have taken of the King's conduct towards the Quakers.]

[Footnote 298: Penn's visits to Whitehall, and levees at Kensington, are described with great vivacity, though in very bad Latin, by Gerard Croese. "Sumebat," he says, "rex saepe secretum, non horarium, vero horarum plurium, in quo de variis rebus cum Penno serio sermonem conferebat, et interim differebat audire praecipuorum nobilium ordinem, qui hoc interim spatio in proc tone, in proximo, regem conventum praesto erant." Of the crowd of suitors at Penn's house. Croese says, "Visi quandoquo de hoc genere hominum non minus bis centum." Historia Quakeriana, lib. ii. 1695.]

[Footnote 299: "Twenty thousand into my pocket; and a hundred thousand into my province." Penn's "Letter to Popple."]

[Footnote 300: These orders, signed by Sunderland, will be found in Sewel's History. They bear date April 18, 1685. They are written in a style singularly obscure and intricate: but I think that I have exhibited the meaning correctly. I have not been able to find any proof that any person, not a Roman Catholic or a Quaker, regained his freedom under these orders. See Neal's History of the Puritans, vol. ii. chap. ii.; Gerard Croese, lib. ii. Croese estimates the number of Quakers liberated at fourteen hundred and sixty.]

[Footnote 301: Barillon, May 28,/June 7, 1685. Observator, May 27, 1685; Sir J. Reresby's Memoirs.]

[Footnote 302: Lewis wrote to Barillon about this class of Exclusionists as follows: "L'interet qu'ils auront a effacer cette tache par des services considerables les portera, aelon toutes les apparences, a le servir plus utilement que ne pourraient faire ceux qui ont toujours ete les plus attaches a sa personne." May 15-25,1685.]

[Footnote 303: Barillon, May 4-14, 1685; Sir John Reresby's Memoirs.]

[Footnote 304: Burnet, i. 626; Evelyn's Diary, May, 22, 1685.]

[Footnote 305: Roger North's Life of Guildford, 218; Bramston's Memoirs.]

[Footnote 306: North's Life of Guildford, 228; News from Westminster.]

[Footnote 307: Burnet, i. 382; Letter from Lord Conway to Sir George Rawdon, Dec. 28, 1677. in the Rawdon Papers.]

[Footnote 308: London Gazette, May 25, 1685; Evelyn's Diary, May 22, 1685.]

[Footnote 309: North's Life of Guildford, 256.]

[Footnote 310: Burnet, i. 639; Evelyn's Diary, May 22, 1685; Barillon, May 23,/June 2, and May 25,/June 4, 1685 The silence of the journals perplexed Mr. Fox; but it is explained by the circumstance that Seymour's motion was not seconded.]

[Footnote 311: Journals, May 22. Stat. Jac. II. i. 1.]

[Footnote 312: Journals, May 26, 27. Sir J. Reresby's Memoirs.]

[Footnote 313: Commons' Journals, May 27, 1685.]

[Footnote 314: Roger North's Life of Sir Dudley North; Life of Lord Guilford, 166; Mr M'Cullough's Literature of Political Economy.]

[Footnote 315: Life of Dudley North, 176, Lonsdale's Memoirs, Van Citters, June 12-22, 1685.]

[Footnote 316: Commons' Journals, March 1, 1689.]

[Footnote 317: Lords' Journals, March 18, 19, 1679, May 22, 1685.]

[Footnote 318: Stat. 5 Geo. IV. c. 46.]

[Footnote 319: Clarendon's History of the Rebellion, book xiv.; Burnet's Own Times, i. 546, 625; Wade's and Ireton's Narratives, Lansdowne MS. 1152; West's information in the Appendix to Sprat's True Account.]

[Footnote 320: London Gazette, January, 4, 1684-5; Ferguson MS. in Eachard's History, iii. 764; Grey's Narratives; Sprat's True Account, Danvers's Treatise on Baptism; Danvers's Innocency and Truth vindicated; Crosby's History of the English Baptists.]

[Footnote 321: Sprat's True Account; Burnet, i. 634; Wade's Confession, Earl. MS. 6845.—— Lord Howard of Escrick accused Ayloffe of proposing to assassinate the Duke of York; but Lord Howard was an abject liar; and this story was not part of his original confession, but was added afterwards by way of supplement, and therefore deserves no credit whatever.]

[Footnote 322: Wade's Confession, Harl. MS. 6845; Lansdowne MS. 1152; Holloway's narrative in the Appendix to Sprat's True Account. Wade owned that Holloway had told nothing but truth.]

[Footnote 323: Sprat's True Account and Appendix, passim.]

[Footnote 324: Sprat's True Account and Appendix, Proceedings against Rumbold in the Collection of State Trials; Burnet's Own Times, i. 633; Appendix to Fox's History, No. IV.]

[Footnote 325: Grey's narrative; his trial in the Collection of State Trials; Sprat's True Account.]

[Footnote 326: In the Pepysian Collection is a print representing one of the balls which About this time William and Mary gave in the Oranje Zaal.]

[Footnote 327: Avaux Neg. January 25, 1685. Letter from James to the Princess of Orange dated January 1684-5, among Birch's Extracts in the British Museum.]

[Footnote 328: Grey's Narrative; Wade's Confession, Lansdowne MS. 1152.]

[Footnote 329: Burnet, i. 542; Wood, Ath. Ox. under the name of Owen; Absalom and Achtophel, part ii.; Eachard, iii. 682, 697; Sprat's True Account, passim; Lond. Gaz. Aug. 6,1683; Nonconformist's Memorial; North's Examen, 399.]

[Footnote 330: Wade's Confession, Harl. MS. 6845.]

[Footnote 331: Avaux Neg. Feb. 20, 22, 1685; Monmouth's letter to James from Ringwood.]

