The History of England from the Accession of James II, Vol 4 by Thomas Babington Macaulay (page 13)

United Provinces, met at Ryswick. Three treaties were to be signed, and there was a long dispute on the momentous question which should be signed first. It was one in the morning before it was settled that the treaty between France and the States General should have precedence; and the day was breaking before all the instruments had been executed. Then the plenipotentiaries, with many bows, congratulated each other on having had the honour of contributing to so great a work.816

A sloop was in waiting for Prior. He hastened on board, and on the third day, after weathering an equinoctial gale, landed on the coast of Suffolk.817

Very seldom had there been greater excitement in London than during the month which preceded his arrival. When the west wind kept back the Dutch packets, the anxiety of the people became intense. Every morning hundreds of thousands rose up hoping to hear that the treaty was signed; and every mail which came in without bringing the good news caused bitter disappointment. The malecontents, indeed, loudly asserted that there would be no peace, and that the negotiation would, even at this late hour, be broken off. One of them had seen a person just arrived from Saint Germains; another had had the privilege of reading a letter in the handwriting of Her Majesty; and all were confident that Lewis would never acknowledge the usurper. Many of those who held this language were under so strong a delusion that they backed their opinion by large wagers. When the intelligence of the fall of Barcelona arrived, all the treason taverns were in a ferment with nonjuring priests laughing, talking loud, and shaking each other by the hand.818

At length, in the afternoon of the thirteenth of September, some speculators in the City received, by a private channel, certain intelligence that the treaty had been signed before dawn on the morning of the eleventh. They kept their own secret, and hastened to make a profitable use of it; but their eagerness to obtain Bank stock, and the high prices which they offered, excited suspicion; and there was a general belief that on the next day something important would be announced. On the next day Prior, with the treaty, presented himself before the Lords justices at Whitehall. Instantly a flag was hoisted on the Abbey, another on Saint Martin’s Church. The Tower guns proclaimed the glad tidings. All the spires and towers from Greenwich to Chelsea made answer. It was not one of the days on which the newspapers ordinarily appeared; but extraordinary numbers, with headings in large capitals, were, for the first time, cried about the streets. The price of Bank stock rose fast from eighty-four to ninety-seven. In a few hours triumphal arches began to rise in some places. Huge bonfires were blazing in others. The Dutch ambassador informed the States General that he should try to show his joy by a bonfire worthy of the commonwealth which he represented; and he kept his word; for no such pyre had ever been seen in London. A hundred and forty barrels of pitch roared and blazed before his house in Saint James’s Square, and sent up a flame which made Pall Mall and Piccadilly as bright as at noonday.819

Among the Jacobites the dismay was great. Some of those who had betted deep on the constancy of Lewis took flight. One unfortunate zealot of divine right drowned himself. But soon the party again took heart. The treaty had been signed; but it surely would never be ratified. In a short time the ratification came; the peace was solemnly proclaimed by the heralds; and the most obstinate nonjurors began to despair. Some divines, who had during eight years continued true to James, now swore allegiance to William. They were probably men who held, with Sherlock, that a settled government, though illegitimate in its origin, is entitled to the obedience of Christians, but who had thought that the government of William could not properly be said to be settled while the greatest power in Europe not only refused to recognise him, but strenuously supported his competitor.820 The fiercer and more determined adherents of the banished family were furious against Lewis. He had deceived, he had betrayed his suppliants. It was idle to talk about the misery of his people. It was idle to say that he had drained every source of revenue dry, and that, in all the provinces of his kingdom, the peasantry were clothed in rags, and were unable to eat their fill even of the coarsest and blackest bread. His first duty was that which he owed to the royal family of England. The Jacobites talked against him, and wrote against him, as absurdly, and almost as scurrilously, as they had long talked and written against William. One of their libels was so indecent that the Lords justices ordered the author to be arrested and held to bail.821

But the rage and mortification were confined to a very small minority. Never, since the year of the Restoration, had there been such signs of public gladness. In every part of the kingdom where the peace was proclaimed, the general sentiment was manifested by banquets, pageants, loyal healths, salutes, beating of drums, blowing of trumpets, breaking up of hogsheads. At some places the whole population, of its own accord, repaired to the churches to give thanks. At others processions of girls, clad all in white, and crowned with laurels, carried banners inscribed with “God bless King William.” At every county town a long cavalcade of the principal gentlemen, from a circle of many miles, escorted the mayor to the market cross. Nor was one holiday enough for the expression of so much joy. On the fourth of November, the anniversary of the King’s birth, and on the fifth, the anniversary of his landing at Torbay, the bellringing, the shouting, and the illuminations were renewed both in London and all over the country.822 On the day on which he returned to his capital no work was done, no shop was opened, in the two thousand streets of that immense mart. For that day the chiefs streets had, mile after mile, been covered with gravel; all the Companies had provided new banners; all the magistrates new robes. Twelve thousand pounds had been expended in preparing fireworks. Great multitudes of people from all the neighbouring shires had come up to see the show. Never had the City been in a more loyal or more joyous mood. The evil days were past. The guinea had fallen to twenty-one shillings and sixpence. The bank note had risen to par. The new crowns and halfcrowns, broad, heavy and sharply milled, were ringing on all the counters. After some days of impatient expectation it was known, on the fourteenth of November, that His Majesty had landed at Margate. Late on the fifteenth he reached Greenwich, and rested in the stately building which, under his auspices, was turning from a palace into a hospital. On the next morning, a bright and soft morning, eighty coaches and six, filled with nobles, prelates, privy councillors and judges, came to swell his train. In Southwark he was met by the Lord Mayor and the Aldermen in all the pomp of office. The way through the Borough to the bridge was lined by the Surrey militia; the way from the bridge to Walbrook by three regiments of the militia of the City. All along Cheapside, on the right hand and on the left, the livery were marshalled under the standards of their trades. At the east end of Saint Paul’s churchyard stood the boys of the school of Edward the Sixth, wearing, as they still wear, the garb of the sixteenth century. Round the Cathedral, down Ludgate Hill and along Fleet Street, were drawn up three more regiments of Londoners. From Temple Bar to Whitehall gate the trainbands of Middlesex and the Foot Guards were under arms. The windows along the whole route were gay with tapestry, ribands and flags. But the finest part of the show was the innumerable crowd of spectators, all in their Sunday clothing, and such clothing as only the upper classes of other countries could afford to wear. “I never,” William wrote that evening to Heinsius, “I never saw such a multitude of welldressed people.” Nor was the King less struck by the indications of joy and affection with which he was greeted from the beginning to the end of his triumph. His coach, from the moment when he entered it at Greenwich till he alighted from it in the court of Whitehall, was accompanied by one long huzza. Scarcely had he reached his palace when addresses of congratulation, from all the great corporations of his kingdom, were presented to him. It was remarked that the very foremost among those corporations was the University of Oxford. The eloquent composition in which that learned body extolled the wisdom, the courage and the virtue of His Majesty, was read with cruel vexation by the nonjurors, and with exultation by the Whigs.823

The rejoicings were not yet over. At a council which was held a few hours after the King’s public entry, the second of December was appointed to be the day of thanksgiving for the peace. The Chapter of Saint Paul’s resolved that, on that day, their noble Cathedral, which had been long slowly rising on the ruins of a succession of pagan and Christian temples, should be opened for public worship. William announced his intention of being one of the congregation. But it was represented to him that, if he persisted in that intention, three hundred thousand people would assemble to see him pass, and all the parish churches of London would be left empty. He therefore attended the service in his own chapel at Whitehall, and heard Burnet preach a sermon, somewhat too eulogistic for the place.824 At Saint Paul’s the magistrates of the City appeared in all their state. Compton ascended, for the first time, a throne rich with the sculpture of Gibbons, and thence exhorted a numerous and splendid assembly. His discourse has not been preserved; but its purport may be easily guessed; for he preached on that noble Psalm: “I was glad when they said unto me, Let us go into the house of the Lord.” He doubtless reminded his hearers that, in addition to the debt which was common to them with all Englishmen, they owed as Londoners a peculiar debt of gratitude to the divine goodness, which had permitted them to efface the last trace of the ravages of the great fire, and to assemble once more, for prayer and praise, after so many years, on that spot consecrated by the devotions of thirty generations. Throughout London, and in every part of the realm, even to the remotest parishes of Cumberland and Cornwall, the churches were filled on the morning of that day; and the evening was an evening of festivity.825

