It was clare the prince and princess king and queen. manifest that such a declaration implied, though it did not expressly affirm, all that the Tories were unwilling to concede; for nobody could pretend that William had succeeded to the regal office by right of birth. To pass a resolution acknowledging him as king was therefore an act of election; and how could there be an election without a vacancy? The proposition of the Whig lords was rejected by fifty-two votes to forty-seven. The question was then put whether the throne was vacant. The Contents were only forty-one, the Not Contents fifty-five. Of the minority thirty-six protested.* During the two following days London was in an unquiet and anxious state. The Tories began to hope that they might be able again to bring forward their favorite plan of regency with better success. Perhaps the prince himself, when he found that he had no chance of wearing the crown, might prefer Sancroft's scheme to Danby's. It was better, doubtless, to be a king than to be a regent; but it was better to be a regent than to be a gentleman usher. On the other side, the lower and fiercer class of Whigs, the old emissaries of Shaftesbury, the old associates of College, began to stir in the city. Crowds assembled in Palace Yard, and held threatening language. Lord Lovelace, who was suspected of having encouraged these assemblages, informed the peers that he was charged with a petition requesting them instantly to declare the Prince and Princess of Orange king and queen. asked by whom the petition was signed. "There are no hands to it yet," he answered; "but, when I bring it here next, there shall be hands enough." This menace alarmed and disgusted his own party. The leading Whigs were, in truth, even more anxious than the Tories that the deliberations of the Convention should be perfectly free, and that it should not be in the power of any adherent of James to allege that either house had acted under force. A petition, similar to that which had been in He was trusted to Lovelace, was brought into the House of Commons, but was contemptuously rejected. Maynard was foremost in protesting against the attempt of the rabble in the streets to overawe the estates of the realm. William sent for Lovelace, expostulated with him strongly, and ordered the magistrates to act with vigor against all unlawful assemblies. Nothing in the history of our revolution is more deserving of admiration and of imitation than the manner in which the two parties in the Convention, at the very moment at which their disputes ran highest, joined like one man to resist the dictation of the mob of the capital. But, though the Whigs were fully determined to maintain order and to respect the freedom of debate, they were equally determined to make no concession. James, as usual, came to the help of his enemies. A letter from him to the Convention had just arrived in London. On Saturday, the second of February, the Commons, without a division, resolved to adhere to their resolution as it originally stood. It had been transmitted to Preston by the apostate Melfort, who was now high in favor at Saint Germain's. The name of Melfort was an abomination to every Churchman. That he was still a confidential minister was alone sufficient to prove that his master's folly and perverseness were incurable. No member of either house ventured to propose that a paper which came from such a quarter should be read. The contents, however, were well known to all the town. His majesty exhorted the Lords and Commons not to despair of his clemency, and graciously assured them that he would pardon those who had betrayed him, some few excepted, whom he did not name. How was it possible to do any thing for a prince who, vanquished, deserted, banished, living on alms, told those who were the arbiters of his fate that, if they would Citters, Feb., 1689; Clarendon's Diary, Feb. 2. The story is greatly exaggerated in the work entitled Revolution Politics, an eminently absurd book, yet of some value as a record of the foolish reports of the day. Grey's Debates. set him on his throne again, he would hang only a few of them?* The contest between the two branches of the Legislature lasted some days longer. On Monday, the fourth of February, the peers resolved that they would insist on their amendments; but a protest to which thirty-nine names were subscribed was entered on the journals.† On the following day the Tories determined to try their strength in the Lower House. They mustered there in great force. A motion was made to agree to the amendments of the Lords. Those who were for the plan of Sancroft and those who were for the plan of Danby divided together; but they were beaten by two hundred and eightytwo votes to a hundred and fifty-one. The House then resolved to request a free conference with the Lords.