[Footnote 332: Boyer's History of King William the Third, 2d edition, 1703, vol. i 160.]

[Footnote 333: Welwood's Memoirs, App. xv.; Burnet, i. 530. Grey told a somewhat different story, but he told it to save his life. The Spanish ambassador at the English court, Don Pedro de Ronquillo, in a letter to the governor of the Low Countries written about this time, sneers at Monmouth for living on the bounty of a fond woman, and hints a very unfounded suspicion that the Duke's passion was altogether interested. "Hallandose hoy tan falto de medios que ha menester trasformarse en Amor con Miledi en vista de la ecesidad de poder subsistir."—Ronquillo to Grana. Mar. 30,/Apr. 9, 1685.]

[Footnote 334: Proceedings against Argyle in the Collection of State Trials, Burnet, i 521; A True and Plain Account of the Discoveries made in Scotland, 1684, The Scotch Mist Cleared; Sir George Mackenzie's Vindication, Lord Fountainhall's Chronological Notes.]

[Footnote 335: Information of Robert Smith in the Appendix to Sprat's True Account.]

[Footnote 336: True and Plain Account of the Discoveries made in Scotland.]

[Footnote 337: Discorsi sopra la prima Deca di Tito Livio, lib. ii. cap. 33.]

[Footnote 338: See Sir Patrick Hume's Narrative, passim.]

[Footnote 339: Grey's Narrative; Wade's Confession, Harl. MS. 6845.]

[Footnote 340: Burnet, i. 631.]

[Footnote 341: Grey's Narrative.]

[Footnote 342: Le Clerc's Life of Locke; Lord King's Life of Locke; Lord Grenville's Oxford and Locke. Locke must not be confounded with the Anabapist Nicholas Look, whose name was spelled Locke in Grey's Confession, and who is mentioned in the Lansdowne MS. 1152, and in the Buccleuch narrative appended to Mr. Rose's dissertation. I should hardly think it necessary to make this remark, but that the similarity of the two names appears to have misled a man so well acquainted with the history of those times as Speaker Onslow. See his note on Burnet, i, 629.]

[Footnote 343: Wodrow, book iii. chap. ix; London Gazette, May 11, 1685; Barillon, May 11-21.]

[Footnote 344: Register of the Proceedings of the States General, May 5-15, 1685.]

[Footnote 345: This is mentioned in his credentials, dated on the 16th of March, 1684-5.]

[Footnote 346: Bonrepaux to Seignelay, February 4-14, 1686.]

[Footnote 347: Avaux Neg. April 30,/May 10, May 1-11, May 5-15, 1685; Sir Patrick Hume's Narrative; Letter from The Admiralty of Amsterdam to the States General, dated June 20, 1685; Memorial of Skelton, delivered to the States General, May 10, 1685.]

[Footnote 348: If any person is inclined to suspect that I have exaggerated the absurdity and ferocity of these men, I would advise him to read two books, which will convince him that I have rather softened than overcharged the portrait, the Hind Let Loose, and Faithful Contendings Displayed.]

[Footnote 349: A few words which were in the first five editions have been omitted in this place. Here and in another passage I had, as Mr. Aytoun has observed, mistaken the City Guards, which were commanded by an officer named Graham, for the Dragoons of Graham of Claverhouse.]

[Footnote 350: The authors from whom I have taken the history of Argyle's expedition are Sir Patrick Hume, who was an eyewitness of what he related, and Wodrow, who had access to materials of the greatest value, among which were the Earl's own papers. Wherever there is a question of veracity between Argyle and Hume, I have no doubt that Argyle's narrative ought to be followed.—— See also Burnet, i. 631, and the life of Bresson, published by Dr. Mac Crie. The account of the Scotch rebellion in the Life of James the Second, is a ridiculous romance, not written by the King himself, nor derived from his papers, but composed by a Jacobite who did not even take the trouble to look at a map of the seat of war.]

[Footnote 351: Wodrow, III. ix 10; Western Martyrology; Burnet, i. 633; Fox's History, Appendix iv. I can find no way, except that indicated in the text, of reconciling Rumbold's denial that he had ever admitted into his mind the thought of assassination with his confession that he had himself mentioned his own house as a convenient place for an attack on the royal brothers. The distinction which I suppose him to have taken was certainly taken by another Rye House conspirator, who was, like him, an old soldier of the Commonwealth, Captain Walcot. On Walcot's trial, West, the witness for the crown, said, "Captain, you did agree to be one of those that were to fight the Guards." "What, then, was the reason." asked Chief Justice Pemberton, "that he would not kill the King?" "He said," answered West, "that it was a base thing to kill a naked man, and he would not do it."]

[Footnote 352: Wodrow, III. ix. 9.]

[Footnote 353: Wade's narrative, Harl, MS. 6845; Burnet, i. 634; Van Citters's Despatch of Oct. 30,/Nov. 9, 1685; Luttrell's Diary of the same date.]

[Footnote 354: Wodrow, III, ix. 4, and III. ix. 10. Wodrow gives from the Acts of Council the names of all the prisoners who were transported, mutilated or branded.]

[Footnote 355: Skelton's letter is dated the 7-17th of May 1686. It will be found, together with a letter of the Schout or High Bailiff of Amsterdam, in a little volume published a few months later, and entitled, "Histoire des Evenemens Tragiques d'Angleterre." The documents inserted in that work are, as far as I have examined them, given exactly from the Dutch archives, except that Skelton's French, which was not the purest, is slightly corrected. See also Grey's Narrative.—— Goodenough, on his examination after the battle of Sedgemoor, said, "The Schout of Amsterdam was a particular friend to this last design." Lansdowne MS. 1152.—— It is not worth while to refute those writers who represent the Prince of Orange as an accomplice in Monmouth's enterprise. The circumstance on which they chiefly rely is that the authorities of Amsterdam took no effectual steps for preventing the expedition from sailing. This circumstance is in truth the strongest proof that the expedition was not favoured by William. No person, not profoundly ignorant of the institutions and politics of Holland, would hold the Stadtholder answerable for the proceedings of the heads of the Loevestein party.]

