66

publicly disengaged from acting as a mediator," they continue, "or 66 upon such terms and conditions as were then proposed, Your Majesty may enter into the war to no other end, than that the said “French King may be reduced into such a condition, as he

66

66

66

may be no

longer terrible to Your Majesty's subjects; and that Christendom may be restored to such a peace as may not be in the power of the "French King to disturb."* No one will deny that such a proposal was just and reasonable. In fact it was no other than one which had been made to the King by Temple several months before, and on the rejection of which he had refused the embassy to Holland. † Had it even now been adopted, there can be little doubt that the popularity of government would have risen to a height that might have swept away every obstacle. The party in Holland, which reproached the Prince of Orange with the faithlessness of Charles, would have sunk before this proof of his sincerity, and the King of England would have appeared in his proper station, directing the energies, and disposing of the revenue, of a powerful nation, against her inveterate enemy. But such glory was not the sphere of Charles. Amidst all the changes and inconsistencies of man, it may be remarked, that there is seldom, if ever, a transition from duplicity to candour, and from base intrigue to honourable conduct. Charles had navigated too long in creeks and shallows, to venture with boldness and resolution upon the open sea. The address of the Commons was sent to the Lords for their concurrence, and was suffered to lie on their table. The King took no notice of it, and gave no proof of his sincerity in the cause of the allies. Mr. Hume, in one place, endeavours to justify his conduct, on the ground that his father had been led into a war, and then denied the supplies necessary to carry it on. ‡ But if this is any defence for Charles, how much more reasonable were the suspicions of the Commons, who, only seven years before, had voted a supply to support the triple alliance, at a time when a peace was made secretly with France.

• March 15. + Temple's Works, vol. i. folio, p. 457.

‡ Vol. viii. p. 24.

In the course of this month Lord Russell received the following note from his wife, indorsed by him "March y 1677-8, while yo. the House was sitting." I know not to what it refers.

66

My sister being here tells me she overheard you tell her Lord "last night, that you would take notice of the business (you know "what I mean) in the House: this alarms me, and I do earnestly

66

beg of you to tell me truly if you have or mean to do it. If you "do, I am most assured you will repent it. I beg once more to “know the truth. 'Tis more pain to be in doubt, and to your sister 66 too, and if I have any interest, I use it to beg your silence in this case, at least to-day."

66

"R. RUSSELL.”

An adjournment of the Commons now took place: the negociations with Holland and France were renewed; and the Prince of Orange was obliged reluctantly to consent that Valenciennes, Tournay, and Condè, should remain in the hands of France; terms which he thought destructive to the safety of Europe. In proposing these terms to France, Charles asked for six millions of livres for himself for three years, as the price of his good offices. Lewis, finding that the confederates had consented to such low terms, which showed they had no reliance on the professions of the King of England, resolved to make the most of his advantage. He ordered his ambassador at Nimeguen to publish a declaration, insisting on still more favourable conditions of peace, and insinuating an understanding with the King of England. Charles was really provoked, at finding himself thus outwitted, at the expense both of his money and his character: but confidence is not the creature of a day. When he attempted to make a treaty with Holland, her ambassador, after a preliminary negociation, owned he had no powers to conclude. Parliament, when they met, acted with the same distrust. The treaties having been laid before them, they were voted to be not pursuant to the addresses of the House, nor consistent with the good and safety of the kingdom. A peevish vote, as Sir William Temple calls it, on the subject of religion was carried;

1678.

and after some close divisions, addresses were voted to remove evil May, counsellors, generally, and the Duke of Lauderdale by name. 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.

He now concluded a formal treaty. He accepted six milMay 27. lions 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 May 21. 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

* 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 600,0001. ; 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.

CHAP. VI.

DISCOVERIES OF DALRYMPLE. 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.