cause every chance, but it was impossible to help those who would not help themselves. Directly Argyll's advance became known, James's council determined on a retreat from Perth. The Highlanders obeyed in sullen silence, or with muttered mutiny, which would have broken into active rebellion, if they had not been told that the army was only retreating to the Highlands in order that it might better attack Argyll. The retreat was by way of the Carse o' Gowrie and Dundee to Montrose. During the march Mar told James that all hope was lost, and urged him to fly to France. James resisted this proposal, and only consented to it when told that his presence would help no one, and increase his adherents' danger. At Montrose a French vessel was lying in the harbour, and on the evening of February 4th James secretly left his lodging. Accompanied by Mar, he went to the water side, pushed off in a small boat, and embarked on the vessel for France. James left behind him a letter addressed to Argyll, enclosing a sum of money, all that he had left, desiring that it might be given to the poor people whose villages he had been obliged to burn on his retreat, so that, "I may at least have the satisfaction of having been the destruction of none, at a time when I came to free all ". The Highlanders were indignant and discouraged at the flight of their King, but as Argyll's advancing army was close on their heels, they marched to Aberdeen, their numbers 'The original letter is printed in Chambers's History. getting fewer and fewer as they went along, and from Aberdeen they retired into their Highland fastnesses, dispersing as they went. Very few were taken prisoners, partly because of Argyll's lack of vigilance, and partly because of the inaccessible nature of the country. The men, safe in their obscurity, went back to their homes, the chiefs hid for a time until the storm blew over, or made good their escape to the Continent. Thus ended the rising of 1715, and putting aside sentiment (and it must be admitted that sentiment was all on the side of James), it probably ended for the best. From the personal point of view England would have gained little by a change of King. James was a more attractive personality than George, but he had his failings and his vices too. His mistresses would have been French instead of German, and more beautiful, but little less rapacious. His advisers, instead of being hungry Hanoverians, would have been French and Italian Jesuits, quite as objectionable, and far more dangerous. From the national point of view, the cause of civil and religious liberty would have sustained a severe check. But when all this is admitted, the fact remains that James was the heir of our ancient kings. It is impossible to withhold sympathy from those who, so long as he and his sons lived, refused allegiance to the House of Hanover, or to the many more whose sentiments, though they acquiesced in the established order of things, were expressed in the epigram of John Byrom: God bless the King, God bless our faith's Defender, God bless us all! that's quite another thing. By the death of James's younger son Henry Benedict, Cardinal York, at Rome, in 1807, these dynastic disputes came to an end. By the accession reigning dynasty of Queen Victoria, in 1837, the gained a lustre before denied it, and became consecrated in the hearts and affection of the English people. And this holds equally good of his present gracious Majesty, King Edward the Seventh, who is a lineal descendant of King James the First, and has inherited many of the generous and lovable characteristics of the Stuarts. 234 CHAPTER V. AFTER THE RISING. 1716. WHEN James landed in France he proceeded to St. Germains, but the Regent declined to receive him, and desired him to withdraw to Lorraine. Instead of doing so, he went for a time to Versailles, to “a little house," according to Bolingbroke, "where his female ministers resided". Here James gave Bolingbroke audience, and received him graciously. "No Italian ever embraced the man he was going to stab with a greater show of affection and confidence," wrote Bolingbroke after. The next morning Bolingbroke received a visit from Ormonde, who handed him a paper in James's writing, which curtly intimated that he had no further occasion for his services, and desiring him to give up the papers of the secretary's office. "These papers," Bolingbroke "might have been contained in a small letter case." The reason of James's extraordinary conduct to the man who was his ablest adherent has always remained a mystery. Some said it was because of Bolingbroke's not raising supplies, others that James had never trusted him, said contemptuously, and in some way blamed him for the failure of his enterprise, others that it was due to the influence of James's woman advisers and the jealousy of Mar. It was probably a combination of all these. Lord Stair has another reason: "They use poor Harry (Bolingbroke) most unmercifully, and call him knave and traitor, and God knows what. I believe all poor Harry's fault was, that he could not play his part with a grave enough face; he could not help laughing now and then at such kings and queens." Be the reason what it may, Bolingbroke never forgave the insult, and when the Queen-Mother, Mary Beatrice, sent him a message later saying that his dismissal was against her advice and without her approval, and expressing the wish that he would continue to work for her son's cause, he returned an answer saying that he hoped his arm would rot off and his brain fail if he ever again devoted either to the restoration of the Stuarts. Henceforth he concentrated his energies on getting his attainder reversed and returning to England. The Jacobite rising had a painful sequel in England in the punishment of its leaders. In Scotland no men of note were taken. But in England many fell into the hands of the Government at the surrender of Preston. These were treated with great severity, some of the inferior officers were tried by court martial and shot forthwith. The leaders were sent to London, where they met with 'The Earl of Stair (English ambassador in Paris) to the elder Horace Walpole, 3rd March, 1716. |