[Footnote 356: Avaux Neg. June 7-17, 8-18, 14-24, 1685, Letter of the Prince of Orange to Lord Rochester, June 9, 1685.]

[Footnote 357: Van Citters, June 9-19, June 12-22,1685. The correspondence of Skelton with the States General and with the Admiralty of Amsterdam is in the archives at the Hague. Some pieces will be found in the Evenemens Tragiques d'Angleterre. See also Burnet, i. 640.]

[Footnote 358: Wade's Confession in the Hardwicke Papers; Harl. MS. 6845.]

[Footnote 359: See Buyse's evidence against Monmouth and Fletcher in the Collection of State Trials.]

[Footnote 360: Journals of the House of Commons, June 13, 1685; Harl. MS. 6845; Lansdowne MS. 1152.]

[Footnote 361: Burnet, i. 641, Goodenough's confession in the Lansdowne MS. 1152. Copies of the Declaration, as originally printed, are very rare; but there is one in the British Museum.]

[Footnote 362: Historical Account of the Life and magnanimous Actions of the most illustrious Protestant Prince James, Duke of Monmouth, 1683.]

[Footnote 363: Wade's Confession, Hardwicke Papers; Axe Papers; Harl. MS. 6845.]

[Footnote 364: Harl. MS. 6845.]

[Footnote 365: Buyse's evidence in the Collection of State Trials; Burnet i 642; Ferguson's MS. quoted by Eachard.]

[Footnote 366: London Gazette, June 18, 1685; Wade's Confession, Hardwicke Papers.]

[Footnote 367: Lords' Journals, June 13,1685.]

[Footnote 368: Wade's Confession; Ferguson MS.; Axe Papers, Harl. MS. 6845, Oldmixon, 701, 702. Oldmixon, who was then a boy, lived very near the scene of these events.]

[Footnote 369: London Gazette, June 18, 1685; Lords' and Commons' Journals, June 13 and 15; Dutch Despatch, 16-26.]

[Footnote 370: Oldmixon is wrong in saying that Fenwick carried up the bill. It was carried up, as appears from the Journals, by Lord Ancram. See Delamere's Observations on the Attainder of the Late Duke of Monmouth.]

[Footnote 371: Commons' Journals of June 17, 18, and 19, 1685; Reresby's Memoirs.]

[Footnote 372: Commons' Journals, June 19, 29, 1685; Lord Lonsdale's Memoirs, 8, 9, Burnet, i. 639. The bill, as amended by the committee, will be found in Mr. Fox's historical work. Appendix iii. If Burnet's account be correct, the offences which, by the amended bill, were made punishable only with civil incapacities were, by the original bill, made capital.]

[Footnote 373: 1 Jac. II. c. 7; Lords' Journals, July 2, 1685.]

[Footnote 374: Lords' and Commons' Journals, July 2, 1685.]

[Footnote 375: Savage's edition of Toulmin's History of Taunton.]

[Footnote 376: Sprat's true Account; Toulmin's History of Taunton.]

[Footnote 377: Life and Death of Joseph Alleine, 1672; Nonconformists' Memorial.]

[Footnote 378: Harl. MS. 7006; Oldmixon. 702; Eachard, iii. 763.]

[Footnote 379: Wade's Confession; Goodenough's Confession, Harl. MS. 1152, Oldmixon, 702. Ferguson's denial is quite undeserving of credit. A copy of the proclamation is in the Harl. MS. 7006.]

[Footnote 380: Copies of the last three proclamations are in the British Museum; Harl. MS. 7006. The first I have never seen; but it is mentioned by Wado.]

[Footnote 381: Grey's Narrative; Ferguson's MS., Eachard, iii. 754.]

[Footnote 382: Persecution Exposed, by John Whiting.]

[Footnote 383: Harl. MS. 6845.]

[Footnote 384: One of these weapons may still be seen in the tower.]

[Footnote 385: Grey's Narrative; Paschall's Narrative in the Appendix to Heywood's Vindication.]

[Footnote 386: Oldmixon, 702.]

[Footnote 387: North's Life of Guildford, 132. Accounts of Beaufort's progress through Wales and the neighbouring counties are in the London Gazettes of July 1684. Letter of Beaufort to Clarendon, June 19, 1685.]

[Footnote 388: Bishop Fell to Clarendon, June 20; Abingdon to Clarendon, June 20, 25, 26, 1685; Lansdowne MS. 846.]

[Footnote 389: Avaux, July 5-15, 6-16, 1685.]

[Footnote 390: Van Citters, June 30,/July 10, July 3-13, 21-31,1685; Avaux Neg. July 5-15, London Gazette, July 6.]

[Footnote 391: Barillon, July 6-16, 1685; Scott's preface to Albion and Albanius.]

[Footnote 392: Abingdon to Clarendon, June 29,1685; Life of Philip Henry, by Bates.]

[Footnote 393: London Gazette, June 22, and June 25,1685; Wade's Confession; Oldmixon, 703; Harl. MS. 6845.]

[Footnote 394: Wade's Confession.]

[Footnote 395: Wade's Confession; Oldmixon, 703; Harl. MS. 6845; Charge of Jeffreys to the grand jury of Bristol, Sept. 21, 1685.]

[Footnote 396: London Gazette, June 29, 1685; Wade's Confession.]

[Footnote 397: Wade's Confession.]

