firm adherence to prelacy was not for conscience of one religion more than another, for it was his principle that an honest man might be saved in any profession; but he had a mistaken principle, that kingly government in the state could not stand without episcopal government in the church, and therefore as the bishops flattered him by preaching up his sovereign prerogative, and inveighing against the Puritans as factious and disloyal, so he protected them in all their pomp and pride, and insolent practices, against all the godly and sober people of the land." The character of Charles may be thought here to be too hardly drawn, particularly when it is remembered that it comes from one who was a rigid Puritan herself, and more> over the wife of one of the judges who sentenced him to death. Yet, making due allowance for partiality for her own party, it will scarcely be found that she is guilty of any exaggeration. It is admitted, we believe, on all hands, that Charles came to the throne with very high notions of the regal authority; and as the prelates flattered him in that opinion, he thought himself bound both in conscience and honor to support them in their privileges. He lived at a period when the spirit of the people became too mighty for those restraints which the regal power derived from the constitution; and when the tide of fanaticism began to overbear the religion of his country, to which he was conscientiously devoted, he suffered himself to be guided by counsellors who were not only inferior to himself in knowledge and judgment, but generally proud, partial, and inflexible: and from an excess of conjugal affection that bordered upon weakness, he paid too much deference to the advice and desires of his consort, who was superstitiously attached to the errors of popery, and importuned him incessantly in favor of the Roman Catholics. But the misfortunes of Charles's reign were neither imputable altogether to the episcopal predilections of the King, nor to his ready compliance with the wishes of the Queen. As a ings, and many other ingenuities, less offensive than the bawdry and profane abusive wit, which was the only exercise of the other court. But as, in the primitive times, it is observed, that the best emperors were some of them stirred by Satan to be the bitterest persecutors of the church, so this King was a worse encroacher upon the civil and spiritual liberties of the people by far than his father. He married a Papist, a French lady, of a haughty spirit, and a great wit and beauty, to whom he became a most uxorious husband. By this means the court was replenished with Papists, and many who hoped to advance themselves by the change, turned to that religion; all the Papists in the kingdom were favored, and by the King's example matched into the best families; the Puritans were more than ever discountenanced and persecuted, insomuch that many of them chose rather to abandon their native country, and leave their dearest relations, and retire into any foreign soil and plantation, where they might, amidst all outward inconveniences, enjoy the free exercise of God's worship. Such as could not flee were tormented in the bishop's courts, fined, whipt, pilloried, imprisoned, and suffered to enjoy no rest, so that death was better than life to them; and, notwithstanding their patient sufferance of all these things, yet was not the King satisfied till the whole land was reduced to perfect slavery. The example of the French King was propounded to him, and he thought himself no monarch so long as his will was confined to the bounds of any law; but knowing that the people of England were not pliable to an arbitrary rule he plotted to subdue them to his yoke by a foreign foe, and till he could effect it, made no conscience of granting any thing to the people, which he resolved should not oblige him longer than it served his turn; he was a prince that had nothing of faith or truth, justice or generosity, in him: he was the most obstinate person in his self-will that ever was, and so bent upon being an absolute, uncontroulable sovereign, that he was resolved either to be such a king or none. His firm adherence to prelacy was not fo The character of Charles may be though hardly drawn, particularly when it is rem comes from one who was a rigid Puritan her over the wife of one of the judges who sen death. Yet, making due allowance for part own party, it will scarcely be found that she is exaggeration. It is admitted, we believe, on Charles came to the throne with very high notion authority; and as the prelates flattered him in t he thought himself bound both in conscience an support them in their privileges. He lived at a perio spirit of the people became too mighty for those which the regal power derived from the constituti when the tide of fanaticism began to overbear the reli his country, to which he was conscientiously devoted, he fered himself to be guided by counsellors who were hot o inferior to himself in knowledge and judgment, but general proud, partial, and inflexible: and from an excess of conjugal affection that bordered upon weakness, he paid too much deference to the advice and desires of his consort, who was superstitiously attached to the errors of popery, and importuned him incessantly in favor of the Roman Catholics, But the misfortunes of Charles's reign were neither imputable altogether to the episcopal predilections of the King, nor to his ready compliance with the wishes of the Queen, Asa private individual, his character was in the highest degree amiable and praiseworthy; but as a monarch, in a turbulent period, he was utterly unfit for the station he occupied. He wanted resolution and vigour. The sacrifice of the Earl of Strafford, an event which he exceedingly lamented, and to which no extremity should have induced him to submit, rendered him contemptible in the eyes both of his enemies and his friends. The giving up of Strafford was mean and cowardly; and far from the letter which that unfortunate nobleman is said to have sent him, urging the King not to let his life stand as an obstacle to an agreement between him and his Parliament upon that occasion, being an excuse for him, it only aggravates the King's treachery and pusillanimity. Dissimulation, one of the worst vices with which a monarch can be tinctured, seems to have been a prevailing feature in the character of this prince, and ultimately to have led him to the scaffold, if the following relation from Hume can be relied on. "There prevails a story, that Cromwell intercepted a letter wrote to the Queen, where the King said, that he would first raise and then destroy Cromwell. It is first told by Roger Coke, a very passionate historian, who wrote so late as the revolution, and who mentions it only as a rumour. In the Memoirs of Lord Broghill, we meet with another story of an intercepted letter, which deserves some more attention, and is thus related by Mr. Maurice, chaplain to Roger, Earl of Orrery. "Lord Orrery, (says he), in the time of his greatness with Cromwell, just after he had so seasonably relieved him in his great distress at Clonmell, riding out to Youghall one day with him and Ireton, they fell into discourse about the King's death. Cromwell thereupon said more than once, that if the King had followed his own judgment, and had been attended by none but trusty servants, he had fooled them all; and that once they had a mind to have closed with him, but, upon something that happened, fell off from that design. Orrery finding them in good humour, and being alone with them, asked, if he might pre sume to desire to know, why they would once have closed with his majesty, and why they did not? Cromwell very freely told him, he would satisfy him in both his queries. The reason, (says he) why we would have closed with the King was this: We found that the Scotch Presbyterians began to be more powerful than we, and were likely to agree with him, and leave us in the lurch. For this reason we thought it best to prevent them by offering first to come in on reasonable conditions. But whilst our thoughts were taken up with this subject, there came a letter to us from one of our spies, who was of the King's bed-chamber, acquainting us that our final doom was decreed that very day; that he could not possibly learn what it was, but we might discover it, if we could but intercept a letter sent from the King to the Queen, wherein he informed her of his resolution; that this letter was sewn up in the skirts of a saddle, and the bearer of it would come with the saddle upon his head, about ten of the clock that night, to the Blue Boar, in Holborn, where he was to take horse for Dover. The messenger knew nothing of the letter in the saddle, though some in Dover did. We were at Windsor (said Cromwell) when we received this letter, and immediately upon the receipt of it, Ireton and I resolved to take one trusty fellow with us, and to go in troopers' habits to that inn. We did so, and leaving our man at the gate of the inn (which had a wicket only open to let persons in and out) to watch and give us notice when any man came with a saddle, we went into a drinking stall. We there continued drinking cans of beer till about ten of the clock, when our sentinel at the gate gave us notice, that the man with the saddle was come. We rose up presently, and just as the man was leading out his horse saddled, we came up to him with drawn swords, and told him we were to search all that went in and out there; but as he looked like an honest man, we would only search his saddle, and so dismiss him. The saddle was ungirt, we carried it into |
