Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

accession of a Roman Catholic king, 'the administration of the government should remain in Protestant hands'; which was understood to mean the regency of the Princess Mary. To this the Whigs refused to consent; and then Charles, without giving the members a moment for reflection, made his way to the Schools (i.e. the University Buildings) where the parliament was sitting, and as soon as he had assumed the royal robes, called the members before him and dissolved the parliament.

Discomfi

ture of

the Whigs.

The discomfiture of the Whigs was complete. From Westminster the bolder spirits might have retired into the city and attempted to continue their sittings; at Oxford they could only obey, and even Shaftesbury felt that parliamentary opposition was hopeless. What had enabled Charles to gain his great victory was the intervention of Louis XIV., who had been so alarmed at the prospects of such a practical union of England and Holland, as would have been implied by the accession of Mary either as sovereign or regent, that he had agreed to give Charles £250,000, on condition that no parliament should be called for three years. At this price Charles had been willing, as before, to sell his independence. Hence the dissolution. The next step of the government was to follow up their success by prosecuting their opponents. Their first victim was a foolish talker of the name of Stephen College, who, as the 'Protestant Prosecution of the joiner,' had been made much of by some of the Whigs. In Whigs. London there would have been little chance of convicting him; but, by a monstrous perversion of justice, he was tried in Oxford, and there, by a Tory jury, he was convicted of treason and subsequently hanged. With Shaftesbury, however, it was not so easy to deal, as no London grand jury would find a true bill on which he might have been tried by his peers. An attempt, however, was made, and backed up by the publication on the day of the trial of Dryden's Absalom and Achitophel. It failed, however; and the government proceeded, by a flagrant violation of the rights of the citizens, to force on London two Tory sheriffs-North, a Turkey merchant, brother of Chief-Justice North and of Roger North, the well-known Tory diarist; and Colonel Rich, a turncoat, who had formerly voted for the Exclusion Bill. With such sheriffs, Shaftesbury well knew that a packed jury was inevitable; and, despairing of raising an insurrection, he slipped away to the continent in November 1682, and within two months died in Holland.

Meanwhile, violent schemes had undoubtedly been discussed by the Whig leaders. Shaftesbury had talked of the 'brave boys' he would bring from Wapping. Monmouth had, during 1682, been making a progress through England, assuming royal state, pretending to have the

The Rye

Executions

power of touching effectively for 'the king's evil,' and doing all he could to make himself a party. Meetings had been held in London; but it is certain that no organised plan had been formed, and, indeed, most of the real leaders were quite convinced of the futility of an armed rebellion. It appears, however, that some of the more violent men, among whom was Colonel Rumbold, an old Cromwellian, had at least talked over a a plan for arresting and possibly murdering Charles and James as they passed by the Rye House, an isolated resi- House Plot. dence near Hoddesdon, on the road from Newmarket to London. The whole affair is wrapped in mystery; but, acting on the information of informers, the chief of whom were Lord Howard and Colonel Rumsey, the government arrested not only Rumbold's friends, Walcot, Hone, and Rouse, but also the earl of Essex, Lord Russell, John Hampden, and Colonel Algernon Sidney. These, with the duke of Monmouth and Lord Howard, were accused of forming a council of six for the organising of an insurrection. Of the prisoners, Walcot, Hone, and Rouse were hanged. Lord Russell, who had certainly been present at a meeting of the malcontents, but denied having taken any share in a conspiracy, was convicted on the evidence of Howard and Rumsey, and beheaded; and Algernon Sidney suffered the of Russell and Sidney. same fate. Russell was a man of great prudence and circumspection, not at all likely to engage in such a rash undertaking as that for which he was condemned, and a man beloved and respected in every relation of life. Algernon Sidney was a rash republican, who had been an active member of the expelled parliament of 1653, and had spent much of his time abroad. He had done his best to get aid from both France and Holland towards raising a rebellion in 1665 and 1666, and was quite capable of further plotting. His trial, however, as conducted by the brutal Jeffreys, was a parody of justice. The evidence against him was scandalously insufficient, and the want of a second witness was supplied by an unpublished manuscript found in his desk, from which it was argued that, as he had approved of insurrections against Nero and Caligula, he therefore approved of an insurrection against Charles II. He met his fate with firmness, and was regarded as the noblest victim of the despotism of Charles. Against Hampden even the evidence which had convicted the others was wanting, but he was sentenced to pay a ruinous fine of £40,000 for a misdemeanour; Essex committed suicide; and Monmouth, having made a confession in general terms, was pardoned and permitted to retire to Holland. Rumbold also made his escape. In Scotland the earl of Argyll was arrested and condemned, but he too contrived to make his way to Holland.