[Footnote 398: London Gazette, July 2,1685; Barillon, July 6-16; Wade's Confession.]

[Footnote 399: London Gazette, June 29,1685; Van Citters, June 30,/July 10,]

[Footnote 400: Harl. MS. 6845; Wade's Confession.]

[Footnote 401: Wade's Confession; Eachard, iii. 766.]

[Footnote 402: Wade's Confession.]

[Footnote 403: London Gazette, July 6, 1685; Van Citters, July 3-13, Oldmixon, 703.]

[Footnote 404: Wade's Confession.]

[Footnote 405: Matt. West. Flor. Hist., A. D. 788; MS. Chronicle quoted by Mr. Sharon Turner in the History of the Anglo-Saxons, book IV. chap. xix; Drayton's Polyolbion, iii; Leland's Itinerary; Oldmixon, 703. Oldmixon was then at Bridgewater, and probably saw the Duke on the church tower. The dish mentioned in the text is the property of Mr. Stradling, who has taken laudable pain's to preserve the relics and traditions of the Western insurrection.]

[Footnote 406: Oldmixon, 703.]

[Footnote 407: Churchill to Clarendon, July 4, 1685.]

[Footnote 408: Oldmixon, 703; Observator, Aug. 1, 1685.]

[Footnote 409: Paschall's Narrative in Heywood's Appendix.]

[Footnote 410: Kennet, ed. 1719, iii. 432. I am forced to believe that this lamentable story is true. The Bishop declares that it was communicated to him in the year 1718 by a brave officer of the Blues, who had fought at Sedgemoor, and who had himself seen the poor girl depart in an agony of distress.]

[Footnote 411: Narrative of an officer of the Horse Guards in Kennet, ed. 1718, iii. 432; MS. Journal of the Western Rebellion, kept by Mr. Edward Dummer, Dryden's Hind and Panther, part II. The lines of Dryden are remarkable:

"Such were the pleasing triumphs of the sky For James's late nocturnal victory. The fireworks which his angels made above. The pledge of his almighty patron's love, I saw myself the lambent easy light Gild the brown horror and dispel the night. The messenger with speed the tidings bore. News which three labouring nations did restore; But heaven's own Nuntius was arrived before.']

[Footnote 412: It has been said by several writers, and among them by Pennant, that the district in London called Soho derived its name from the watchword of Monmouth's army at Sedgemoor. Mention of Soho Fields will be found in many books printed before the Western insurrection; for example, in Chamberlayne's State of England, 1684.]

[Footnote 413: There is a warrant of James directing that forty pounds should be paid to Sergeant Weems, of Dumbarton's regiment, "for good service in the action at Sedgemoor in firing the great guns against the rebels." Historical Record of the First or Royal Regiment of Foot.]

[Footnote 414: James the Second's account of the battle of Sedgemoor in Lord Hardwicke's State Papers; Wade's Confession; Ferguson's MS. Narrative in Eachard, iii. 768; Narrative of an Officer of the Horse Guards in Kennet, ed. 1719, iii. 432, London Gazette, July 9, 1685; Oldmixon, 703; Paschall's Narrative; Burnet, i. 643; Evelyn's Diary, July 8; Van Citters,.July 7-17; Barillon, July 9-19; Reresby's Memoirs; the Duke of Buckingham's battle of Sedgemoor, a Farce; MS. Journal of the Western Rebellion, kept by Mr. Edward Dummer, then serving in the train of artillery employed by His Majesty for the suppression of the same. The last mentioned manuscript is in the Pepysian library, and is of the greatest value, not on account of the narrative, which contains little that is remarkable, but on account of the plans, which exhibit the battle in four or five different stages.]

"The history of a battle," says the greatest of living generals, "is not unlike the history of a ball. Some individuals may recollect all the little events of which the great result is the battle won or lost, but no individual can recollect the order in which, or the exact moment at which, they occurred, which makes all the difference as to their value or importance..... Just to show you how little reliance can be placed even on what are supposed the best accounts of a battle, I mention that there are some circumstances mentioned in General—'s account which did not occur as he relates them. It is impossible to say when each important occurrence took place, or in what order."—Wellington Papers, Aug. 8, and 17, 1815.—— The battle concerning which the Duke of Wellington wrote thus was that of Waterloo, fought only a few weeks before, by broad day, under his own vigilant and experienced eye. What then must be the difficulty of compiling from twelve or thirteen narratives an account of a battle fought more than a hundred and sixty years ago in such darkness that not a man of those engaged could see fifty paces before him? The difficulty is aggravated by the circumstance that those witnesses who had the best opportunity of knowing the truth were by no means inclined to tell it. The Paper which I have placed at the head of my list of authorities was evidently drawn up with extreme partiality to Feversham. Wade was writing under the dread of the halter. Ferguson, who was seldom scrupulous about the truth of his assertions, lied on this occasion like Bobadil or Parolles. Oldmixon, who was a boy at Bridgewater when the battle was fought, and passed a great part of his subsequent life there, was so much under the influence of local passions that his local information was useless to him. His desire to magnify the valour of the Somersetshire peasants, a valour which their enemies acknowledged and which did not need to be set off by exaggeration and fiction, led him to compose an absurd romance. The eulogy which Barillon, a Frenchman accustomed to despise raw levies, pronounced on the vanquished army, is of much more value, "Son infanterie fit fort bien. On eut de la peine a les rompre, et les soldats combattoient avec les crosses de mousquet et les scies qu'ils avoient au bout de grands bastons au lieu de picques."—— Little is now to be learned by visiting the field of battle for the face of the country has been greatly changed; and the old Bussex Rhine on the banks of which the great struggle took place, has long disappeared. The rhine now called by that name is of later date, and takes a different course.—— I have derived much assistance from Mr. Roberts's account of the battle. Life of Monmouth, chap. xxii. His narrative is in the main confirmed by Dummer's plans.]

