The period to which the active life of Lord Russell belongs is one of great importance. From the year 1670 to 1683 may be styled the middle of that great contest which, beginning in 1641, and ending in 1688, has been very properly called a revolution of half a century.

The sons of Charles the First had confident expectations of establishing an arbitrary monarchy in England; and, on the other side, there were many real patriots determined to surrender their liberties only with their lives.

At this period a struggle took place between the Crown and the Parliament, which ended in the complete victory of the former; and had not James attacked the church, as well as the constitution, would, probably, have led the way to despotism. The triumph of Charles the Second over his Parliament was scarcely less signal than that of the Parliament over his father, and, like it, sealed with blood. But it differs in one remarkable particular. Although Charles the Second was finally successful, all

the laws enacted during the contest were in favour of the conquered party.

The history of this period, as Mr. Serjeant Heywood has remarked, has not yet been accurately written. Hume had finished his work before Sir John Dalrymple published the valuable dispatches of the French ministers in England; besides which, every reader must feel that his partiality to the house of Stuart greatly lessens the value of what he has written. even with these defects, such is his depth of thought, and beauty of style, that I cannot take up his book without wondering at my own presumption in describing events which have been related by so able an author.

Yet,

A very different feeling arises in my mind on looking at the work of Sir John Dalrymple. At first one is inclined to believe, that his taste for bombast led to his numerous errors; but when it appears, as I think it does in the following pages, that there is not a single member of the Whig party of any note whom he has

not traduced by false allegations, it is difficult to acquit him of intentional misrepresentation.

The last few years have brought to light several works which illustrate the reign of Charles the Second. The Life of King James, great part of which is written by himself, and Evelyn's Memoirs, are the most remarkable. With the assistance of these materials I conceived that it was possible a narrative might be formed of the domestic history of Charles the Second, not altogether uninteresting. And although I have been obliged sometimes to lose sight of Lord Russell, he is always closely connected with the subject; for the opposition made to the designs of this unprincipled King began with his entrance into public life, was continued with his aid, and was totally extinguished at his death.

The principal sources from which the present work is derived, are the well-known histories and memoirs, written by persons who lived at the time of which they treat. But it would be

to me.

ungrateful in me not to acknowledge the great obligations I owe to the late Mr. Howell, the editor of Cobbett's State Trials. The new Parliamentary History has also been of great use And I have derived most useful lights from the observations on this reign in the introductory chapter of Mr. Fox's History; a work which contains more sound constitutional opinions than any other history with which I am acquainted. Some information was gained from the letters of Secretary Coventry, in manuscript, at Longleat. A few letters and papers are preserved at Woburn Abbey. But by far the most valuable assistance I have received, has been from the original letters O Lady Russell, which the Duke of Devonshire had the kindness to let me see. They will, I hope, be given to the world as soon as this work, accompanied by all the illustrations they require.

In this place I beg to return my best thanks to Lord Sidmouth, for the permission to see some papers concerning Lord Russell, in the

State-Paper Office. And to Lord Granville Somerset, for the research he desired to be made into the books of the Treasury.

The style and composition of the following work require much apology, which, I trust, the indulgence of the public will supply.

July, 1820.

I consider it necessary for my own justifica

When

tion, to publish the two following notes. I was engaged in writing the Life of Lord Russell, I naturally became anxious to see the dispatches of Barillon, which Sir John Dalrymple copied and published. My first application was in the summer of 1818, and it has been renewed more than once; but the first regular answer I have received, was to a request made in the course of the present spring, through the Count de Caraman, who at present represents the French government at London.