« ПредишнаНапред »
of a hero, to whom, perhaps, more than any other (with the exception of the immortal Nelson) this country is indebted for her present maritime glory and strength, have expressed themselves in cautious and ambiguous terms. But Anthony Wood, in his Fasti Wood's Fasti, bo Oxonienses, enumerating Blake among the batchelors, mentions the order of the King before mentioned, and then adds, “His body, I say, was then (September, 12th) “ taken up, and, with others, buried in a pit in St.
Margaret's church-yard adjoining, near to the back “ door of one of the prebendaries of Westminster, in " which place it now remaineth, enjoying no other “ monument but what it reared by its valour, which “ time itself can hardly efface." The story then, does not rest on the
the authority of Neale only, as Mr. Rose states, but is supported by an author whose political sentiments cannot be suspected of being too favourable to liberty of any description, and from whom probably Neale had borrowed it. We will now leave to Mr. Rose the task of reconciling the refutation of Grey, and the clear evidence of Kennett, with the positive assertion of Wood.
conduct to the
Fos, p. 20.
The next passage in Mr. Fox's work objected to, is that Monk's base which charges Monk at the trial of Argyle with having Earl of Argyle. produced letters of friendship and confidence to take
away the life of a nobleman, the zeal and cordiality “ of whose co-operation with him, proved by such docam
Rose, p. 22.
ments, was the chief ground of his execution." The propriety of Mr. Fox's remarks upon this conduct are not disputed. Mr. Rose himself calls it, “ an infamous act, provided the fact were true; and takes upon himself the proof of its falsehood with a confidence, which nothing, he has produced in argument, can war
He stumbles at the threshold, for in terms, which convey an imputation upon Mr. Fox for not having made proper inquiries before he wrote, he himself makes an assertion, which is not correct. He that, “ On considering the evidence accessible to every ~ one when Mr. Fox wrote respecting the share Monk " is represented to have had in the death of the Mar« quis of Argyle, it will be found that the charge " against him for so infamous an act rested, as has been « observed, on the assertion of Bishop Burnet, which
appears to have been satisfactorily refuted by Dr.
Campbell," and he refers to the Lives of the Admirals, and the Biographia Britannica. If Mr. Rose had consulted evidence accessible to every one, nay, if he had opened the very books he has mentioned in his note upon
he must have discovered, that though when Dr. Campbell wrote, this charge against Monk might rest on the assertion of Bishop Burnet, yet when Mr. Fox wrote, it did not. In the note before alluded to, we are told, that “Mr. Laing, in his History “ of Scotland, also relies on the bishop's authority, “ confirmed, as he says, by Baillie, vol. ii. p. 431.
“ and by Cunningham in his History of Britain, vol. I.
p. 13.” Here we have a notable instance of official accuracy, for Mr. Rose does not take the trouble to turn either to Baillie or Cunningham, to see whether they confirm the bishop or not, though he seems to dispute the fact, leaving it on the assertion of Mr. Laing.f It is t on the formerar a clear that he did not examine Baillie, for he has copied
allows that a cites the misprint of the page from Mr. Laing's work, and
botte Barlles urinenghe cites from page 431, instead of 451. Mr. Rose is not
but thinko Cangebote section of his book; it may not be always well directed, be wrong, but tänne
his industry is apparent in every reporter Thora.fha may but this is an instance, of which very few occur, of Free Fet The Amy Lor's
having: made no exertion at all to verify à most change root only one important fact", upon which all his future reasoning Burrust.
* That the reader may form a proper judgment of these references which if Mr. Rose had condescended to have examined, might, probably, have put this question to rest, the passages are copied at length here. Baillie says,
“When his libelled crimes appeared not unpar. « donable, and his son Lord Neil went up to see his brother Lorne « at London, and spake somewhat liberally of his father's satisfactory “ answers, Monk was moved to send down four or five of his Letters “ to himself, and others proving his full compliance with them, that 6 the King should not reprieve him. The chancellor and Rotheş « went to court to shew the hazard of his escape. - The man was
very wise, and questionless the greatest subject the King had, some« time much known, and beloved in all the three kingdoms. It was “ not thought safe he should live.” Baillie mentions many circumstances concerning the proceedings against, and execution of Argyle, which show that he was minutely informed of every part of the trans
upon the subject was to depend. The reader is left to account for this conduct as he pleases, but it must not be forgotten, that his benumbed faculties are restored, when the attack is to be revived upon Bishop Burnet; he is then laborious in his inquiries, his mind resumes its usual activity, and neither dust nor cobwebs prove obstacles to his pursuit.
We shall not weary our
readers with discussing all the arguments, adduced by Dr. Campbell upon the subject. In Mr. Laing he has met with not a contemptible opponent, and few will be of opinion that the latter had the worst of the argument. Mr.
Mr. Rose's arguments answered,
action : and that he was interested in it, and likely to observe what passed, appears from the following passage. “ Argyle long to me
was the best and most excellent man our state of a long time had
enjoyed, but his compliance with the English, and remonstrants “ took my heart off him these eight years: yet I mourned for his death
and still pray to God for his family. His two sons are good « youths, and ever were loyal.” Baillie's Letters II. p. 451.
Cunningham lived after the execution of Argyle, but he was intimately connected with his son and his family ; was trusted by the Whigs of Scotland, and in a situation to obtain the best information upon the subject. “At the restoration many letters were addressed " to the King,” of which Cunningham says, “I myself have three“ score,” afterwards he adds, “ There is one from the Marquis of Ar
gyle, in which after wishing his Majesty all health and prosperity 6 he gravely excuses his absence on account of his bad state of 46 health, and the length of the journey. As to other matters' says
Rose has reprinted Dr. Campbell's attack upon Burnet in his Appendix, but we shall confine ourselves chiefly to such of his arguments, as are retailed in the observations. XIt was not merely
not merely an attack upon the X Fhat too is someter bishop, which was in the contemplation of Mr. Rose, it was aimed also at Mr. Fox, who, without taking proper pains to get information, is charged with having retailed the scandal. A Whig bishop, and a Whig statesman were to be levelled to the ground at one blow; and though Mr. Rose's intention to be correct and candid, cannot be disputed, the political atmosphere thickened round him, his best efforts were traversed and con
“ he, 'I refer to my son Lorne.' The King, on reading this letter, 56 spoke to the Lord Lorne in a very kind manner; upon which, Ar
gyle, conceiving hopes of safety, set out for London, and came to 6 court to cast himself upon the King's clemency. But, through the in6 terference of Monk, with whom he had held a long and intimate friend
ship in the time of Oliver, he was presently committed to custody, 66 and sent back for his trial to Scotland. He endeavoured to make “ his defence, but, chiefly by the discoveries of Monk, was condemned 66 of high treason and lost his head.” Cunn. Hist. I. p. 13. It seems, by this extract, that the letter from Argyle to the King was in Cunningham's possession, among the threescore letters he mentions. And, it may be observed, that both Baillie's and Cunningham's testimony may now be added to the proofs adduced in the text, to shew the incorrectness of Dr. Campbell's assertion that Monk always considered Argyle as a secret friend of the King; for in the time of Oliver he “ held a long and intimate friendship with him ;” and it was on account of his compliance with the English that Baillie estranged himself from him.