[Footnote 415: I learned these things from persons living close to Sedgemoor.]

[Footnote 416: Oldmixon, 704.]

[Footnote 417: Locke's Western Rebellion Stradling's Chilton Priory.]

[Footnote 418: Locke's Western Rebellion Stradling's Chilton Priory; Oldmixon, 704.]

[Footnote 419: Aubrey's Natural History of Wiltshire, 1691.]

[Footnote 420: Account of the manner of taking the late Duke of Monmouth, published by his Majesty's command; Gazette de France, July 18-28, 1688; Eachard, iii. 770; Burnet, i. 664, and Dartmouth's note: Van Citters, July 10-20,1688.]

[Footnote 421: The letter to the King was printed at the time by authority; that to the Queen Dowager will be found in Sir H. Ellis's Original Letters; that to Rochester in the Clarendon Correspondence.]

[Footnote 422: "On trouve," he wrote, "fort a redire icy qu'il ayt fait une chose si peu ordinaire aux Anglois." July 13-23, 1685.]

[Footnote 423: Account of the manner of taking the Duke of Monmouth; Gazette, July 16, 1685; Van Citters, July 14-24,]

[Footnote 424: Barillon was evidently much shocked. "Ill se vient," he says, "de passer icy, une chose bien extraordinaire et fort opposee a l'usage ordinaire des autres nations" 13-23, 1685.]

[Footnote 425: Burnet. i. 644; Evelyn's Diary, July 15; Sir J. Bramston's Memoirs; Reresby's Memoirs; James to the Prince of Orange, July 14, 1685; Barillon, July 16-26; Bucclench MS.]

[Footnote 426: James to the Prince of Orange, July 14, 1685, Dutch Despatch of the same date, Dartmouth's note on Burnet, i. 646; Narcissus Luttrell's Diary, (1848) a copy of this diary, from July 1685 to Sept. 1690, is among the Mackintosh papers. To the rest I was allowed access by the kindness of the Warden of All Souls' College, where the original MS. is deposited. The delegates of the Press of the University of Oxford have since published the whole in six substantial volumes, which will, I am afraid, find little favour with readers who seek only for amusement, but which will always be useful as materials for history. (1857.)]

[Footnote 427: Buccleuch MS; Life of James the Second, ii. 37, Orig. Mem., Van Citters, July 14-24, 1685; Gazette de France, August 1-11.]

[Footnote 428: Buccleuch MS.; Life of James the Second, ii. 37, 38, Orig. Mem., Burnet, i. 645; Tenison's account in Kennet, iii. 432, ed. 1719.]

[Footnote 429: Buccleuch MS.]

[Footnote 430: The name of Ketch was often associated with that of Jeffreys in the lampoons of those days.

"While Jeffreys on the bench, Ketch on the gibbet sits,"

says one poet. In the year which followed Monmouth's execution Ketch was turned out of his office for insulting one of the Sheriffs, and was succeeded by a butcher named Rose. But in four months Rose himself was hanged at Tyburn, and Ketch was reinstated. Luttrell's Diary, January 20, and May 28, 1686. See a curious note by Dr. Grey, on Hudibras, part iii. canto ii. line 1534.]

[Footnote 431: Account of the execution of Monmouth, signed by the divines who attended him; Buccleuch MS; Burnet, i. 646; Van Citters, July 17-27,1685, Luttrell's Diary; Evelyn's Diary, July 15; Barillon, July 19-29.]

[Footnote 432: I cannot refrain from expressing my disgust at the barbarous stupidity which has transformed this most interesting little church into the likeness of a meetinghouse in a manufacturing town.]

[Footnote 433: Observator, August 1, 1685; Gazette de France, Nov. 2, 1686; Letter from Humphrey Wanley, dated Aug. 25, 1698, in the Aubrey Collection; Voltaire, Dict. Phil. There are, in the Pepysian Collection, several ballads written after Monmouth's death which represent him as living, and predict his speedy return. I will give two specimens.

"Though this is a dismal story Of the fall of my design, Yet I'll come again in glory, If I live till eighty-nine: For I'll have a stronger army And of ammunition store."

Again;

"Then shall Monmouth in his glories Unto his English friends appear, And will stifle all such stories As are vended everywhere. "They'll see I was not so degraded, To be taken gathering pease, Or in a cock of hay up braided. What strange stories now are these!"]

[Footnote 434: London Gazette, August 3, 1685; the Battle of Sedgemoor, a Farce.]

[Footnote 435: Pepys's Diary, kept at Tangier; Historical Records of the Second or Queen's Royal Regiment of Foot.]

[Footnote 436: Bloody Assizes, Burnet, i. 647; Luttrell's Diary, July 15, 1685; Locke's Western Rebellion; Toulmin's History of Taunton, edited by Savage.]

[Footnote 437: Luttrell's Diary, July 15, 1685; Toulmin's Hist. of Taunton.]

[Footnote 438: Oldmixon, 705; Life and Errors of John Dunton, chap. vii.]

[Footnote 439: The silence of Whig writers so credulous and so malevolent as Oldmixon and the compilers of the Western Martyrology would alone seem to me to settle the question. It also deserves to be remarked that the story of Rhynsault is told by Steele in the Spectator, No. 491. Surely it is hardly possible to believe that, if a crime exactly resembling that of Rhynsault had been committed within living memory in England by an officer of James the Second, Steele, who was indiscreetly and unseasonably forward to display his Whiggism, would have made no allusion to that fact. For the case of Lebon, see the Moniteur, 4 Messidor, l'an 3.]

[Footnote 440: Sunderland to Kirke, July 14 and 28, 1685. "His Majesty," says Sunderland, "commands me to signify to you his dislike of these proceedings, and desires you to take care that no person concerned in the rebellion be at large." It is but just to add that, in the same letter, Kirke is blamed for allowing his soldiers to live at free quarter.]

[Footnote 441: I should be very glad if I could give credit to the popular story that Ken, immediately after the battle of Sedgemoor, represented to the chiefs of the royal army the illegality of military executions. He would, I doubt not, have exerted all his influence on the side of law and of mercy, if he had been present. But there is no trustworthy evidence that he was then in the West at all. Indeed what we know about his proceedings at this time amounts very nearly to proof of an alibi. It is certain from the Journals of the House of Lords that, on the Thursday before the battle, he was at Westminster, it is equally certain that, on the Monday after the battle, he was with Monmouth in the Tower; and, in that age, a journey from London to Bridgewater and back again was no light thing.]

[Footnote 442: North's Life of Guildford, 260, 263, 273; Mackintosh's View of the Reign of James the Second, page 16, note; Letter of Jeffreys to Sunderland, Sept. 5, 1685.]

[Footnote 443: See the preamble of the Act of Parliament reversing her attainder.]

[Footnote 444: Trial of Alice Lisle in the Collection of State Trials; Act of the First of William and Mary for annulling and making void the Attainder of Alice Lisle widow; Burnet, i. 649; Caveat against the Whigs.]

[Footnote 445: Bloody Assizes.]

[Footnote 446: Locke's Western Rebellion.]

[Footnote 447: This I can attest from my own childish recollections.]

[Footnote 448: Lord Lonsdale says seven hundred; Burnet six hundred. I have followed the list which the Judges sent to the Treasury, and which may still be seen there in the letter book of 1685. See the Bloody Assizes, Locke's Western Rebellion; the Panegyric on Lord Jeffreys; Burnet, i. 648; Eachard, iii. 775; Oldmixon, 705.]

[Footnote 449: Some of the prayers, exhortations, and hymns of the sufferers will be found in the Bloody Assizes.]

[Footnote 450: Bloody Assizes; Locke's Western Rebellion; Lord Lonsdale's Memoirs; Account of the Battle of Sedgemoor in the Hardwicke Papers. The story in the Life of James the Second, ii. 43; is not taken from the King's manuscripts, and sufficiently refutes itself.]

[Footnote 451: Bloody Assizes; Locke's Western Rebellion, Humble Petition of Widows and Fatherless Children in the West of England; Panegyric on Lord Jeffreys.]

[Footnote 452: As to the Hewlings, I have followed Kiffin's Memoirs, and Mr. Hewling Luson's narrative, which will be found in the second edition of the Hughes Correspondence, vol. ii. Appendix. The accounts in Locke's Western Rebellion and in the Panegyric on Jeffreys are full of errors. Great part of the account in the Bloody Assizes was written by Kiffin, and agrees word for word with his Memoirs.]

[Footnote 453: See Tutchin's account of his own case in the Bloody Assizes.]

[Footnote 454: Sunderland to Jeffreys, Sept. 14, 1685; Jeffreys to the King, Sept. 19, 1685, in the State Paper Office.]

[Footnote 455: The best account of the sufferings of those rebels who were sentenced to transportation is to be found in a very curious narrative written by John Coad, an honest, Godfearing carpenter who joined Monmouth, was badly wounded at Philip's Norton, was tried by Jeffreys, and was sent to Jamaica. The original manuscript was kindly lent to me by Mr. Phippard, to whom it belongs.]

[Footnote 456: In the Treasury records of the autumn of 1685 are several letters directing search to be made for trifles of this sort.]

[Footnote 457: Commons' Journals, Oct. 9, Nov. 10, Dec 26, 1690; Oldmixon, 706. Panegyrie on Jeffreys.]

[Footnote 458: Life and Death of Lord Jeffreys; Panegyric on Jeffreys; Kiffin's Memoirs.]

[Footnote 459: Burnet, i 368; Evelyn's Diary, Feb. 4, 1684-5, July 13, 1686. In one of the satires of that time are these lines:

"When Duchess, she was gentle, mild, and civil; When Queen, she proved a raging furious devil."]

[Footnote 460: Sunderland to Jeffreys, Sept. 14, 1685.]

[Footnote 461: Locke's Western Rebellion; Toulmin's History of Taunton, edited by Savage, Letter of the Duke of Somerset to Sir F. Warre; Letter of Sunderland to Penn, Feb. 13, 1685-6, from the State Paper Office, in the Mackintosh Collection. (1848.)—— The letter of Sunderland is as follows:—

"Whitehall, Feb. 13, 1685-6.

"Mr. Penne,

"Her Majesty's Maids of Honour having acquainted me that they design to employ you and Mr. Walden in making a composition with the Relations of the Maids of Taunton for the high Misdemeanour they have been guilty of, I do at their request hereby let you know that His Majesty has been pleased to give their Fines to the said Maids of Honour, and therefore recommend it to Mr. Walden and you to make the most advantageous composition you can in their behalf."

I am, Sir,

"Your humble servant,

"SUNDERLAND."