These was indeed reason for joy and thankfulness. England had passed through severe trials, and had come forth renewed in health and vigour. Ten years before, it had seemed that both her liberty and her independence were no more. Her liberty she had vindicated by a just and necessary revolution. Her independence she had reconquered by a not less just and necessary war. She had successfully defended the order of things established by the Bill of Rights against the mighty monarchy of France, against the aboriginal population of Ireland, against the avowed hostility of the nonjurors, against the more dangerous hostility of traitors who were ready to take any oath, and whom no oath could bind. Her open enemies had been victorious on many fields of battle. Her secret enemies had commanded her fleets and armies, had been in charge of her arsenals, had ministered at her altars, had taught at her Universities, had swarmed in her public offices, had sate in her Parliament, had bowed and fawned in the bedchamber of her King. More than once it had seemed impossible that any thing could avert a restoration which would inevitably have been followed, first by proscriptions and confiscations, by the violation of fundamental laws, and the persecution of the established religion, and then by a third rising up of the nation against that House which two depositions and two banishments had only made more obstinate in evil. To the dangers of war and the dangers of treason had recently been added the dangers of a terrible financial and commercial crisis. But all those dangers were over. There was peace abroad and at home. The kingdom, after many years of ignominious vassalage, had resumed its ancient place in the first rank of European powers. Many signs justified the hope that the Revolution of 1688 would be our last Revolution. The ancient constitution was adapting itself, by a natural, a gradual, a peaceful development, to the wants of a modern society. Already freedom of conscience and freedom of discussion existed to an extent unknown in any preceding age. The currency had been restored. Public credit had been reestablished. Trade had revived. The Exchequer was overflowing. There was a sense of relief every where, from the Royal Exchange to the most secluded hamlets among the mountains of Wales and the fens of Lincolnshire. The ploughmen, the shepherds, the miners of the Northumbrian coalpits, the artisans who toiled at the looms of Norwich and the anvils of Birmingham, felt the change, without understanding it; and the cheerful bustle in every seaport and every market town indicated, not obscurely, the commencement of a happier age.

FN 1 Relation de la Voyage de Sa Majeste Britannique en Hollande, enrichie de planches tres curieuses, 1692; Wagenaar; London Gazette, Jan. 29. 1693; Burnet, ii. 71

FN 2 The names of these two great scholars are associated in a very interesting letter of Bentley to Graevius, dated April 29. 1698. “Sciunt omnes qui me norunt, et si vitam mihi Deus O.M. prorogaverit, scient etiam posteri, ut te et ton panu Spanhemium, geminos hujus aevi Dioscuros, lucida literarum sidera, semper praedicaverim, semper veneratus sim.”

FN 3 Relation de la Voyage de Sa Majeste Britannique en Hollande 1692; London Gazette, Feb. 2. 1691,; Le Triomphe Royal ou l’on voit descrits les Arcs de Triomphe, Pyramides, Tableaux et Devises an Nombre de 65, erigez a la Haye a l’hounneur de Guillaume Trois, 1692; Le Carnaval de la Haye, 1691. This last work is a savage pasquinade on William.

FN 4 London Gazette, Feb. 5. 1693; His Majesty’s Speech to the Assembly of the States General of the United Provinces at the Hague the 7th of February N.S., together with the Answer of their High and Mighty Lordships, as both are extracted out of the Register of the Resolutions of the States General, 1691.

FN 5 Relation de la Voyage de Sa Majeste Britannique en Hollande; Burnet, ii. 72.; London Gazette, Feb. 12. 19. 23. 1690/1; Memoires du Comte de Dohna; William Fuller’s Memoirs.

FN 6 Wagenaar, lxii.; Le Carnaval de la Haye, Mars 1691; Le Tabouret des Electeurs, April 1691; Ceremonial de ce qui s’est passe a la Haye entre le Roi Guillaume et les Electeurs de Baviere et de Brandebourg. This last tract is a MS. presented to the British Museum by George IV,

FN 7 London Gazette, Feb. 23. 1691.

FN 8 The secret article by which the Duke of Savoy bound himself to grant toleration to the Waldenses is in Dumont’s collection. It was signed Feb. 8, 1691.

FN 9 London Gazette from March 26. to April 13. 1691; Monthly Mercuries of March and April; William’s Letters to Heinsius of March 18. and 29., April 7. 9.; Dangeau’s Memoirs; The Siege of Mons, a tragi-comedy, 1691. In this drama the clergy, who are in the interest of France, persuade the burghers to deliver up the town. This treason calls forth an indignant exclamation

“Oh priestcraft, shopcraft, how do ye effeminate The minds of men!”

FN 10 Trial of Preston in the Collection of State Trials. A person who was present gives the following account of Somers’s opening speech: “In the opening the evidence, there was no affected exaggeration of matters, nor ostentation of a putid eloquence, one after another, as in former trials, like so many geese cackling in a row. Here was nothing besides fair matter of fact, or natural and just reflections from thence arising.” The pamphlet from which I quote these words is entitled, An Account of the late horrid Conspiracy by a Person who was present at the Trials, 1691.

FN 11 State Trials.

FN 12 Paper delivered by Mr. Ashton, at his execution, to Sir Francis Child, Sheriff of London; Answer to the Paper delivered by Mr. Ashton. The Answer was written by Dr. Edward Fowler, afterwards Bishop of Gloucester. Burnet, ii. 70.; Letter from Bishop Lloyd to Dodwell, in the second volume of Gutch’s Collectanea Curiosa.

FN 13 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary.

FN 14 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary; Burnet, ii. 71.

FN 15 Letter of Collier and Cook to Sancroft among the Tanner MSS.

FN 16 Caermarthen to William, February 3. 1690/1; Life of James, ii. 443.

FN 17 That this account of what passed is true in substance is sufficiently proved by the Life of James, ii. 443. I have taken one or two slight circumstances from Dalrymple, who, I believe, took them from papers, now irrecoverably lost, which he had seen in the Scotch College at Paris.

FN 18 The success of William’s “seeming clemency” is admitted by the compiler of the Life of James. The Prince of Orange’s method, it is acknowledged, “succeeded so well that, whatever sentiments those Lords which Mr. Penn had named night have had at that time, they proved in effect most bitter enemies to His Majesty’s cause afterwards.”-ii. 443.

FN 19 See his Diary; Evelyn’s Diary, Mar. 25., April 22., July 11. 1691; Burnet, ii. 71.; Letters of Rochester to Burnet, March 21. and April 2. 1691.

FN 20 Life of James, ii. 443. 450.; Legge Papers in the Mackintosh Collection.

FN 21 Burnet, ii. 71; Evelyn’s Diary, Jan. 4. and 18. 1690,; Letter from Turner to Sancroft, Jan. 19. 1690/1; Letter from Sancroft to Lloyd of Norwich April 2. 1692. These two letters are among the Tanner MSS. in the Bodleian, and are printed in the Life of Ken by a Layman. Turner’s escape to France is mentioned in Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary for February 1690. See also a Dialogue between the Bishop of Ely and his Conscience, 16th February 1690/1. The dialogue is interrupted by the sound of trumpets. The Bishop hears himself proclaimed a traitor, and cries out,

“Come, brother Pen, ’tis time we both were gone.”

FN 22 For a specimen of his visions, see his Journal, page 13; for his casting out of devils, page 26. I quote the folio edition of 1765.

FN 23 Journal, page 4

FN 24 Ibid. page 7.

