:

commanded by the church of which he was a member. Cromwell established the "Directory," and did all in his power to perpetuate in his republic, that form of worship which he most approved : James reconciled himself to the see of Rome and left no stone unturned that might insure the stability of the Catho lic faith in his three kingdoms. Was it possible that James should suppose the people of England could pass from the extreme of Puritanic sanctity to that of Romish prejudice; from the rigid nonobservances of Calvinism, and the simplicity of Calvinistic worship, to the endless ceremonies of Catholic appointment, and the gaudy pageantries of that soi disant Apostolic Hierarchy? Could those, who refused to acknowledge any worldly superior in religious matters, be brought, by any imaginable course of management, to adore the Vicar of God upon earth, and to yield blind obedience to the dogmata of a church whose adorations they deemed idolatry, and to a priest to whose character they affixed the stigma of spiritual fornication? It might be true, that the nation at large had not imbibed the spirit of enthusiastic piety; and that, of those who had been most forward in professions of Puritanic zeal, the majority were called away to an unimpeachable judgement: yet undoubtedly a considerable portion remained, who were well qualified to determine by personal observation, whether the solemn court of the Protector, or the profligate levées of Charles the Second; whether the gloom of the Interregnum, or the riots of the Restoration, were most satisfactory to the thinking mind, or most becoming the character and dignity of English statesmen. It were vain to deny that the prostitutes of Charles were his ruin: they reduced him to beggary: they blinded his eyes; they hardened his heart; they deceived his understanding.

He went

As an ox to the slaughter house,
As a dog to the gallows,
As a stag to the toils,
As a bird to the snare,

Heedless that the issue affected his life. Why could not James infer, that his opponents were as strongly attached to their religious sentiments as he was to his?-that they had received from their fathers the influence of example as well of precept, and that the triumphant

struggle not long before maintained against the chief of the constitution could not be forgotten, and might be repeated ?-The bulk of the nation were more moderate, it is true, yet though inconsiderate they were not insensible, though once intoxicated by wine and loyalty, they had had time to recover from the fumes of both. The hearts of the mass of his subjects were alienated by the conduct of his brother: he had been closely watched; clearly detected; completely despised; and, long before he died, dreading to look his people in the face, he determined to dismiss those terrors which at the very whisper of the term "Parliament" thrilled through his frame. Had we not, then, reason when we complained, that Mr. Fox, in narrating the events of these times, paid too little attention to the religious feelings extant, and in certain connections, prevalent at that time, in the nation ?-and when we regretted that the moral lessons which the British statesman might have inculcated, he had suffered to escape him?

Mr. Rose is not far distant from us in opinion on the work of Mr. Fox; he disapproves of his having laid all the misdeeds of James to the love of arbitrary power, and the desire of grasping unrestrainable authority. He thinks, that the wish to establish popery was the primum mobile of the king's actions: and that he could not be content with an open profession of his own principles, unless he rendered popery triumphant, and clothed it with all the authority of the land. We confess, that we do not perceive why these two intentions were not perfectly reconcileable; and why both. might not be advanced at the same time, and by the same means. The suppression of protestantism was the establishment of arbitrary power; the introduction of popery was the extinction of liberty, as well personal as mental. Neither does the acquiescence in the will of James, at first manifested by his parliament, appear to us so decisive of their real feel. ings as it does to Mr. Rose. There were wise men in that assembly who willingly gave James a trial, though they suspected him; and who saw a greater propriety in congratulating than in disturbing a new reign. Perhaps too they knew that the question of religion would afford them the most efficacious position. Even from the

very Resolution of the Commons, which Mr. R. adduces in proof that they reposed unlimited confidence in the king, we infer the contrary: for the hint at the close of it, conveys no ambiguous in formation to those who living at the time, must have been very competent to discern its object. "That, this House doth acquiesce, entirely rely, and rest wholly satisfied in his Majesty's gracious word, and repeated declarations, to support and defend the religion of the Church of England, as it is now by law established, which is dearer to us than our lives.” What need for this comparison of their value for their lives with their value for the Church, if the idea of hazarding those lives in defence of the Church, had not occurred to some among them?- but against whom could they be called to defend the Church with their lives, as things then stood? Besides, though the acts of a mob are not the acts of a nation, yet when Nell Gwynn, to escape an outrage, assured the people, that "she was the Protestant whore," there could be little doubt as to the prevailing abhorrence of popery among the lower classes. Mr. Rose admits, also, that Mr. Fox has greatly understated the cruelties practiced in Scotland by order of James: and we can venture to assure him, that these enormities were thoroughly understood by the religious sectaries in England.