That the person to whom this letter was addressed was William Penn the Quaker was not doubted by Sir James Mackintosh who first brought it to light, or, as far as I am aware, by any other person, till after the publication of the first part of this History. It has since been confidently asserted that the letter was addressed to a certain George Penne, who appears from an old accountbook lately discovered to have been concerned in a negotiation for the ransom of one of Monmouth's followers, named Azariah Pinney.—— If I thought that I had committed an error, I should, I hope, have the honesty to acknowledge it. But, after full consideration, I am satisfied that Sunderland's letter was addressed to William Penn.—— Much has been said about the way in which the name is spelt. The Quaker, we are told, was not Mr. Penne, but Mr. Penn. I feel assured that no person conversant with the books and manuscripts of the seventeenth century will attach any importance to this argument. It is notorious that a proper name was then thought to be well spelt if the sound were preserved. To go no further than the persons, who, in Penn's time, held the Great Seal, one of them is sometimes Hyde and sometimes Hide: another is Jefferies, Jeffries, Jeffereys, and Jeffreys: a third is Somers, Sommers, and Summers: a fourth is Wright and Wrighte; and a fifth is Cowper and Cooper. The Quaker's name was spelt in three ways. He, and his father the Admiral before him, invariably, as far as I have observed, spelt it Penn; but most people spelt it Pen; and there were some who adhered to the ancient form, Penne. For example. William the father is Penne in a letter from Disbrowe to Thurloe, dated on the 7th of December, 1654; and William the son is Penne in a newsletter of the 22nd of September, 1688, printed in the Ellis Correspondence. In Richard Ward's Life and Letters of Henry More, printed in 1710, the name of the Quaker will be found spelt in all the three ways, Penn in the index, Pen in page 197, and Penne in page 311. The name is Penne in the Commission which the Admiral carried out with him on his expedition to the West Indies. Burchett, who became Secretary to the Admiralty soon after the Revolution, and remained in office long after the accession of the House of Hannover, always, in his Naval History, wrote the name Penne. Surely it cannot be thought strange that an old-fashioned spelling, in which the Secretary of the Admiralty persisted so late as 1720, should have been used at the office of the Secretary of State in 1686. I am quite confident that, if the letter which we are considering had been of a different kind, if Mr. Penne had been informed that, in consequence of his earnest intercession, the King had been graciously pleased to grant a free pardon to the Taunton girls, and if I had attempted to deprive the Quaker of the credit of that intercession on the ground that his name was not Penne, the very persons who now complain so bitterly that I am unjust to his memory would have complained quite as bitterly, and, I must say, with much more reason.—— I think myself, therefore perfectly justified in considering the names, Penn and Penne, as the same. To which, then, of the two persons who bore that name George or William, is it probable that the letter of the Secretary of State was addressed?—— George was evidently an adventurer of a very low class. All that we learn about him from the papers of the Pinney family is that he was employed in the purchase of a pardon for the younger son of a dissenting minister. The whole sum which appears to have passed through George's hands on this occasion was sixty-five pounds. His commission on the transaction must therefore have been small. The only other information which we have about him, is that he, some time later, applied to the government for a favour which was very far from being an honour. In England the Groom Porter of the Palace had a jurisdiction over games of chance, and made some very dirty gain by issuing lottery tickets and licensing hazard tables. George appears to have petitioned for a similar privilege in the American colonies.—— William Penn was, during the reign of James the Second, the most active and powerful solicitor about the Court. I will quote the words of his admirer Crose. "Quum autem Pennus tanta gratia plurinum apud regem valeret, et per id perplures sibi amicos acquireret, illum omnes, etiam qui modo aliqua notitia erant conjuncti, quoties aliquid a rege postulandum agendumve apud regem esset, adire, ambire, orare, ut eos apud regem adjuvaret." He was overwhelmed by business of this kind, "obrutus negotiationibus curationibusque." His house and the approaches to it were every day blocked up by crowds of persons who came to request his good offices; "domus ac vestibula quotidie referta clientium et suppliccantium." From the Fountainhall papers it appears that his influence was felt even in the highlands of Scotland. We learn from himself that, at this time, he was always toiling for others, that he was a daily suitor at Whitehall, and that, if he had chosen to sell his influence, he could, in little more than three, years, have put twenty thousand pounds into his pocket, and obtained a hundred thousand more for the improvement of the colony of which he was proprietor.—— Such was the position of these two men. Which of them, then, was the more likely to be employed in the matter to which Sunderland's letter related? Was it George or William, an agent of the lowest or of the highest class? The persons interested were ladies of rank and fashion, resident at the palace. where George would hardly have been admitted into an outer room, but where William was every day in the presence chamber and was frequently called into the closet. The greatest nobles in the kingdom were zealous and active in the cause of their fair friends, nobles with whom William lived in habits of familiar intercourse, but who would hardly have thought George fit company for their grooms. The sum in question was seven thousand pounds, a sum not large when compared with the masses of wealth with which William had constantly to deal, but more than a hundred times as large as the only ransom which is known to have passed through the hands of George. These considerations would suffice to raise a strong presumption that Sunderland's letter was addressed to William, and not to George: but there is a still stronger argument behind.—— It is most important to observe that the person to whom this letter was addressed was not the first person whom the Maids of Honour had requested to act for them. They applied to him because another person to whom they had previously applied, had, after some correspondence, declined the office. From their first application we learn with certainty what sort of person they wished to employ. If their first application had been made to some obscure pettifogger or needy gambler, we should be warranted in believing that the Penne to whom their second application was made was George. If, on the other hand, their first application was made to a gentleman of the highest consideration, we can hardly be wrong in saying that the Penne to whom their second application was made must have been William. To whom, then, was their first application made? It was to Sir Francis Warre of Hestercombe, a Baronet and a Member of Parliament. The letters are still extant in which the Duke of Somerset, the proud Duke, not a man very likely to have corresponded with George Penne, pressed Sir Francis to undertake the commission. The latest of those letters is dated about three weeks before Sunderland's letter to Mr. Penne. Somerset tells Sir Francis that the town clerk of Bridgewater, whose name, I may remark in passing, is spelt sometimes Bird and sometimes Birde, had offered his services, but that those services had been declined. It is clear, therefore, that the Maids of Honour were desirous to have an agent of high station and character. And they were right. For the sum which they demanded was so large that no ordinary jobber could safely be entrusted with the care of their interests.—— As Sir Francis Warre excused himself from undertaking the negotiation, it became necessary for the Maids of Honour and their advisers to choose somebody who might supply his place; and they chose Penne. Which of the two Pennes, then, must have been their choice, George, a petty broker to whom a percentage on sixty-five pounds was an object, and whose highest ambition was to derive an infamous livelihood from cards and dice, or William, not inferior in social position to any commoner in the kingdom? Is it possible to believe that the ladies, who, in January, employed the Duke of Somerset to procure for them an agent in the first rank of the English gentry, and who did not think an attorney, though occupying a respectable post in a respectable corporation, good enough for their purpose, would, in February, have resolved to trust everything to a fellow who was as much below Bird as Bird was below Warre?—— But, it is said, Sunderland's letter is dry and distant; and he never would have written in such a style to William Penn with whom he was on friendly terms. Can it be necessary for me to reply that the official communications which a Minister of State makes to his dearest friends and nearest relations are as cold and formal as those which he makes to strangers? Will it be contended that the General Wellesley to whom the Marquis Wellesley, when Governor of India, addressed so many letters beginning with "Sir," and ending with "I have the honour to be your obedient servant,'' cannot possibly have been his Lordship's brother Arthur?—— But, it is said, Oldmixon tells a different story. According to him, a Popish lawyer named Brent, and a subordinate jobber, named Crane, were the agents in the matter of the Taunton girls. Now it is notorious that of all our historians Oldmixon is the least trustworthy. His most positive assertion would be of no value when opposed to such evidence as is furnished by Sunderland's letter, But Oldmixon asserts nothing positively. Not only does he not assert positively that Brent and Crane acted for the Maids of Honour; but he does not even assert positively that the Maids of Honour were at all concerned. He goes no further than "It was said," and "It was reported." It is plain, therefore, that he was very imperfectly informed. I do not think it impossible, however, that there may have been some foundation for the rumour which he mentions. We have seen that one busy lawyer, named Bird, volunteered to look after the interest of the Maids of Honour, and that they were forced to tell him that they did not want his services. Other persons, and among them the two whom Oldmixon names, may have tried to thrust themselves into so lucrative a job, and may, by pretending to interest at Court, have succeeded in obtaining a little money from terrified families. But nothing can be more clear than that the authorised agent of the Maids of Honour was the Mr. Penne, to whom the Secretary of State wrote; and I firmly believe that Mr. Penne to have been William the Quaker—— If it be said that it is incredible that so good a man would have been concerned in so bad an affair, I can only answer that this affair was very far indeed from being the worst in which he was concerned.—— For those reasons I leave the text, and shall leave it exactly as it originally stood. (1857.)]