FN 25 “What they know, they know naturally, who turn from the command and err from the spirit, whose fruit withers, who saith that Hebrew, Greek, and Latine is the original: before Babell was, the earth was of one language; and Nimrod the cunning hunter, before the Lord which came out of cursed Ham’s stock, the original and builder of Babell, whom God confounded with many languages, and this they say is the original who erred from the spirit and command; and Pilate had his original Hebrew, Greek and Latine, which crucified Christ and set over him.”–A message from the Lord to the Parliament of England by G. Fox, 1654. The same argument will be found in the journals, but has been put by the editor into a little better English. “Dost thou think to make ministers of Christ by these natural confused languages which sprung from Babell, are admired in Babylon, and set atop of Christ, the Life, by a persecutor?”-Page 64.

FN 26 His journal, before it was published, was revised by men of more sense and knowledge than himself, and therefore, absurd as it is, gives us no notion of his genuine style. The following is a fair specimen. It is the exordium of one of his manifestoes. “Them which the world who are without the fear of God calls Quakers in scorn do deny all opinions, and they do deny all conceivings, and they do deny all sects, and they do deny all imaginations, and notions, and judgments which riseth out of the will and the thoughts, and do deny witchcraft and all oaths, and the world and the works of it, and their worships and their customs with the light, and do deny false ways and false worships, seducers and deceivers which are now seen to be in the world with the light, and with it they are condemned, which light leadeth to peace and life from death which now thousands do witness the new teacher Christ, him by whom the world was made, who raigns among the children of light, and with the spirit and power of the living God, doth let them see and know the chaff from the wheat, and doth see that which must be shaken with that which cannot be shaken nor moved, what gives to see that which is shaken and moved, such as live in the notions, opinions, conceivings, and thoughts and fancies these be all shaken and comes to be on heaps, which they who witness those things before mentioned shaken and removed walks in peace not seen and discerned by them who walks in those things unremoved and not shaken.”–A Warning to the World that are Groping in the Dark, by G. Fox, 1655.

FN 27 See the piece entitled, Concerning Good morrow and Good even, the World’s Customs, but by the Light which into the World is come by it made manifest to all who be in the Darkness, by G. Fox, 1657.

FN 28 Journal, page 166.

FN 29 Epistle from Harlingen, 11th of 6th month, 1677.

FN 30 Of Bowings, by G. Fox, 1657.

FN 31 See, for example, the Journal, pages 24. 26. and 51.

FN 32 See, for example, the Epistle to Sawkey, a justice of the peace, in the journal, page 86.; the Epistle to William Larnpitt, a clergyman, which begins, “The word of the Lord to thee, oh Lampitt,” page 80.; and the Epistle to another clergyman whom he calls Priest Tatham, page 92.

FN 33 Journal, page 55.

FN 34 Ibid. Page 300.

FN 35 Ibid. page 323.

FN 36 Ibid. page 48.

FN 37 “Especially of late,” says Leslie, the keenest of all the enemies of the sect, “some of them have made nearer advances towards Christianity than ever before; and among them the ingenious Mr. Penn has of late refined some of their gross notions, and brought them into some form, and has made them speak sense and English, of both which George Fox, their first and great apostle, was totally ignorant . . . . . They endeavour all they can to make it appear that their doctrine was uniform from the beginning, and that there has been no alteration; and therefore they take upon them to defend all the writings of George Fox, and others of the first Quakers, and turn and wind them to make them (but it is impossible) agree with what they teach now at this day.” (The Snake in the Grass, 3rd ed. 1698. Introduction.) Leslie was always more civil to his brother Jacobite Penn than to any other Quaker. Penn himself says of his master, “As abruptly and brokenly as sometimes his sentences would fall from him about divine things; it is well known they were often as texts to many fairer declarations.” That is to say, George Fox talked nonsense and some of his friends paraphrased it into sense.

FN 38 In the Life of Penn which is prefixed to his works, we are told that the warrants were issued on the 16th of January 1690, in consequence of an accusation backed by the oath of William Fuller, who is truly designated as a wretch, a cheat and. an impostor; and this story is repeated by Mr. Clarkson. It is, however, certainly false. Caermarthen, writing to William on the 3rd of February, says that there was then only one witness against Penn, and that Preston was that one witness. It is therefore evident that Fuller was not the informer on whose oath the warrant against Penn was issued. In fact Fuller appears from his Life of himself, to have been then at the Hague. When Nottingham wrote to William on the 26th of June, another witness had come forward.

FN 39 Sidney to William, Feb. 27. 1690,. The letter is in Dalrymple’s Appendix, Part II. book vi. Narcissus Luttrell in his Diary for September 1691, mentions Penn’s escape from Shoreham to France. On the 5th of December 1693 Narcissus made the following entry: “William Penn the Quaker, having for some time absconded, and having compromised the matters against him, appears now in public, and, on Friday last, held forth at the Bull and Month, in Saint Martin’s.” On December 18/28. 1693 was drawn up at Saint Germains, under Melfort’s direction, a paper containing a passage of which the following is a translation

“Mr. Penn says that Your Majesty has had several occasions, but never any so favourable, as the present; and he hopes that Your Majesty will be earnest with the most Christian King not to neglect it: that a descent with thirty thousand men will not only reestablish Your Majesty, but according to all appearance break the league.” This paper is among the Nairne MSS., and was translated by Macpherson.

FN 40 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, April 11. 1691.

FN 41 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, August 1691; Letter from Vernon to Wharton, Oct. 17. 1691, in the Bodleian.

FN 42 The opinion of the Jacobites appears from a letter which is among the archives of the French War Office. It was written in London on the 25th of June 1691.

FN 43 Welwood’s Mercurius Reformatus, April 11. 24. 1691; Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, April 1691; L’Hermitage to the States General, June 19/29 1696; Calamy’s Life. The story of Fenwick’s rudeness to Mary is told in different ways. I have followed what seems to me the most authentic, and what is certainly the last disgraceful, version.

FN 44 Burnet, ii. 71.

FN 45 Lloyd to Sancroft, Jan. 24. 1691. The letter is among the Tanner MSS., and is printed in the Life of Ken by a Layman.

FN 46 London Gazette, June 1. 1691; Birch’s Life of Tillotson; Congratulatory Poem to the Reverend Dr. Tillotson on his Promotion, 1691; Vernon to Wharton, May 28. and 30. 1691. These letters to Wharton are in the Bodleian Library, and form part of a highly curious collection, which was kindly pointed out to me by Dr. Bandinel.

FN 47 Birch’s Life of Tillotson; Leslie’s Charge of Socinianism against Dr. Tillotson considered, by a True Son of the Church 1695; Hickes’s Discourses upon Dr. Burnet and Dr. Tillotson, 1695; Catalogue of Books of the Newest Fashion to be Sold by Auction at the Whigs Coffee House, evidently printed in 1693. More than sixty years later Johnson described a sturdy Jacobite as firmly convinced that Tillotson died an Atheist; Idler, No, 10.

FN 48 Tillotson to Lady Russell, June 23. 1691.

FN 49 Birch’s Life of Tillotson; Memorials of Tillotson by his pupil John Beardmore; Sherlock’s sermon preached in the Temple Church on the death of Queen Mary, 1694/5.

FN 50 Wharton’s Collectanea quoted in Birch’s Life of Tillotson.

FN 51 Wharton’s Collectanea quoted in D’Oyly’s Life of Sancroft; Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary.

FN 52 The Lambeth MS. quoted in D’Oyly’s Life of Sancroft; Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary; Vernon to Wharton, June 9. 11. 1691.

FN 53 See a letter of R. Nelson, dated Feb. 21. 1709/10, in the appendix to N. Marshall’s Defence of our Constitution in Church and State, 1717; Hawkins’s Life of Ken; Life of Ken by a Layman.

FN 54 See a paper dictated by him on the 15th Nov. 1693, in Wagstaffe’s letter from Suffolk.

FN 55 Kettlewell’s Life, iii. 59.

FN 56 See D’Oyly’s Life of Sancroft, Hallam’s Constitutional History, and Dr. Lathbury’s History of the Nonjurors.

FN 57 See the autobiography of his descendant and namesake the dramatist. See also Onslow’s note on Burnet, ii. 76.

FN 58 A vindication of their Majesties’ authority to fill the sees of the deprived Bishops, May 20. 1691; London Gazette, April 27. and June 15. 1691; Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, May 1691. Among the Tanner MSS. are two letters from Jacobites to Beveridge, one mild and decent, the other scurrilous even beyond the ordinary scurrility of the nonjurors. The former will be found in the Life of Ken by a Layman.