To what can it be attributed that others saw the king's ruin in his obstinacy, if the principle of religious fortitude and perseverance for conscience sake, were not then in activity? The sectaries, no less obstinate in their profession, than the king was in his, were never wholly without influence; and though Charles distributed a few guineas among their leading ministers (the proper parent of the Regium Donum) yet two hundred pounds could hardly be thought to

"Make all difficulties clear,"

among two thousand ejected ministers, who chose rather to resign their livings than their consciences. The fact is, that a vast proportion of the nation entered but very little into the spirit of religion; and, while undisturbed, they knew and cared nothing about it: yet there was a number, which, though small in comparison, was considerable in the whole these did think, and some of these did feel, and tenderly too, though prudence

suppressed the declaration of their feelings while they could hope no good from it.

Charles advised his brother to take the

Test, and to profess himself a member of the Protestant communion. Colbert, then his ambassador, expressly tells Louis XIV. that on the subject of religion he had only two friends in England, Charles and his brother. When his brother was dead, could the infatuated monarch expect to establish the Catholic religion, against the unanimous voice of the na tion?

James was warned by some of his courtiers, who refused to enter the Chapel Royal to hear mass with him. He was warned by whatever of popularity at tached to the Duke of Monmouth be cause a Protestant: he was warned in

express terms by the Prince of Orange, that his subjects were discontented:" "You keep company with no others" was all the notice he condescended to take of the prince's suggestion.

--

restoration to his communion, coughed The Pope, to whom James applied for at the proposal, till the ambassador was the ridicule of his situation to be not completely out of countenance; and felt only unbecoming but unbearable.

On the subject of the corruptions, the pensions, and bribes received by Charles and James from Louis, Mr. Rose speaks out distinctly. He calls those transac tions by their proper names: but, we wonder much, that he had not consulted the Works of Louis XIV, published in 1800, and reviewed in Panorama, Vol. I. pp. 482, 718, et al. He would there have found a general view of the treaties, private, secret, most secret, verbal, and simulé, between these sovereigns: he would have seen the causes which influenced Louis in concluding those treaties; the advantages he reaped from them; and the early period at which private negotiations between England and France were conducted. He would have felt, too, the justice of our remark when reporting on Mr. Fox's volume, that while the sovereigus of England bestowed favours on the conti nent, affairs went well at home; but, when they received favours they were first subjects of suspicion, and afterwards of execration. For there he would have seen, Cromwell offering money to Louis for Dunkirk; and, after a while, Louis,

paying money for that town to Charles. Nor is this all; for in spite of Mr. Rose's desire and endeavours to relieve the memory of Sidney from the charge of having received money from France, by Barillon, the French ambassador: in spite of his attempt to affix the guilt of falsification on Barillon, in order to vindicate Sidney, he will find [Compare Panorama, Vol. I. p. 720]* an intercourse between Sidney and Louis of the most confidential nature. Sidney offered to excite an insurection, if Louis would furnish him with 100,000 crowns: Louis offered him 20,000 crowns, and further The credibility therefore of Barillon's accounts to his master, and of his charges, remains unimpeached. And further, Louis says he even maintained intelligence with the remains of Cromwell's faction, in hopes to excite new troubles in London, through their means:" they could not therefore be so wholly despicable, or so entirely suppressed, as to be undeserving the attention of Charles or of James.

assistance.

Mr. Rose has recovered the original of one of these treaties between Charles and Louis; that made at Dover, May 22, 1670. the stipulations of which are (as usual) the acknowledgment of Charles's conversion to popery when opportunity shall be favourable; the payment of money to him; and the supporting of him by French troops. This curious document Mr. R. received from the family of Lord Clifford: one of the agents who signed it, on behalf of Charles. He has also had access to papers in other noble families; to the public journals and newspapers of the times; and he avails himself of marginal notes, written by Lord Dartmouth in his copy of Burnet's History of these times. Mr. Rose bears hard on Burnet: we attribute much of his incorrectness to the strongly marked confusion of Burnet's mind, which manifested itself undeniably in his conversation absences: but, the charge of wilful falsity, intended to deceive posterity, is, we must be allowed to hope, rather the perversion of party than the sober verdict of truth.

and

Mr Rose dislikes the periods into which Mr. Fox had chosen to divide his work :

The reader is desired to correct the date in the note at the foot of this page: we presume that 1700 should be 1670.

this,

we conceive, on a posthumous publication, is hypercriticism. Mr. Fox, comparing the public execution of Charles with the private assassinations of former kings of England (for so we understand him) gives it the character of "least dishonourable." It will not follow, that Mr. F. considered that execution as justified by the voice of the nation or that he deemed the later murder of Louis XVI. of France to be less than enormous guilt.

Mr. Rose vindicates the character of General Monk from the charge of having suffered indignities to the corpse of his former patron Blake: and from having produced confidential letters by which the Earl of Arygle was convicted, beyond hope of escape.