[Footnote 462: Burnet, i. 646, and Speaker Onslow's note; Clarendon to Rochester, May 8, 1686.]

[Footnote 463: Burnet, i. 634.]

[Footnote 464: Calamy's Memoirs; Commons' Journals, December 26,1690; Sunderland to Jeffreys, September 14, 1685; Privy Council Book, February 26, 1685-6.]

[Footnote 465: Lansdowne MS. 1152; Harl. MS. 6845; London Gazette, July 20, 1685.]

[Footnote 466: Many writers have asserted, without the slightest foundation, that a pardon was granted to Ferguson by James. Some have been so absurd as to cite this imaginary pardon, which, if it were real would prove only that Ferguson was a court spy, in proof of the magnanimity and benignity of the prince who beheaded Alice Lisle and burned Elizabeth Gaunt. Ferguson was not only not specially pardoned, but was excluded by name from the general pardon published in the following spring. (London Gazette, March 15, 1685-6.) If, as the public suspected and as seems probable, indulgence was shown to him; it was indulgence of which James was, not without reason, ashamed, and which was, as far as possible, kept secret. The reports which were current in London at the time are mentioned in the Observator, Aug. 1,1685.—— Sir John Reresby, who ought to have been well informed, positively affirms that Ferguson was taken three days after the battle of Sedgemoor. But Sir John was certainly wrong as to the date, and may therefore have been wrong as to the whole story. From the London Gazette, and from Goodenough's confession (Lansdowne MS. 1152), it is clear that, a fortnight after the battle, Ferguson had not been caught, and was supposed to be still lurking in England.]

[Footnote 467: Granger's Biographical History.]

[Footnote 468: Burnet, i. 648; James to the Prince of Orange, Sept. 10, and 24, 1685; Lord Lonadale's Memoirs; London Gazette, Oct. 1, 1685.]

[Footnote 469: Trial of Cornish in the Collection of State Trials, Sir J. Hawles's Remarks on Mr. Cornish's Trial; Burnet, i. 651; Bloody Assizes; Stat. 1 Gul. and Mar.]

[Footnote 470: Trials of Fernley and Elizabeth Gaunt, in the Collection of State Trials Burnet, i. 649; Bloody Assizes; Sir J. Bramston's Memoirs; Luttrell's Diary, Oct. 23, 1685.]

[Footnote 471: Bateman's Trial in the Collection of State Trials; Sir John Hawles's Remarks. It is worth while to compare Thomas Lee's evidence on this occasion with his confession previously published by authority.]

[Footnote 472: Van Citters, Oct. 13-23, 1685.]

[Footnote 473: Neal's History of the Puritans, Calamy's Account of the ejected Ministers and the Nonconformists' Memorial contain abundant proofs of the severity of this persecution. Howe's farewell letter to his flock will be found in the interesting life of that great man, by Mr. Rogers. Howe complains that he could not venture to show himself in the streets of London, and that his health had suffered from want of air and exercise. But the most vivid picture of the distress of the Nonconformists is furnished by their deadly enemy, Lestrange, in the Observators of September and October, 1685.]

THE END

Previous Part     1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15
Home - Random Browse