confusion. All were mingled together, men labouring to extinguish the flames, citizens conveying away their families and goods, crowds flying from the imaginary massacre, others in arms hastening to oppose the murderers, and mobs surrounding and ill-treating every stranger, foreigner, and reputed papist, who ventured into the streets.

Exertions

Charles never appeared so deeply affected as at the sight of the conflagration. Breaking from his of the pleasures and his mistresses, he displayed an energy king. of mind and body of which his most intimate friends thought him no longer capable. Wherever the danger appeared the greatest, the king was to be found with his brother, mixing among the workmen, animating them by his example, and with his own hand rewarding their exertions.* He divided the city into districts, and gave the command of each district to one of the privy council. He ordered biscuits and other necessaries to be brought from the royal stores for the relief of the families in the fields, and ordered out strong patroles of his guards, to prevent robbery, and to conduct to prison all persons suspected and arrested by the populace, as the most likely means of preserving their lives.

On

End of the conflagra

tion.

Sep. 5.

While the storm continued, the conflagration bade defiance to all the exertions of human ingenuity or power. In many places houses had been blown up or demolished: but the ignited flakes were carried over the empty space, or the ruins again took fire, or the flames unexpectedly turned in a new direction. the evening of Wednesday the violence of the wind began to abate; and the duke of York saved the church of the Temple by the destruction of the neighbouring buildings : the next morning a similar precaution was adopted Sep. 6. by the king to preserve Westminster-abbey and the palace of Whitehall. About five in the evening of Thursday the weather became calm; and every heart beat with the hope that this dreadful visitation was approaching to its close. But in the night new alarms were excited. The fire burst out again in the Temple; it was still seen to rage with unabated fury near Cripplegate, and a large body of flame made rapid advance towards the Tower. The duke and the other noblemen were immediately at their posts. With the aid of gunpowder large openings were made; Charles attended at the demolition of the houses on the graff near the maga zine in the Tower; and the conflagration, being thus prohibit

"It is not indeed imaginable how extraordinary the vigilance and activity of the king and the duke was, even labouring in person, and being present to command, order, reward, or encourage workmen." Evelyn, ii. 268. Life of James, i. 424.

ed from extending its ravages, gradually died away, though months elapsed before the immense accumulation of ruins ceased to present appearances of internal heat and combustion.*

By this deplorable accident two-thirds of the me

Its extent. tropolis, the whole space from the Tower to the

Temple, had been reduced to ashes. The number of houses consumed amounted to thirteen thousand two hundred, of churches, including St. Paul's, to eighty-nine, covering three hundred and seventy-three acres within, and sixty-three without the walls. In the fields about Islington and Sep. 7. Highgate were seen lying on the bare ground, or under huts hastily erected, two hundred thousand individuals, many in a state of utter destitution, and the others watching the small remnant of their property which they had snatched from the flames. Charles was indefatigable in his exertions to afford relief, and to procure them lodgings in the nearest towns and villages.†

Whoever considers the place in which the fire Its cause. began, the violence of the wind, and the materials of

which the houses were built, will not be at a loss to account for the origin and the extent of the conflagration. But it was an age in which political and religious prejudices had perverted the judgments of men. Some considered it as an evident visitation of Providence in punishment of sin; but of what sin? Of the immorality of the king and the courtiers, replied the more rigid religionists; of the late rebellion, recriminated the cavaliers. Others attributed it to the disloyalty and revenge, either of the republicans, who sought to destroy the seat of the monarchy, or of the monarchy, or of the papists, who wished to punish the strong hold of orthodoxy. But of these charges, though the individuals suspected were examined before the council and the lord chief justice, though the house of commons ordered a strict inquiry to be instituted,

* London Gazette, No. 85. Clarend, 348-352. Evelyn, ii. 263–7. Philips, 652. Burnet, i. 401. 2; and Pepys, in the confusion has divided one day into two. Diary, iii. 16-35.

t St. Trials, vi. 807. Evelyn, ii. 271.

Two remarkable coincidences have been noticed. At the trials of certain conspirators in the preceding April, it appeared that they had intended to set fire to London on the 3d of September of the last year, that they might avail themselves of the confusion to overturn the government (London Gazette, Ap. 23-26): and it was about one in the morning of Sep. 3, of this year that the fire made its appearance. Again, in 1656, a treatise was advertised, purporting to show from the Apocalypse, that in the year 1666 the Romish Babylon would be destroyed by fire. (Marc. Pol. in Burton's Diary, i. cxlvii.) Now this great fire actually happened in 1666, the year foretold, though it destroyed not the Romish, but the English Babylon.

though every species of conjectural and hearsay evidence was admitted, yet no vestige of proof could ever be discovered. The report of the committee still exists, a complete refutation of the calumny.* Subsequently, however, on the monument erected to perpetuate this calamitous event, it was, and still stands, recorded, that "the burning of this protestant city was begun and carried on by the treachery and malice of the popish faction." Next to the guilt of him who perpetrates an atrocious crime, is the guilt of those who charge it on the innocent.t

liament.

In the same month, when the parliament assembled, it became manifest that the popularity of the Proceedking was on the wane in the lower house. The ings in parlate disaster had thrown a gloom over the public mind; and the murmurs of the people were echoed in the speeches of their representatives. The duke of Buckingham sought the company of the discontented; by tales of the royal extravagance and immorality, he sharpened their indignation and won their confidence; and, in a short time, a formidable party was arrayed against the advocates of the court. No man, indeed, could be more immoral than Buckingham himself; but Charles, to gratify the anger of Castlemaine, had banished him from court, and resentment made him a saint and a patriot. The commons began, indeed, by voting a supply of 1,800,000l. ; yet, while they held out the money as a lure to the king, they required several concessions before they would deliver it into his hands. 1. According to ancient custom, they displayed their zeal against the catholics. The attempt to fasten on them the charge of having fired the capital, unfortunately failed; but a committee was appointed "to inquire into the insolence of the papists and the increase of popery" and, though the information which they procured, consisted of tales so childish and improbable that they dared not pronounce an opinion.‡ yet it served as the foundation of an address to the king; and Charles, in accordance with their petition, commanded, by proclamation, all priests and jesuits to quit the kingdom; gave directions to the judges and magis

* These examinations are printed in Howell's State Trials, vi. 807-866. One Hubert, a French protestant, who formerly worked as a silversmith in the city, gave himself up as the incendiary, was examined before the committee (see his examination, p. 824), and, persisting in his story, was condemned and executed. The man was clearly insane. "Neither the judges, nor any present at the trial, did believe him guilty; but that he was a poor distracted wretch, weary of his life, and chose to part with it this way." Clarendon, 353. See also Higgons on Burnet, 215.

The monument was begun in 1671, and finished in 1677; the inscription was written by Dr. Thomas Gale, afterward dean of York. Pennant's London, 347.

‡ It is published in the State Trials, vi. 851–6.

trates to execute the laws against recusants, to disarm all papists, and to administer the oaths of allegiance and supremacy to all persons suspected of popery; and ordered the commanders of regiments to dismiss from the army every officer and soldier who should refuse the oaths, or had not received the sacrament.

debate on Irish cattle.

2. In 1663 complaint had been made in parliament that the agricultural interest of England was sacrificed to that of Ireland; that the annual importation of Irish cattle, amounting to more than sixty thousand beeves and a proportionate number of sheep, depressed the prices in the English market: and that the English farmers were no longer able to pay their rents to their landlords or their taxes to the king. The result was an act prohibiting under severe penalties the importation of cattle from the Irish to the English ports. There now remained but one resource for the Irish farmer, the introduction of the dead carcase in place of the live animal; and to meet this a bill was brought in during the session at Oxford, to extend the prohibition to salt beef, bacon, and pork. It was lost by the hasty prorogation of parliament, but revived in the present session. Never, for many years, had any question excited such agitation in the public mind, or such animosities in the two houses. On the one part, it was contended that the parliament was bound in duty to protect the agricultural interest, which comprised not only the farmers and their servants, but all the landlords in the kingdom; on the other, that the people had a right to purchase their food at the cheapest market; that it was unjust to protect one interest at the expense of another; and that, if the Irish were not allowed to export their cattle, they would not be able to import the manufactures of England. The bill, after much contestation, was sent to the lords, and returned by them with amendments, to which the commons objected. The opponents of the measure hoped, by fomenting the dissension, to suppress the bills: but the king was so anxious not to lose by delay the supply which had been voted, and so alarmed by the tumultuous meetings of the agriculturists in the country, that he commanded the duke of York and his friends in the house of lords to desist from their opposition. They withdrew before the division, and the bill was suffered to pass into a law.*

Clarendon, 371

* Miscel. Aul. 432. 6, 7. 9. 436. Coke, 151-144. 383. Carte, ij. 317–322. 329-334. In the course of these debates, Buckingham said that whoever opposed the bill, must have an Irish interest in his heart, or an Irish intellect in his head. Lord Ossory challenged him; but he chose to mistake the place of meeting, and to give an account of the whole proceeding to the house. Both were put under custody, and after

3. Reports were circulated that the supplies previously voted for the war had been diverted from On the auditing of their original destination: and a bill was carried the public through the commons appointing commissioners to accounts. audit the public accounts. Charles, at the solicitation of sir George Carteret, treasurer of the navy, and of Cooper, recently created lord Ashley, treasurer of the prize money, openly declared that he would never yield his consent. It was a direct invasion of the royal prerogative; it would prevent men from taking office if, instead of the regular method of auditing accounts, they were to be interrogated at will by the commons, and subjected to the arbitrary judgment of that house; and, which was the most cogent argument of all, it would reveal to the public the many and valuable grants which the king had made of the national money to his favourites and mistresses. But to oppose it openly might provoke and confirm suspicion: when the bill came to the upper house, the lords voted an address to the king to appoint a commission of inquiry; the commons resolved that such an address, pending the bill, was unparliamentary, and the two houses found themselves involved in an endless controversy respecting their rights and privileges. Charles, however, was now assailed from a different quarter. His opponents threatened to impeach the countess of Castlemain; and his anxiety to screen her from prosecution induced him to employ his influence in favour of the bill. The lords passed it with a few trifling amendments; and then its supporters, as if their only object had been to excite the distrust of the nation, instead of proceeding with a measure which they had so warmly pursued, suffered the bill to lie without notice on the table. The means of raising the supply by a pole tax and by eleven monthly assessments were voted, and the king, having obtained his end, prorogued the parliament,*

*

1667.

Jan. 24.

Feb. 8.

wards reconciled. Next he quarrelled with lord Dorchester, respecting a seat in a conference with the commons. The marquess in the scuffle lost his perriwig, the duke a handful of hair. The two champions were sent to the Tower, and reconciled. L. Journ. xii. 18, 19. 52. Clarendon, 376 -9. Miscel. Aul. 423-6.

* L. Journ. xii. 34. 47. 52. 72. 81. 88. C. Journal, Jan. 24, Feb. 7. Clarendon, 368. 374. Charles, however, in the April following, did appoint a commission of lords and commons, "for taking accounts of the several sums of money which had been raised and assigned to his majesty's use during the war, and of all such moneys and profits as had been made of prizes taken since the beginning of the war, with power to call to account all treasurers, receivers, etc. and all such authority, as might serve for the effectual and impartial execution of the said commission." They sate, continued the inquiry, for many months, and made reports to the house of commons. There was, however, no important result.