FN 59 It does not seem quite clear whether Sharp’s scruple about the deprived prelates was a scruple of conscience or merely a scruple of delicacy. See his Life by his Son.

FN 60 See Overall’s Convocation Book, chapter 28. Nothing can be clearer or more to the purpose than his language

“When, having attained their ungodly desires, whether ambitious kings by bringing any country into their subjection, or disloyal subjects by rebellious rising against their natural sovereigns, they have established any of the said degenerate governments among their people, the authority either so unjustly established, or wrung by force from the true and lawful possessor, being always God’s authority, and therefore receiving no impeachment by the wickedness of those that have it, is ever, when such alterations are thoroughly settled, to be reverenced and obeyed; and the people of all sorts, as well of the clergy as of the laity, are to be subject unto it, not only for fear, but likewise for conscience sake.”

Then follows the canon

“If any man shall affirm that, when any such new forms of government, begun by rebellion, are after thoroughly settled, the authority in them is not of God, or that any who live within the territories of any such new governments are not bound to be subject to God’s authority which is there executed, but may rebel against the same, he doth greatly err.”

FN 61 A list of all the pieces which I have read relating to Sherlock’s apostasy would fatigue the reader. I will mention a few of different kinds. Parkinson’s Examination of Dr. Sherlock’s Case of Allegiance, 1691; Answer to Dr. Sherlock’s Case of Allegiance, by a London Apprentice, 1691; the Reasons of the New Converts taking the Oaths to the present Government, 1691; Utrum horum? or God’s ways of disposing of Kingdoms and some Clergymen’s ways of disposing of them, 1691; Sherlock and Xanthippe 1691; Saint Paul’s Triumph in his Sufferings for Christ, by Matthew Bryan, LL.D., dedicated Ecclesim sub cruce gementi; A Word to a wavering Levite; The Trimming Court Divine; Proteus Ecclesiasticus, or observations on Dr. Sh–‘s late Case of Allegiance; the Weasil Uncased; A Whip for the Weasil; the Anti-Weasils. Numerous allusions to Sherlock and his wife will be found in the ribald writings of Tom Brown, Tom Durfey, and Ned Ward. See Life of James, ii. 318. Several curious letters about Sherlock’s apostasy are among the Tanner MSS. I will give two or three specimens of the rhymes which the Case of Allegiance called forth

“when Eve the fruit had tasted,
She to her husband hasted,
And chuck’d him on the chin-a.
Dear Bud, quoth she, come taste this fruit; ‘Twill finly with your palate suit,
To eat it is no sin-a.”

“As moody Job, in shirtless ease,
With collyflowers all o’er his face, Did on the dunghill languish,
His spouse thus whispers in his ear, Swear, husband, as you love me, swear,
‘Twill ease you of your anguish.”

“At first he had doubt, and therefore did pray That heaven would instruct him in the right way, Whether Jemmy or William he ought to obey, Which nobody can deny,

“The pass at the Boyne determin’d that case; And precept to Providence then did give place; To change his opinion he thought no disgrace; Which nobody can deny.

“But this with the Scripture can never agree, As by Hosea the eighth and the fourth you may see; ‘They have set up kings, but yet not by me,’ Which nobody can deny.”

FN 62 The chief authority for this part of my history is the Life of James, particularly the highly important and interesting passage which begins at page 444. and ends at page 450. of the second volume.

FN 63 Russell to William, May 10 1691, in Dalrymple’s Appendix, Part II. Book vii. See also the Memoirs of Sir John Leake.

FN 64 Commons’ Journals, Mar. 21. 24. 1679; Grey’s Debates; Observator.

FN 65 London Gazette, July 21. 1690.

FN 66 Life of James, ii. 449.

FN 67 Shadwell’s Volunteers.

FN 68 Story’s Continuation; Proclamation of February 21. 1690/1; the London Gazette of March 12.

FN 69 Story’s Continuation.

FN 70 Story’s Impartial History; London Gazette, Nov. 17. 1690.

FN 71 Story’s Impartial History. The year 1684 had been considered as a time of remarkable prosperity, and the revenue from the Customs had been unusually large. But the receipt from all the ports of Ireland, during the whole year, was only a hundred and twenty-seven thousand pounds. See Clarendon’s Memoirs.

FN 72 Story’s History and Continuation; London Gazettes of September 29. 1690, and Jan. 8. and Mar. 12. 1690/1.

FN 73 See the Lords’ Journals of March 2. and 4. 1692/3 and the Commons’ Journals of Dec. 16. 1693, and Jan. 29. 1695/4. The story, bad enough at best, was told by the personal and political enemies of the Lords justices with additions which the House of Commons evidently considered as calumnious, and which I really believe to have been so. See the Gallienus Redivivus. The narrative which Colonel Robert Fitzgerald, a Privy Councillor and an eyewitness delivered in writing to the House of Lords, under the sanction of an oath, seems to me perfectly trustworthy. It is strange that Story, though he mentions the murder of the soldiers, says nothing about Gafney.

FN 74 Burnet, ii. 66.; Leslie’s Answer to King.

FN 75 Macariae Excidium; Fumeron to Louvois Jan 31/Feb 10 1691. It is to be observed that Kelly, the author of the Macariae Excidium and Fumeron, the French intendant, are most unexceptionable witnesses. They were both, at this time, within the walls of Limerick. There is no reason to doubt the impartiality of the Frenchman; and the Irishman was partial to his own countrymen.

FN 76 Story’s Impartial History and Continuation and the London Gazettes of December, January, February, and March 1690/1.

FN 77 It is remarkable that Avaux, though a very shrewd judge of men, greatly underrated Berwick. In a letter to Louvois, dated Oct. 15/25. 1689, Avaux says: “Je ne puis m’empescher de vous dire qu’il est brave de sa personne, a ce que l’on dit mais que c’est un aussy mechant officie, qu’il en ayt, et qu’il n’a pas le sens commun.”

FN 78 Leslie’s Answer to King, Macariae Excidium.

FN 79 Macariae Excidium.

FN 80 Macariae Excidium; Life of James, ii. 422.; Memoirs of Berwick.

FN 81 Macariae Excidium.

FN 82 Life of James, ii. 422, 423.; Memoires de Berwick.

FN 83 Life of James, ii. 433-457.; Story’s Continuation.

FN 84 Life of James, ii. 438.; Light to the Blind; Fumeron to Louvois, April 22/May 2 1691.

FN 85 Macariae Excidium; Memoires de Berwick; Life of James, ii. 451, 452.

FN 86 Macariae Excidium; Burnet, ii. 78.; Dangeau; The Mercurius Reformatus, June 5. 1691.

FN 87 An exact journal of the victorious progress of their Majesties’ forces under the command of General Ginckle this summer in Ireland, 1691; Story’s Continuation; Mackay’s Memoirs.

FN 88 London Gazette, June 18. 22. 1691; Story’s Continuation; Life of James, ii. 452. The author of the Life accuses the Governor of treachery or cowardice.

FN 89 London Gazette, June 22. 25. July 2. 1691; Story’s Continuation; Exact Journal.

FN 90 Life of James, ii. 373. 376. 377

FN 91 Macariae Excidium. I may observe that this is one of the many passages which lead me to believe the Latin text to be the original. The Latin is: “Oppidum ad Salaminium amnis latus recentibus ac sumptuosioribus aedificiis attollebatur; antiquius et ipsa vetustate in cultius quod in Paphiis finibus exstructum erat.” The English version is: “The town on Salaminia side was better built than that in Paphia.” Surely there is in the Latin the particularity which we might expect from a person who had known Athlone before the war. The English version is contemptibly bad, I need hardly say that the Paphian side is Connaught, and the Salaminian side Leinster.

FN 92 I have consulted several contemporary maps of Athlone. One will be found in Story’s Continuation.

