May, and after some close divisions, addresses were voted to remove evil counsellors, generally, and the Duke of Lauderdale by name. 1678. This was, in other words, an address for a change of ministry. The King replied, that the address was so extravagant he would give it no answer; on which the Commons voted, by one voice, in a full House, that the King's message, lately sent to them, for a supply to pay off the fleet, should not be observed. * Parliament was upon this prorogued for ten days. This quarrel with the Commons seems to have made Charles determine to close the breach with France, which he had taken care not to make irreparable. May 27. He now concluded a formal treaty. He accepted six millions of livres for himself; but he refused to put his name to the conditions, that he should disband his army and prorogue his Parliament. The royal conscience was completely relieved, however, when it was expressed, that he should receive the money upon disbanding the army and proroguing the Parliament. To such a quibble was all his virtue reduced! † He was, however, allowed to retain 3000 troops for Ostend, and after long discussion, 3000 more for Scotland. The Parliament was to be prorogued for four months. ‡ When the Parliament met, the King told them that events had driven things violently on towards a peace, but he was resolved to save Flanders, either by a war or by a peace; and therefore desired to keep up his army and navy. The Commons prayed May 21. * Reresby. + Dal. p. 165. He endeavoured to employ Sir W. Temple in this negociation; but that upright man was so offended, that, after evading the employment by feigning sickness, he retired to his house at Sheen, and wrote to the Lord Treasurer, to offer his resignation of his embassy at Nimeguen, and an abandonment of the promise he had received to be Secretary of State. Barillon. Dal. App. p. 170. Temple's Works. Temple tells us, that he heard on good authority, that the King expressed such indignation at one article of the private treaty, proposed by Barillon, that he said he never would forget it as long as he lived. Swift, who edited Temple's Memoirs, tells us, the article proposed was, that Charles should never keep above eight thousand men of standing army in the three kingdoms, and that Charles said in a rage, "God's fish! does my brother of France think to serve me thus? Are all his promises to make me absolute master of my realms come to this? or does he think that a thin to be done, with eight thousand men ?” him to declare immediate war, and upon his refusal, voted that the army should be disbanded; but the King, finding that he had money to pay the troops, retained them for some time longer. The rest of the summer passed in new preparations for hostilities, and new jealousies on the part of the Commons. Sir John Reresby tells us that the rumour of war was revived in June, but that he often saw the King, the Duke, and Barillon together at the Duchess of Portsmouth's, laughing at those who believed it. * It is melancholy to record the general results of this session. A needless burden of 600,000l.; a standing army, not only useless but dangerous; pensions received by the King from France, and a peace concluded abroad, leaving Flanders exposed to a hazard, from which, after so many successful wars, it has not yet been relieved. Such are the bad effects to the nation of being governed by a King in whom his parliament can place no confidence. The various events of the negociation at Nimeguen; the artificial difficulties raised by the French; the embassy of Sir William Temple, and the mission of Du Cros; are more fit subjects for general history than biography. Perhaps I have already detailed too minutely the progress of public affairs. But the conduct of the party to which Lord Russell belonged could not be explained, without presenting a view of the times; and it will be presently seen, that his own character has been attacked upon the ground of his behaviour during a part of this session. * Reresby, p. 207. DISCOVERIES of dalrYMPLE. CHAP. VI. ROUVIGNY'S INTERVIEWS WITH LORD RUSSELL. I HAVE hitherto postponed an account of the interviews between Lord Russell and the French minister, because, from the manner in which this subject has been treated, the narrative will necessarily be mixed with controversy. Many years have elapsed since Sir John Dalrymple communicated to the world the discoveries he had made in the depôt des affaires etrangères at Versailles. The intrigues between the courts of France and England, which had already been partly detected by means of Danby's letters, which were openly detailed in a work published at Paris in 1682*, and which, since that time, have been recorded by all historians, could create little surprise. But the connection of Sydney and Russell with France excited, as might be expected, astonishment, sorrow, and indignation. To heighten the effect of the discovery, Sir John declared that he "felt very near the same shock as if he had seen a son turn his back in the day of battle." He pronounced these intrigues to be of a tendency nearly as dangerous