‡ At the same time, strenuous efforts were making without the walls of Parliament to bring the dispute between the two branches of the Legislature to a close. Burnet thought that the importance of the crisis justified him in publishing the great secret which the princess had confided to him. He knew, he said, from her own lips, that it had long been her full determination, even if she came to the throne in the regular course of descent, to surrender her power, with the sanction of Parliament, into the hands of her husband. Danby received from her an earnest and almost angry reprimand. She was, she wrote, the prince's wife; she had no other wish than to be subject to him; the most cruel injury that could be done to her would be to set her up as his competitor; and she never could re Jan. 24 The letter of James, dated 1689, will be found in Kennet. It is most disingenuously garbled in Clarke's Life of James. See Clarendon's Diary, Feb. 2, 4; Grey's Debates; Lords' Journals, Feb. 2, 4, 1688. + It has been asserted by several writers, and, among others, by Ralph and by M. Mazure, that Danby signed this protest. This is a mistake. Probably some person who examined the journals before they were printed mistook Derby for Danby. Lords' Journals, Feb. 4, 1688. Evelyn, a few days before, wrote Derby, by mistake, for Danby. Diary, Jan. 29, 1688. Commons' Journals, Feb. 5, 1688. gard any person who took such a course as her true friend.* The Tories had still one hope. Anne might insist on her rights and on those of her children. No effort was spared to stimulate her ambition and to alarm her conscience. Her uncle Clarendon was especially active. A few weeks only had elapsed since the hope of wealth and greatness had impelled him to belie the boastful professions of his whole life, to desert the royal cause, to join with the Wildmans and Fergusons, nay, to propose that the king should be sent a prisoner to a foreign land, and immured in a fortress begirt by pestilential marshes. The lure which had produced this strange transformation was the viceroyalty of Ireland. Soon, however, it appeared that the proselyte had little chance of obtaining the splendid prize on which his heart was set. He found that others were consulted on Irish affairs. His advice was never asked, and, when obtrusively and importunately offered, was coldly received. He repaired many times to Saint James's Palace, but could scarcely obtain a word or a look. One day the prince was writing; another day he wanted fresh air, and must ride in the Park; on a third he was closeted with officers on military business, and could see nobody. Clarendon saw that he was not likely to gain any thing by the sacrifice of his principles, and determined to take them back again. In December ambition had converted him into a rebel. In January disappointment reconverted him into a Royalist. The uneasy consciousness that he had not been a consistent Tory gave a peculiar acrimony to his Toryism. In the House of Lords he had done all in his power to prevent a settlement. He now exerted, for the same end, all his influence over the Princess Anne; but his influence over her was small indeed when compared with that of the Churchills, who wisely called to their help two powerful allies, Tillotson, who, as a spiritual director, had at that time immense authority, and Lady Russell, whose noble and gentle virtues, proved * Burnet, i., 819. + Clarendon's Diary, Jan. 1, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 1683; Burnet, i., 807. by the most cruel of all trials, had gained for her the reputation of a saint. The Princess of Denmark, it was soon known, was willing that William should reign for life; and it was evident that to defend the cause of the princesses against themselves was a hopeless task.* And now William thought that the time had come when he ought to explain himself. He accordingly sent for Halifax, Danby, Shrewsbury, and some other political leaders of great note, and, with that air of stoical apathy under which he had, from a boy, been in the habit of concealing his strongest emotions, addressed to them a few deeply meditated and weighty words. He had hitherto, he said, remained silent; he had used neither solicitation nor menace; he had not even suffered a hint of his opinions or wishes to get abroad; but a crisis had now arrived at which it was necessary for him to declare his intentions. He had no right and no wish to dictate to the Convention. All that he claimed for himself was the privilege of declining any office which he felt that he could not hold with honor to himself and with benefit to the public. A strong party was for a regency. It was for the houses to determine whether such an arrangement would be for the interest of the nation. He had a decided opinion on that point; and he thought it right to say distinctly that he would not be regent. Another party was for placing the princess on the throne, and for giving to him, during her life, the title of king, and such a share in the administration as she might be pleased to allow him. He could not stoop to such a post. He esteemed the princess as much as it was possible for man to esteem woman; but not even from her would he accept a subordinate and a precarious place in the government. He was so made that he could not submit to be tied to the apron strings even of the best of wives. He did not desire to take any part in English affairs; but, if he did consent to take a part, there was one part only * Clarendon's Diary, Feb. 5, 1688; Duchess of Marlborough's Vindication; Mulgrave's Account of the Revolution. |