FN 93 Diary of the Siege of Athlone, by an Engineer of the Army, a Witness of the Action, licensed July 11. 1691; Story’s Continuation; London Gazette, July 2. 1691; Fumeron to Louvois, June 28/July 8. 1691. The account of this attack in the Life of James, ii. 453., is an absurd romance. It does not appear to have been taken from the King’s original Memoirs.

FN 94 Macariae Excidium. Here again I think that I see clear proof that the English version of this curious work is only a bad translation from the Latin. The English merely says: “Lysander,”- -Sarsfield,–“accused him, a few days before, in the general’s presence,” without intimating what the accusation was. The Latin original runs thus: “Acriter Lysander, paucos ante dies, coram praefecto copiarum illi exprobraverat nescio quid, quod in aula Syriaca in Cypriorum opprobrium effutivisse dicebatur.” The English translator has, by omitting the most important words, and by using the aorist instead of the preterpluperfect tense, made the whole passage unmeaning.

FN 95 Story’s Continuation; Macariae Excidium; Daniel Macneal to Sir Arthur Rawdon, June 28. 1691, in the Rawdon Papers.

FN 96 London Gazette, July 6. 1691; Story’s Continuation; Macariae Excidium; Light to the Blind.

FN 97 Macariae Excidium; Light to the Blind.

FN 98 Life of James, ii. 460.; Life of William, 1702.

FN 99 Story’s Continuation; Mackay’s Memoirs; Exact Journal; Diary of the Siege of Athlone.

FN 100 Story’s Continuation.; Macariae Excid.; Burnet, ii. 78, 79.; London Gaz. 6. 13. 1689; Fumeron to Louvois June 30/July 10 1690; Diary of the Siege of Athlone; Exact Account.

FN 101 Story’s Continuation; Life of James, ii. 455. Fumeron to Louvois June 30/July 10 1691; London Gazette, July 13.

FN 102 The story, as told by the enemies of Tyrconnel, will be found in the Macariae Excidium, and in a letter written by Felix O’Neill to the Countess of Antrim on the 10th of July 1691. The letter was found on the corpse of Felix O’Neill after the battle of Aghrim. It is printed in the Rawdon Papers. The other story is told in Berwick’s Memoirs and in the Light to the Blind.

FN 103 Macariae Excidium; Life of James, ii 456.; Light to the Blind.

FN 104 Macariae Excidium.

FN 105 Story’s Continuation.

FN 106 Burnet, ii. 79.; Story’s Continuation.

FN 107 “They maintained their ground much longer than they had been accustomed to do,” says Burnet. “They behaved themselves like men of another nation,” says Story. “The Irish were never known to fight with more resolution,” says the London Gazette.

FN 108 Story’s Continuation; London Gazette, July 20. 23. 1691; Memoires de Berwick; Life of James, ii. 456.; Burnet, ii. 79.; Macariae Excidium; Light to the Blind; Letter from the English camp to Sir Arthur Rawdon, in the Rawdon Papers; History of William the Third, 1702.

The narratives to which I have referred differ very widely from each other. Nor can the difference be ascribed solely or chiefly to partiality. For no two narratives differ more widely than that which will be found in the Life of James, and that which will be found in the memoirs of his son.

In consequence, I suppose, of the fall of Saint Ruth, and of the absence of D’Usson, there is at the French War Office no despatch containing a detailed account of the battle.

FN 109 Story’s Continuation.

FN 110 Story’s Continuation; Macariae Excidium; Life of James, ii. 464.; London Gazette, July 30., Aug. 17. 1691; Light to the Blind.

FN 111 Story’s Continuation; Macariae Excidium; Life of James, ii. 459; London Gazette, July 30., Aug. 3. 1691.

FN 112 He held this language in a letter to Louis XIV., dated the 5/15th of August. This letter, written in a hand which it is not easy to decipher, is in the French War Office. Macariae Excidium; Light to the Blind.

FN 113 Macariae Excidium; Life of James, ii. 461, 462.

FN 114 Macariae Excidium; Life of James, ii. 459. 462.; London Gazette, Aug. 31 1691; Light to the Blind; D’Usson and Tesse to Barbesieux, Aug. 13/23.

FN 115 Story’s Continuation; D’Usson and Tesse to Barbesieux Aug. 169r. An unpublished letter from Nagle to Lord Merion of Auk. 15. This letter is quoted by Mr. O’Callaghan in a note on Macariae Excidium.

FN 116 Macariae Excidium; Story’s Continuation.

FN 117 Story’s Continuation; London Gazette, Sept. 28. 1691; Life of James, ii. 463.; Diary of the Siege of Lymerick, 1692; Light to the Blind. In the account of the siege which is among the archives of the French War Office, it is said that the Irish cavalry behaved worse than the infantry.

FN 118 Story’s Continuation; Macariae Excidium; R. Douglas to Sir A. Rawdon, Sept. 25. 1691, in the Rawdon Papers; London Gazette, October 8.; Diary of the Siege of Lymerick; Light to the Blind; Account of the Siege of Limerick in the archives of the French War Office.

The account of this affair in the Life of James, ii. 464., deserves to be noticed merely for its preeminent absurdity. The writer tells us that seven hundred of the Irish held out some time against a much larger force, and warmly praises their heroism. He did not know, or did not choose to mention, one fact which is essential to the right understanding of the story; namely, that these seven hundred men were in a fort. That a garrison should defend a fort during a few hours against superior numbers is surely not strange. Forts are built because they can be defended by few against many.

FN 119 Account of the Siege of Limerick in the archives of the French War Office; Story’s Continuation.

FN 120 D’Usson to Barbesieux, Oct. 4/14. 1691.

FN 121 Macariae Excidium.

FN 122 Story’s Continuation; Diary of the Siege of Lymerick.

FN 123 London Gazette, Oct. S. 1691; Story’s Continuation; Diary of the Siege of Lymerick.

FN 124 Life of James, 464, 465.

FN 125 Story’s Continuation.

FN 126 Story’s Continuation; Diary of the Siege of Lymerick; Burnet, ii. 81.; London Gazette, Oct. 12. 1691.

FN 127 Story’s Continuation; Diary of the Siege of Lymerick; London Gazette, Oct. 15. 1691.

FN 128 The articles of the civil treaty have often been reprinted.

FN 129 Story’s Continuation; Diary of the Siege of Lymerick.

FN 130 Story’s Continuation; Diary of the Siege of Lymerick.

FN 131 Story’s Continuation. His narrative is confirmed by the testimony which an Irish Captain who was present has left us in bad Latin. “Hic apud sacrum omnes advertizantur a capellanis ire potius in Galliam.”

FN 132 D’Usson and Tesse to Barbesieux, Oct. 17. 1691.

FN 133 That there was little sympathy between the Celts of Ulster and those of the Southern Provinces is evident from the curious memorial which the agent of Baldearg O’Donnel delivered to Avaux.

FN 134 Treasury Letter Book, June 19. 1696; Journals of the Irish House of Commons Nov. 7. 1717.

FN 135 This I relate on Mr. O’Callaghan’s authority. History of the Irish Brigades Note 47.

FN 136 There is, Junius wrote eighty years after the capitulation of Limerick, “a certain family in this country on which nature seems to have entailed a hereditary baseness of disposition. As far as their history has been known, the son has regularly improved upon the vices of the father, and has taken care to transmit them pure and undiminished into the bosom of his successors.” Elsewhere he says of the member for Middlesex, “He has degraded even the name of Luttrell.” He exclaims, in allusion to the marriage of the Duke of Cumberland and Mrs. Horton who was born a Luttrell: “Let Parliament look to it. A Luttrell shall never succeed to the Crown of England.” It is certain that very few Englishmen can have sympathized with Junius’s abhorrence of the Luttrells, or can even have understood it. Why then did he use expressions which to the great majority of his readers must have been unintelligible? My answer is that Philip Francis was born, and passed the first ten years of his life, within a walk of Luttrellstown.

FN 137 Story’s Continuation; London Gazette, Oct. 22. 1691; D’Usson and Tesse to Lewis, Oct. 4/14., and to Barbesieux, Oct. 7/17.; Light to the Blind.