as those of the princes. And he drew from them this sweeping inference, that "no party in this country has a right to assume over another from the merit of their ancestors; it being too plain, from the following papers, that Whigs and Tories, in their turns, have been the enemies of their country." See a translation of this work, which is a history of the second Dutch war, in the State Tracts published after the Revolution. It is there entitled "The History of the War of Holland, written originally in Italian by the Count de Magole, and printed at Paris in 1682, with the French King's Privilege, but soon after supprest, almost all Copies destroyed, and the Author sent to the Bastile at the Complaint of My Lord Preston, the English Ambassador then residing at Paris. Never before published in English.” + See Hume's note upon this subject, vol. viii. However gratifying such reflections must always be to selfish politicians, and to those who doubt all public virtue, I hope to prove that this instance, at least, will afford no foundation for their malignity. In doing this, I shall not throw any doubt upon the accuracy of the historian or the honesty of the ambassador. I am willing to allow, for the present, that the stream of history has flowed with undiminished purity through these suspected channels. I shall not deny, therefore, that an intercourse took place between Lord Russell and Rouvigny; although it is very probable that Barillon, in repeating from Rouvigny the substance of these interviews, represented them as much more favourable to his master than they really were. But I trust that an account of the whole matter will show that nothing took place derogatory to the public virtue or private honour of Lord Russell. The first thing to consider, is the time at which the intercourse took place; for any political intercourse whatever with an agent of France would, in ordinary times, be, to say the least, extremely improper. But this was a period of extreme danger to the English constitution. The King, who was known to entertain sentiments hostile to the liberty of his people, was about to raise an army, under the pretence of a French war, but in reality, as it was supposed, to subjugate his own country. That these fears were not idle fancies, appears from the best authorities. Sir John Reresby, a professed courtier, says, a jealousy was entertained "that the King indeed intended to raise an army, but never designed to join with the war; and to say the truth, some of the King's own party were not very sure of the contrary." Lord Danby, the prime minister, writes to the Prince of Orange, on Feb. 9. in these words: "The Parliament has now voted 26,000 foot and 4000 horse and dragoons; and I am confident will not stop there, in case His Majesty will go freely into the war, which yet they all doubt, and NOT WITHOUT CAUSE." Two months afterwards Barillon writes, "The Duke of York believes himself lost as to his religion, if the present opportunity does not serve to bring England into subjection: 'tis a very bold enterprise, and the success very K doubtful. I believe they have persuaded this Prince that a war is more proper to accomplish his design than peace." The views of Lord Danby, he says, tended solely to procure money and increase his master's authority. And though the King still wavered, and his humour was very repugnant to the design of changing the form of government, he was nevertheless drawn along by the Duke and Treasurer. † These quotations prove that those who were most in the confidence of Charles, were ignorant of his real intentions, and that the Duke of York looked upon the war as an opportunity for establishing his favourite religion and arbitrary government. The opposition, on the other hand, warned, as we have seen, by Algernon Sydney, and in possession of early information with respect to what was passing at Paris, entertained a suspicion that Lewis was acting in concert with Charles, for the destruction of that liberty which was dearer to them than their lives. Above all, they dreaded that the House of Commons, which, in the course of seventeen years, had been corrupted by bribery, would go into the schemes of the court, and blindly hasten the subversion of the constitution. In this dilemma they saw no chance of safety but in a dissolution. Lewis, on the other hand, equally distrustful of Charles, resolved to obstruct his movements, by a connection with the popular party in England. D'Avaux, the French minister at the Hague, represented to the opposition leaders, by means of Algernon Sydney, that the union of the King of England with the Prince of Orange would prove destructive to the liberty of both countries: and M. de Rouvigny was sent over with money, which, according to the information of Montague, the ambassador at Paris, "by means of William Russell, and other discontented people, he was to distribute in Parliament.' Did we know no more than this, it might be suspected that * Dal. App. p. 143. + Dal. App. ibid. I only quote this dispatch, to show the general views of the court. The date is of the 18th of April. |