But whatever diminution of the dark shades of Monk's character Mr. R. may have effected in these instances, he never will be able to efface that unpardonable crime of having omitted the most favourable opportunity which then had presented itself to our nation of establishing the liberties of the people on a broad and solid foundation. It is true, as we learn from an almost prophetic letter in the Clarendon papers, that immediately on the death of Cromwell, it was foreseen,

that Monk was the man to effect the

Restoration; and that, after he was once engaged in the enterprizé, he must follow the course of events.

But Monk knew this himself, as well as others did: and had he been an honest man, and of a capacious mind, he might, and he would, have stipulated with the king terms that probably might have checked his after profligacies, and have prevented his incessant quarrels with his parliament; they might have withheld him from being the pensioned slave of Louis; and James might even have kept the throne had he been cut off from all hopes of success. in his nefarious intentions by solemn compact, and by the possession of power acknowledged to be limited.

instituted, by a writer of history, between A very instructive comparison might be the character of Monk and that of Lord Somers, in respect to their conduct to

wards the nation.

Monk was ignorant, hypocritical, despotic a soldier, and nothing else, he neither knew what the constitution of his country was, nor had he duly reflected on what it ought to be: the just limits of

authority for the benefit of the governor, and for that of the governed, never occupied his contemplation; the power of the sword was the only power he acknowledged; and to what that dictated he expected implicit obedience.

Lord Somers was universally admired for his talents; his integrity was beyond aspersion or doubt: he possessed consideration and foresight: he chose rather to prevent the intention of crime, than to trust to the effect of punishment. He was learned in the constitution of his country; he knew what ought to be declared as composing it: he recalled to their true principles those departures from it, which had produced the late king's abdication: and he laid maxims before the new king to which it would be at once his duty, his honour, and his happi

ness to conform.

To the interference of Lord Somers, we are, at this day, beholden for whatever the British constitution offers as distinguishingly excellent. He has laid succeeding generations both of kings and people under obligations to him; and the latest posterity will couple the Declaration of Rights, with the recollection of Magna Charta. To the interference of Monk, no other praise is due, than that of performing a conspicuous part in an act, which certainly restored the constitution of the kingdom; but, at the same time, in a manner so unguarded, as to render one king an object of aversion to his people; and to leave his successor free to incur the necessity of abdication through fear of the axe.

We have perused with attention the narration of Sir Patrick Huine. It appears to be dictated by truth, and is written with as great composure of mind as could possibly be expected. Nevertheless, we doubt the correctness of Mr. Rose's infe

rence that Sir Patrick foresaw that the time would come when it would be necessary to vindicate his character to posterity. The narrative of Lady Murray possesses an interest which at once announces its authenticity it narrates domestic incidents; but they are such as every reader may appreciate. One of the appendix papers

:

shews the existence of torture in ScotLand, in 1690, by order of King William. Another is a copy of the enrolled declaration of Charles II. that he never was con.

tracted to any woman except his queen, Catharine. And we confess our obliga. tions to Mr. R. for his communication of the Narrative of the Duke of Monmouth's behaviour: from the Buccleugh papers.

We have repeatedly expressed our satisfaction at the publication of similar documents from the repositories of our noble families: [Could the descendants of the Cromwell family furnish any of a like kind?-Or those of other families then eminent among the dissenters?] Such papers are valuable as materials for history: and statesmen may derive advan tage from them.

Mr. Rose observes, very truly, that we are still much in the dark as to many of the private transactions which led to the settlement of the House of Brunswick on the throne of these kingdoms: and if we mistake not, whenever the private history of the present reign shall come before the public in the shape of confidential papers, it will be found to contain information not less curious, and sometimes not less applicable to the moment, than those of any preceding period of time whatever.

We extract a few passages to shew the temper in which the work is written.

The profligacy of Charles and of his sue cessor was scandalous in the extreme; betraying the best interests of their country, and sacrificing their own honour for miserable stipends from a foreign power, at times when parliament shewed the readiest disposition to furnish them with abundant supplics, as well for their own use as for the public service. from France seems to have arisen from the The eagerness of Charles to obtain money excess of his private expences, and from a desire to have a fui.d at command for corrupt practices at home. The practices began very soon after the Restoration, under the manage, ment of the Earl of Clarendon, whom Mr. Fox considers as quite innocent of it. When he formed that opinion, he could not hava met with the reference in Sir John Dalrym ple's book to the Clarendon papers (then about to be printed) to establish the fact; because those papers, published some years ago, clearly prove that the Chancellor and his son were the active and sole agents in money transac tions with the French minister here, at that ious no one else should be let into the secret. early period; and that his Lordship was anxMr. Fox's words are: "Clarendon is said to "have been privy to the king's receiving