FN 138 Story’s Continuation; London Gazette Jan. 4. 1691/2

FN 139 Story’s Continuation; Macariae Excidium, and Mr. O’Callaghan’s note; London Gazette, Jan. 4. 1691/2.

FN 140 Some interesting facts relating to Wall, who was minister of Ferdinand the Sixth and Charles the Third, will be found in the letters of Sir Benjamin Keene and Lord Bristol, published in Coxe’s Memoirs of Spain.

FN 141 This is Swift’s language, language held not once, but repeatedly and at long intervals. In the Letter on the Sacramental Test, written in 1708, he says: “If we (the clergy) were under any real fear of the Papists in this kingdom, it would be hard to think us so stupid as not to be equally apprehensive with others, since we are likely to be the greater and more immediate sufferers; but, on the contrary, we look upon them to be altogether as inconsiderable as the women and children . . . . The common people without leaders, without discipline, or natural courage, being little better than hewers of wood and drawers of water, are out of all capacity of doing any mischief, if they were ever so well inclined.” In the Drapier’s Sixth Letter, written in 1724, he says: “As to the people of this kingdom, they consist either of Irish Papists, who are as inconsiderable, in point of power, as the women and children, or of English Protestants.” Again, in the Presbyterian’s Plea of Merit written in 1731, he says

“The estates of Papists are very few, crumbling into small parcels, and daily diminishing; their common people are sunk in poverty, ignorance and cowardice, and of as little consequence as women and children. Their nobility and gentry are at least one half ruined, banished or converted. They all soundly feel the smart of what they suffered in the last Irish war. Some of them are already retired into foreign countries; others, as I am told, intend to follow them; and the rest, I believe to a man, who still possess any lands, are absolutely resolved never to hazard them again for the sake of establishing their superstition.”

I may observe that, to the best of my belief, Swift never, in any thing that he wrote, used the word Irishman to denote a person of Anglosaxon race born in Ireland. He no more considered himself as an Irishman than an Englishman born at Calcutta considers himself as a Hindoo.

FN 142 In 1749 Lucas was the idol of the democracy of his own caste. It is curious to see what was thought of him by those who were not of his own caste. One of the chief Pariah, Charles O’Connor, wrote thus: “I am by no means interested, nor is any of our unfortunate population, in this affair of Lucas. A true patriot would not have betrayed such malice to such unfortunate slaves as we.” He adds, with too much truth, that those boasters the Whigs wished to have liberty all to themselves.

FN 143 On this subject Johnson was the most liberal politician of his time. “The Irish,” he said with great warmth, “are in a most unnatural state for we see there the minority prevailing over the majority.” I suspect that Alderman Beckford and Alderman Sawbridge would have been far from sympathizing with him. Charles O’Connor, whose unfavourable opinion of the Whig Lucas I have quoted, pays, in the Preface to the Dissertations on Irish History, a high compliment to the liberality of the Tory Johnson.

FN 144 London Gazette, Oct. 22. 1691.

FN 145 Burnet, ii. 78, 79.; Burchett’s Memoirs of Transactions at Sea; Journal of the English and Dutch fleet in a Letter from an Officer on board the Lennox, at Torbay, licensed August 21. 1691. The writer says: “We attribute our health, under God, to the extraordinary care taken in the well ordering of our provisions, both meat and drink.”

FN 146 Lords’ and Commons’ Journals, Oct. 22. 1691.

FN 147 This appears from a letter written by Lowther, after he became Lord Lonsdale, to his son. A copy of this letter is among the Mackintosh MSS.

FN 148 See Commons’ Journals, Dec. 3. 1691; and Grey’s Debates. It is to be regretted that the Report of the Commissioners of Accounts has not been preserved. Lowther, in his letter to his son, alludes to the badgering of this day with great bitterness. “What man,” he asks, “that hath bread to eat, can endure, after having served with all the diligence and application mankind is capable of, and after having given satisfaction to the King from whom all officers of State derive their authoritie, after acting rightly by all men, to be hated by men who do it to all people in authoritie?”

FN 149 Commons’ Journals, Dec. 12. 1691.

FN 150 Commons’ Journals, Feb. 15. 1690/1; Baden to the States General, Jan 26/Feb 5

FN 151 Stat. 3 W. & M. c. 2., Lords’ Journals; Lords’ Journals, 16 Nov. 1691; Commons’ Journals, Dec. 1. 9. 5.

FN 152 The Irish Roman Catholics complained, and with but too much reason, that, at a later period, the Treaty of Limerick was violated; but those very complaints are admissions that the Statute 3 W. & M. c. 2. was not a violation of the Treaty. Thus the author of A Light to the Blind speaking of the first article, says: “This article, in seven years after, was broken by a Parliament in Ireland summoned by the Prince of Orange, wherein a law was passed for banishing the Catholic bishops, dignitaries, and regular clergy.” Surely he never would have written thus, if the article really had, only two months after it was signed, been broken by the English Parliament. The Abbe Mac Geoghegan, too, complains that the Treaty was violated some years after it was made. But he does not pretend that it was violated by Stat. 3 W. & M. c. 2.

FN 153 Stat. 21 Jac. 1. c. 3.

FN 154 See particularly Two Letters by a Barrister concerning the East India Company (1676), and an Answer to the Two Letters published in the same year. See also the judgment of Lord Jeffreys concerning the Great Case of Monopolies. This judgment was published in 1689, after the downfall of Jeffreys. It was thought necessary to apologize in the preface for printing anything that bore so odious a name. “To commend this argument,” says the editor, “I’ll not undertake because of the author. But yet I may tell you what is told me, that it is worthy any gentleman’s perusal.” The language of Jeffreys is most offensive, sometimes scurrilous, sometimes basely adulatory; but his reasoning as to the mere point of law is certainly able, if not conclusive.

FN 155 Addison’s Clarinda, in the week of which she kept a journal, read nothing but Aurengzebe; Spectator, 323. She dreamed that Mr. Froth lay at her feet, and called her Indamora. Her friend Miss Kitty repeated, without book, the eight best lines of the play; those, no doubt, which begin, “Trust on, and think to- morrow will repay.” There are not eight finer lines in Lucretius.

FN 156 A curious engraving of the India House of the seventeenth century will be found in the Gentleman’s Magazine for December 1784.

FN 157 See Davenant’s Letter to Mulgrave.

FN 158 Answer to Two Letters concerning the East India Company, 1676.

FN 159 Anderson’s Dictionary; G. White’s Account of the Trade to the East Indies, 1691; Treatise on the East India Trade by Philopatris, 1681.

FN 160 Reasons for constituting a New East India Company in London, 1681; Some Remarks upon the Present State of the East India Company’s Affairs, 1690.

FN 161 Evelyn, March 16. 1683

FN 162 See the State Trials.

FN 163 Pepys’s Diary, April 2. and May 10 1669.

FN 164 Tench’s Modest and Just Apology for the East India Company, 1690.

FN 165 Some Remarks on the Present State of the East India Company’s Affairs, 1690; Hamilton’s New Account of the East Indies.

FN 166 White’s Account of the East India Trade, 1691; Pierce Butler’s Tale, 1691.

FN 167 White’s Account of the Trade to the East Indies, 1691; Hamilton’s New Account of the East Indies; Sir John Wyborne to Pepys from Bombay, Jan. 7. 1688.

FN 168 London Gazette, Feb. 16/26 1684.

FN 169 Hamilton’s New Account of the East Indies.

FN 170 Papillon was of course reproached with his inconsistency. Among the pamphlets of that time is one entitled “A Treatise concerning the East India Trade, wrote at the instance of Thomas Papillon, Esquire, and in his House, and printed in the year 1680, and now reprinted for the better Satisfaction of himself and others.”

FN 171 Commons’ Journals, June 8. 1689.

FN 172 Among the pamphlets in which Child is most fiercely attacked are Some Remarks on the Present State of the East India Company’s Affairs, 1690; fierce Butler’s Tale, 1691; and White’s Account of the Trade to the East Indies, 1691.

FN 173 Discourse concerning the East India Trade, showing it to be unprofitable to the Kingdom, by Mr. Cary; pierce Butler’s Tale, representing the State of the Wool Case, or the East India Case truly stated, 1691. Several petitions to the same effect will be found in the Journals of the House of Commons.