Remodel

ling of the Corporations.

While thus attempting to strike terror into his opponents, Charles was taking advantage of the breathing-time secured him by Louis to make sure of a permanent majority in the House of Commons. The strength of the Whigs, as we have seen, lay in the boroughs; that of the Tories in the counties. The election of borough members was usually in the hands of the corporation, which was a close body, filling up its own vacancies as they occurred. It was suggested by Saunders-a judge who, with Scroggs and Jeffreys, earned an infamous reputation at this period-that Charles might, by a writ of quo warranto, recall the charters of such corporations and restore them after nominating a new corporation of Tories to take the place of the old members. Accordingly this was done, not only in all towns which had sent Whigs to parliament, but even in places like Leeds which had no parliamentary representation. In restoring the charters, the king reserved to himself the right of confirming all elections to municipal offices, and, in case he were dissatisfied, of naming the officers himself.

success.

The remodelling of the corporations completed the series of measures by which Charles II. attempted to annul the effect of the resistance Charles' of the Long Parliament to Charles 1. His efforts had been attended with surprising success, and he was now little less than an absolute king. He possessed a small standing army, which gave him a security against the first violence of popular insurrection which the Tudors and Plantagenets had never possessed. He named the officers of the militia, and the governors of such fortresses as had not been dismantled. He dismissed the judges as he thought fit, and had shown that among the bar could be found men as ready to do his will as Scroggs, Saunders, and Jeffreys. Through the offices of the sheriffs, he could command the services of compliant jurymen. The appointment of magistrates was practically in his hands. Through the goodwill of Louis he was in possession of a permanent revenue so long as he did not call a parliament; and if Louis failed him, the remodelling of the corporations had given him the means of seating his own creatures on the benches of the House of Commons.

Death of

Such was the position of this clever but unprincipled sovereign when, on February 6, 1685, at the height of his power, and apparently in the full vigour of health, Charles died of apoplexy. He was a the King. man of consummate ability, who concealed under the appearance of frivolity a talent for intrigue and a calculating hardness of heart which baffled the ablest statesmen of his day, and surprised even those who knew him best. On his deathbed he admitted that he was a

Roman Catholic, and received absolution from a Roman Catholic priest, Huddleston, who had formerly aided him in his escape from Worcester. By his wife, Katharine of Braganza, he had no family; but he left a large number of natural children by different mothers, most of whom were raised to the peerage.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

CHAPTER VI

JAMES II. 1685-1689

Anne Hyde (d. 1671).

Born 1833; married (1673, Mary of Modena (d. 1718).

France.

Louis XIV., d. 1715.

CHIEF CONTEMPORARY PRINCES

Spain.
Charles II., d. 1700.

Holland. William III., d. 1702.

Character of James-Monmouth's Rebellion-The Dispensing Power-Hales' Case The Ecclesiastical Commission-Attacks upon the Universities - The Declaration of Indulgence-Adverse Feeling in the Country-Birth of James' Son-Trial of the Seven Bishops-Expedition of William of Orange-Flight of James-The Interregnum-The Declaration of Right.

WHEN an event has been long anticipated with apprehension, it frequently happens that its actual accomplishment surprises by its apparent simpliQuietness of city. So it was in the accession of James II., which occurred the accession. so quietly and so much as a matter of course, that for s time it seemed that the apprehensions of the exclusionists had been completely groundless.

The new king had some excellent qualities, marred not only by constitutional defects, but by some curious inconsistencies. Sir John Character of Evelyn describes him as a man of 'infinite industry, James. sedulity, gravity, and great understanding, and of a most sincere and honest nature. He makes a conscience of what he promises, and performs it.' The great Marshal Turenne had formed a high opinion of the talent for war which James had shown as a young man ; and he had seen much service with the fleet. At the Admiralty Office he had been most diligent, and Bishop Burnet seems to express the general opinion when he speaks of a future 'reign of action and business, not of sloth and luxury.' These qualities, however, had all been shown in subordinate offices. As sovereign, James possessed in a full measure the

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »