VII. 1662. Oct. 1. BOOK memory of that statesman an indelible stain of duplicity and persecution. In a progress through the western counties, an act of council was framed in a fit of absolute intoxication at Glasgow. Whatsoever ministers had neglected or declined to pro cure presentations from their patrons, and induc tion from the prelates, were ordered to remove from their parishes, or to be displaced if necessary Nov. 1. by military force. Three hundred and fifty clergymen were ejected from their livings; above a third part of the church was displanted, and the tears excited by their valedictory sermons, were due to their sufferings, when expelled from their homes in the winter season; deprived of their stipends due for the preceding year; and with their numerous families left destitute of support. The commissioner imagined that the greater number would solicit indulgence or collation from their ordinaries, while the resistance of a few zealots would justify the severities which he was prepared to inflict. Their unexpected submission disappointed, but did not disarm his resentment. The most distinguished clergymen were selected for persecution, on the recent oath of allegiance to the king. However willing to acknowledge that his majesty was supreme civil governor in ecclesiastical affairs, their explanation of the oath was rejected; and as no penalties were annexed to the act, they were either confined to remote districts, or enjoined to banish themselves from the king VII. dom for life. But the expulsion of the western BOOK clergy excited loud discontent. Their austere and exemplary deportment was universally respected. 1662. They were connected by consanguinity or mar riage with the principal families, and from their endearing familiarity, and fervent devotion, were beloved by the people. The most ignorant or vicious of the clergy, the very refuse of the northern parts, were summoned by a general invitation, and were easily admitted to the benefices of the west. But the negligence or irregular conduct of the new incumbents was ill calculated to remove the prejudices of the people; and the few who from their talents or their birth were above contempt, but from their violence beneath esteem and respect, were no less detested than the others were despised. The people rejecting the instructions of the curates, seceded in search of the spiritual manna, that de- conventi scended no longer around their tents. Each Sunday they abandoned their church and their parish in a body, to attend the worship of their former pastor; and as his habitation was too small or remote for their reception, conventicles first began to be held in the fields. The severities of the privy council were proportionably augmented. The ejected clergy were forbidden to approach within twenty miles of their former parishes, within six of Edinburgh, or a cathedral church, or within three miles of a royal borough; and when the 1663. Origin of cles. VII. BOOK terdicted, the common offices of humanity were proscribed, and the people were forbidden, under the same penalties of sedition, to contribute to their support.4 1663. Middleton's disgrace. From his riotous excesses, the administration of Middleton had become justly contemptible, and from his severities odious; but the removal of an imperious minister seldom proceeds from the sufferings or the complaints of the people. The accusation preferred by Lauderdale might have failed, if Middleton's own indiscretion had not accelerated his disgrace. His services were magnified by the prelates, and on his return to court, he found powerful intercessors in Clarendon, Sheldon the primate, and Monk. But the king was incensed at his presumption in countermanding an order procured and transmitted by Lauderdale to the privy council, to prolong by proclamation the term prescribed for the discharge of fines. His disgrace produced general satisfaction, but the national joy was of short duration. His successors proved Lauderdale more imperious, and worse than himself. Rothes minister. His character. was appointed commissioner to parliament, and was attended by Lauderdale, to whom he was visibly subordinate; but Lauderdale himself was dependent on the prelates, and compelled to yield to their most furious demands.25 Originally not 24 Burnet, i. 221. Wodrow, i.145-55-63. 205. App. 18. Kirkton's Manuscript, 44. 25 Clarendon's Life, ii. 96. 105. Hist. ii. 582. iii. 124. Burnet, i. 143. VII. 1663. less attached to the covenant than at present to the BOOK court, he engaged in its measures with the zeal of a proselyte; determined that no compliance should be omitted to promote his ambition or to preserve his place. His personal appearance is perhaps satirically described as enormous or uncouth; his hair was red and dishevelled; his tongue too big for distinct articulation; his address ungracious, and his manners coarse, boisterous, and unsuitable to the fastidious refinement of a court. During a long imprisonment, his mind had been carefully improved by study, and impressed with a sense of religion which was soon effaced on his return to the world. His learning was extensive and accurate; in public affairs his experience was considerable, and his elocution copious, though unpolished and indistinct. But his temper was dark and vindictive, incapable of friendship, mean and abject to his superiors, haughty and tyrannical to his inferiors; and his judgment, seldom correct or just, was obstinate in error, and irreclaimable by advice. His passions were furious and ungovernable, unless when his interest or ambition interposed his violence was ever prepared to suggest or to execute the most desperate counsels; and his ready compliance preserved his credit with the king, till his faculties were visibly impaired with age. June 18. When the parliament reassembled, Middleton's Parliament. friends were removed from the articles, and the VII. 1663. BOOK former mode of election was revived. The prelates selected eight peers, who appointed eight prelates in return; the sixteen assumed an equal number of barons and burgesses, to whom the officers of state were superadded; and from the servility of the prelates, the nomination of the articles, and the independence of parliament were resigned to the crown. An act was passed at their instigation, against disobedience to ecclesiastical authority, and separation from the church. The clergy, ejected or silenced by their bishop, were punishable as seditious if they presumed to preach. On their separation or absence from their parish church, landholders forfeited a fourth part of their rents, tenants and citizens a fourth part of their substance, the freedom of their corporations and the privilege of trade; and were subjected besides to such corporal punishment as the privy council might choose to inflict.26 A declaration framed in the preceding session, to abjure the covenant and renounce the right of resistance, was confirmed by the same severe penalty of incapacitation, and the loss of the privilege to trade; but the experience of every age may demonstrate, that the most solemn disavowal will never prevent the resumption of those rights which are deemed in 26 Parl. 1663, ch. 1, 2. The act against separation preceded, and appears to have suggested the act against conventicles inEngland, passed 1664. |