FN 174 Reasons against establishing an East India Company with a joint Stock, exclusive to all others, 1691.

FN 175 The engagement was printed, and has been several times reprinted. As to Skinners’ Hall, see Seymour’s History of London, 1734

FN 176 London Gazette, May 11. 1691; White’s Account of the East India Trade.

FN 177 Commons’ Journals, Oct. 28. 1691.

FN 178 Ibid. Oct. 29. 1691.

FN 179 Rowe, in the Biter, which was damned, and deserved to be so, introduced an old gentleman haranguing his daughter thus: “Thou hast been bred up like a virtuous and a sober maiden; and wouldest thou take the part of a profane wretch who sold his stock out of the Old East India Company?”

FN 180 Hop to the States General, Oct 30/Nov. 9 1691.

FN 181 Hop mentions the length and warmth of the debates; Nov. 12/22. 1691. See the Commons’ Journals, Dec. 17. and 18.

FN 182 Commons’ Journals, Feb 4. and 6. 1691.

FN 183 Ibid. Feb. 11. 1691.

FN 184 The history of this bill is to be collected from the bill itself, which is among the Archives of the Upper House, from the Journals of the two Houses during November and December 1690, and January 1691; particularly from the Commons’ Journals of December 11. and January 13. and 25., and the Lords’ Journals of January 20. and 28. See also Grey’s Debates.

FN 185 The letter, dated December 1. 1691, is in the Life of James, ii. 477.

FN 186 Burnet, ii. 85.; and Burnet MS. Harl. 6584. See also a memorial signed by Holmes, but consisting of intelligence furnished by Ferguson, among the extracts from the Nairne Papers, printed by Macpherson. It bears date October 1691. “The Prince of Orange,” says Holmes, “is mortally hated by the English. They see very fairly that he hath no love for them; neither doth he confide in them, but all in his Dutch. . . It’s not doubted but the Parliament will not be for foreigners to ride them with a caveson.”

FN 187 Evelyn’s Diary, Jan. 24.; Hop to States General, Jan 22/Feb 1 1691; Bader to States General, Feb. 16/26

FN 188 The words of James are these; they were written in November 1692:- “Mes amis, l’annee passee, avoient dessein de me rappeler par le Parlement. La maniere etoit concertee; et Milord Churchill devoit proposer dans le Parlement de chasser tous les etrangers tant des conseils et de l’armee que du royaume. Si le Prince d’Orange avoit consenti a cette proposition ils l’auroient eu entre leurs mains. S’il l’avoit refusee, il auroit fait declarer le Parlement contre lui; et en meme temps Milord Churchill devoir se declarer avec l’armee pour le Parlement; et la flotte devoit faire de meme; et l’on devoit me rappeler. L’on avoit deja commence d’agir dans ce projet; et on avoit gagne un gros parti, quand quelques fideles sujets indiscrets, croyant me servir, et s’imaginant que ce que Milord Churchill faisoit n’etoit pas pour moi, mais pour la Princesse de Danemarck, eurent l’imprudence de decouvrir le tout a Benthing, et detournerent ainsi le coup.”

A translation of this most remarkable passage, which at once solves many interesting and perplexing problems, was published eighty years ago by Macpherson. But, strange to say, it attracted no notice, and has never, as far as I know, been mentioned by any biographer of Marlborough.

The narrative of James requires no confirmation; but it is strongly confirmed by the Burnet MS. Harl. 6584. “Marleburrough,” Burnet wrote in September 1693, “set himself to decry the King’s conduct and to lessen him in all his discourses, and to possess the English with an aversion to the Dutch, who, as he pretended, had a much larger share of the King’s favour and confidence than they,”–the English, I suppose,–“had. This was a point on which the English, who are too apt to despise all other nations, and to overvalue themselves, were easily enough inflamed. So it grew to be the universal subject of discourse, and was the constant entertainment at Marleburrough’s, where there was a constant randivous of the English officers.” About the dismission of Marlborough, Burnet wrote at the same time: “The King said to myself upon it that he had very good reason to believe that he had made his peace with King James and was engaged in a correspondence with France. It is certain he was doing all he could to set on a faction in the army and the nation against the Dutch.”

It is curious to compare this plain tale, told while the facts were recent, with the shuffling narrative which Burnet prepared for the public eye many years later, when Marlborough was closely united to the Whigs, and was rendering great and splendid services to the country. Burnet, ii. 90.

The Duchess of Marlborough, in her Vindication, had the effrontery to declare that she “could never learn what cause the King assigned for his displeasure.” She suggests that Young’s forgery may have been the cause. Now she must have known that Young’s forgery was not committed till some months after her husband’s disgrace. She was indeed lamentably deficient in memory, a faculty which is proverbially said to be necessary to persons of the class to which she belonged. Her own volume convicts her of falsehood. She gives us a letter from Mary to Anne, in which Mary says, “I need not repeat the cause my Lord Marlborough has given the King to do what he has done.” These words plainly imply that Anne had been apprised of the cause. If she had not been apprised of the cause would she not have said so in her answer? But we have her answer; and it contains not a word on the subject. She was then apprised of the cause; and is it possible to believe that she kept it a secret from her adored Mrs. Freeman?

FN 189 My account of these transactions I have been forced to take from the narrative of the Duchess of Marlborough, a narrative which is to be read with constant suspicion, except when, as is often the case, she relates some instance of her own malignity and insolence.

FN 190 The Duchess of Marlborough’s Vindication; Dartmouth’s Note on Burnet, ii. 92.; Verses of the Night Bellman of Piccadilly and my Lord Nottingham’s Order thereupon, 1691. There is a bitter lampoon on Lady Marlborough of the same date, entitled The Universal Health, a true Union to the Queen and Princess.

FN 191 It must not be supposed that Anne was a reader of Shakspeare. She had no doubt, often seen the Enchanted Island. That miserable rifacimento of the Tempest was then a favourite with the town, on account of the machinery and the decorations.

FN 192 Burnet MS. Harl. 6584.

FN 193 The history of an abortive attempt to legislate on this subject may be studied in the Commons’ Journals of 1692/3.

FN 194 North’s Examen,

FN 195 North’s Examen; Ward’s London Spy; Crosby’s English Baptists, vol. iii. chap. 2.

FN 196 The history of this part of Fuller’s life I have taken from his own narrative.

FN 197 Commons’ Journals, Dec. 2. and 9. 1691; Grey’s Debates.

FN 198 Commons’ Journals, Jan. 4. 1691/2 Grey’s Debates.

FN 199 Commons’ Journals, Feb. 22, 23, and 24. 1691/2.

FN 200 Fuller’s Original Letters of the late King James and others to his greatest Friends in England.

FN 201 Burnet, ii. 86. Burnet had evidently forgotten what the bill contained. Ralph knew nothing about it but what he had learned from Burnet. I have scarcely seen any allusion to the subject in any of the numerous Jacobite lampoons of that day. But there is a remarkable passage in a pamphlet which appeared towards the close of William’s reign, and which is entitled The Art of Governing by Parties. The writer says, “We still want an Act to ascertain some fund for the salaries of the judges; and there was a bill, since the Revolution, past both Houses of Parliament to this purpose; but whether it was for being any way defective or otherwise that His Majesty refused to assent to it, I cannot remember. But I know the reason satisfied me at that time. And I make no doubt but he’ll consent to any good bill of this nature whenever ’tis offered.” These words convinced me that the bill was open to some grave objection which did not appear in the title, and which no historian had noticed. I found among the archives of the House of Lords the original parchment, endorsed with the words “Le Roy et La Royne s’aviseront.” And it was clear at the first glance what the objection was.

There is a hiatus in that part of Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary which relates to this matter. “The King,” he wrote, “passed ten public bills and thirty-four private ones, and rejected that of the–“

As to the present practice of the House of Commons in such cases, see Hatsell’s valuable work, ii. 356. I quote the edition of 1818. Hatsell says that many bills which affect the interest of the Crown may be brought in without any signification of the royal consent, and that it is enough if the consent be signified on the second reading, or even later; but that, in a proceeding which affects the hereditary revenue, the consent must be signified in the earliest stage.

