to be considered that the war had been entered into almost a year before, and his leaving the court could not prevent the continuance of it; that this meeting of the parliament was owing to his advice and interest with the king; and that, if he had resigned his office, and quitted his station near the king, the houses would probably have been soon prorogued, and, consequently, the great designs which he had in view would have proved abortive. 94 It is plain, from the great honours which the Dutch paid to Lord Shaftesbury when he retired into Holland, (as will appear in the sequel of his life,) that they did not think him the author of 94 This elaborate apology is neither very new nor very successful. The same excuse was advanced at the time, and was afterwards severely handled by Roger North in his "Reflections on Mr. Le Clerc's Life of Mr. John Locke." Sir Walter Scott says, speaking of this speech, "The best apology offered for him by his defenders is, that being chancellor he was the mouth and organ of the council-board, and was obliged to deliver their sentiments, however little they might accord with his own. Whether he ought to have retained his office under such circumstances is a different question, which it is not difficult for integrity to answer." Somers' Tracts, vol. viii. p. 37. The argument advanced in the text against this course of conduct, would be equally applicable in defence of any conduct of an able minister, however infamous that conduct might be. A. D. 1672-3. A. D. 1672-3. Ld. Shaftesbury's ad vice to the king in favour of the Dutch. the speech above mentioned. On the contrary, they knew that he had given advice to the king which was evidently for their safety, upon the following occasion. When the French monarch had made such a progress in his conquests that he came down to Utrecht, and struck the Dutch with such a consternation that they despaired of saving their country, Lord Shaftesbury used his utmost endeavours to rouse his master into a just attention to the designs of France, and a proper spirit for the interest of Europe.95 He laid before him the fatal consequences of the French king's success, and the necessity of sending an embassy to stop his progress, in so clear a light, that Charles began to open his eyes. Accordingly, he sent the Duke of Buckingham, Lord Arlington, and (by Lord Shaftesbury's advice) Lord Halifax, to the French king at Utrecht, with proposals of peace. Lord Halifax had not, at that time, entered into 95 In 1681, Barillon writes, that when Shaftesbury, at the end of the Dutch war, was advising Charles to quit the French and make a Spanish alliance, Charles asked him how much the Spaniards had given him? He answered, "Nothing at all." "Then," said the king, "you owe them nothing, for they offered Arlington forty thousand pounds." the court measures. After the ambassadors had met together at the Hague, they made joint application to Louis, but their interposition with him was ineffectual; for he considered this embassy as forced, in a manner, upon King Charles, who would not have steadiness to support his own remonstrances; and therefore he slighted them. A. D. 1672-3. VOL. II. E A. D. 1672-3. CHAPTER II. Proceedings of Parliament.-Supply granted.-Address against the Declaration of indulgence. - Opinion of the House of Lords. Review of Lord Shaftesbury's Conduct with regard to this measure.-Declaration cancelled.-Test Act. Lord Shaftesbury's opposition to the Popish Ministers.-Conclusion of his Speech to the Parliament.-His Address to the King.Is dismissed from his office of Chancellor.-Review of his Political conduct. THE parliament answered the call thus made upon them. The house of commons immediately ings of par- voted the king a supply of an eighteen months' Proceed liament. assessment, of seventy thousand pounds a month. This was designed by the popish junto to raise an army, which was soon formed and encamped at Blackheath. Immediately after voting the supply, the commons addressed the king to call in his declaration of indulgence, which they unanimously voted to be against law. They ordered a bill to be brought in for the relief of the dissenters, by which all the penalties in the act of uniformity were removed, and nothing required but taking the oaths of allegiance and supremacy. They presented to the king their complaints on the growth of popery, and desired that he would issue out a proclamation to command all priests and jesuits (with exception of those in attendance on the queen) to depart the kingdom within thirty days. The vote of the house of commons against the indulgence was so disagreeable to Charles and the junto, that it was debated in the cabinet council,* whether the king should not prorogue the parliament, it being thought better to part with the parliament than with the declaration. Lord Shaftesbury, who had principally advised the calling of the parliament, spoke warmly against the motion for proroguing it. He told the king that he might judge, by the house of commons, what jealousies the increase of popery, and the apparent countenance which the papists received from the court, had raised in the nation; and if he should prorogue the parliament upon that point, he would expose himself so openly to censure that it might cause a great alteration in the minds of the people and therefore it would be better to * Mr. Stringer. A. D. 1672-3. Conduct of with regard the court to the indul gence. |