FN 202 The history of these ministerial arrangements I have taken chiefly from the London Gazette of March 3. and March 7. 1691/2 and from Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary for that month. Two or three slight touches are from contemporary pamphlets.

FN 203 William to Melville, May 22. 1690.

FN 204 See the preface to the Leven and Melville Papers. I have given what I believe to be a true explanation of Burnet’s hostility to Melville. Melville’s descendant who has deserved well of all students of history by the diligence and fidelity with which he has performed his editorial duties, thinks that Burnet’s judgment was blinded by zeal for Prelacy and hatred of Presbyterianism. This accusation will surprise and amuse English High Churchmen.

FN 205 Life of James, ii. 468, 469.

FN 206 Burnet, ii. 88.; Master of Stair to Breadalbane, Dee. 2. 1691.

FN 207 Burnet, i. 418.

FN 208 Crawford to Melville, July 23. 1689; The Master of Stair to Melville, Aug. 16. 1689; Cardross to Melville, Sept. 9. 1689; Balcarras’s Memoirs; Annandale’s Confession, Aug. i4. 1690.

FN 209 Breadalbane to Melville, Sept. 17. 1690.

FN 210 The Master of Stair to Hamilton, Aug. 17/27. 1691; Hill to Melville, June 26. 1691; The Master of Stair to Breadalbane, Aug. 24. 1691.

FN 211 “The real truth is, they were a branch of the Macdonalds (who were a brave courageous people always), seated among the Campbells, who (I mean the Glencoe men) are all Papists, if they have any religion, were always counted a people much given to rapine and plunder, or sorners as we call it, and much of a piece with your highwaymen in England. Several governments desired to bring them to justice; but their country was inaccessible to small parties.” See An impartial Account of some of the Transactions in Scotland concerning the Earl of Breadalbane, Viscount and Master of Stair, Glenco Men, &c., London, 1695.

FN 212 Report of the Commissioners, signed at Holyrood, June 20. 1695.

FN 213 Gallienus Redivivus; Burnet, ii. 88.; Report of the Commission of 1695.

FN 214 Report of the Glencoe Commission, 1695.

FN 215 Hill to Melville, May 15. 1691.

FN 216 Ibid. June 3. 1691.

FN 217 Burnet, ii. 8, 9.; Report of the Glencoe Commission. The authorities quoted in this part of the Report were the depositions of Hill, of Campbell of Ardkinglass, and of Mac Ian’s two sons.

FN 218 Johnson’s Tour to the Hebrides.

FN 219 Proclamation of the Privy Council of Scotland, Feb. q. 1589. I give this reference on the authority of Sir Walter Scott. See the preface to the Legend of Montrose.

FN 220 Johnson’s Tour to the Hebrides.

FN 221 Lockhart’s Memoirs.

FN 222 “What under heaven was the Master’s byass in this matter? I can imagine none.” Impartial Account, 1695. “Nor can any man of candour and ingenuity imagine that the Earl of Stair, who had neither estate, friendship nor enmity in that country, nor so much as knowledge of these persons, and who was never noted for cruelty in his temper, should have thirsted after the blood of these wretches.” Complete History of Europe, 1707.

FN 223 Dalrymple, in his Memoirs, relates this story, without referring to any authority. His authority probably was family tradition. That reports were current in 1692 of horrible crimes committed by the Macdonalds of Glencoe, is certain from the Burnet MS. Marl. 6584. “They had indeed been guilty of many black murthers,” were Burnet’s words, written in 1693. He afterwards softened down this expression.

FN 224 That the plan originally framed by the Master of Stair was such as I have represented it, is clear from parts of his letters which are quoted in the Report of 1695; and from his letters to Breadalbane of October 27., December 2., and December 3. 1691. Of these letters to Breadalbane the last two are in Dalrymple’s Appendix. The first is in the Appendix to the first volume of Mr. Burtons valuable History of Scotland. “It appeared,” says Burnet (ii. 157.), “that a black design was laid, not only to cut off the men of Glencoe, but a great many more clans, reckoned to be in all above six thousand persons.”

FN 225 This letter is in the Report of 1695.

FN 226 London Gazette, January 14and 18. 1691.

FN 227 “I could have wished the Macdonalds had not divided; and I am sorry that Keppoch and Mackian of Glenco are safe.”–Letter of the Master of Stair to Levingstone, Jan. 9. 1691/2 quoted in the Report of 1695.

FN 228 Letter of the Master of Stair to Levingstone, Jan. 11 1692, quoted in the Report of 1695.

FN 229 Burnet, in 1693, wrote thus about William:–“He suffers matters to run till there is a great heap of papers; and then he signs them as much too fast as he was before too slow in despatching them.” Burnet MS. Harl. 6584. There is no sign either of procrastination or of undue haste in William’s correspondence with Heinsius. The truth is, that the King understood Continental politics thoroughly, and gave his whole mind to them. To English business he attended less, and to Scotch business least of all.

FN 230 Impartial Account, 1695.

FN 231 See his letters quoted in the Report of 1695, and in the Memoirs of the Massacre of Glencoe.

FN 232 Report of 1695.

FN 233 Deposition of Ronald Macdonald in the Report of 1695; Letters from the Mountains, May 17. I773. I quote Mrs. Grant’s authority only for what she herself heard and saw. Her account of the massacre was written apparently without the assistance of books, and is grossly incorrect. Indeed she makes a mistake of two years as to the date.

FN 234 I have taken the account of the Massacre of Glencoe chiefly from the Report of 1695, and from the Gallienus Redivivus. An unlearned, and indeed a learned, reader may be at a loss to guess why the Jacobites should have selected so strange a title for a pamphlet on the massacre of Glencoe. The explanation will be found in a letter of the Emperor Gallienus, preserved by Trebellius Pollio in the Life of Ingenuus. Ingenuus had raised a rebellion in Moesia. He was defeated and killed. Gallienus ordered the whole province to be laid waste, and wrote to one of his lieutenants in language to which that of the Master of Stair bore but too much resemblance. “Non mihi satisfacies si tantum armatos occideris, quos et fors belli interimere potuisset. Perimendus est omnis sexus virilis. Occidendus est quicunque maledixit. Occidendus est quicunque male voluit. Lacera. Occide. Concide.”

FN 235 What I have called the Whig version of the story is given, as well as the Jacobite version, in the Paris Gazette of April 7. 1692.

FN 236 I believe that the circumstances which give so peculiar a character of atrocity to the Massacre of Glencoe were first published in print by Charles Leslie in the Appendix to his answer to King. The date of Leslie’s answer is 1692. But it must be remembered that the date of 1692 was then used down to what we should call the 25th of March 1693. Leslie’s book contains some remarks on a sermon by Tillotson which was not printed till November 1692. The Gallienus Redivivus speedily followed.

FN 237 Gallienus Redivivus.

FN 238 Hickes on Burnet and Tillotson, 1695.

FN 239 Report of 1695.

FN 240 Gallienus Redivivus.

FN 241 Report of 1695.

FN 242 London Gazette, Mar. 7. 1691/2

FN 243 Burnet (ii. 93.) says that the King was not at this time informed of the intentions of the French Government. Ralph contradicts Burnet with great asperity. But that Burnet was in the right is proved beyond dispute, by William’s correspondence with Heinsius. So late as April 24/May 4 William wrote thus: “Je ne puis vous dissimuler que je commence a apprehender une descente en Angleterre, quoique je n’aye pu le croire d’abord: mais les avis sont si multiplies de tous les cotes, et accompagnes de tant de particularites, qu’il n’est plus guere possible d’en douter.” I quote from the French translation among the Mackintosh MSS.

FN 244 Burnet, ii. 95. and Onslow’s note; Memoires de Saint Simon; Memoires de Dangeau.

FN 245 Life of James ii. 411, 412.

FN 246 Memoires de Dangeau; Memoires de Saint Simon. Saint Simon was on the terrace and, young as he was, observed this singular scene with an eye which nothing escaped.

FN 247 Memoires de Saint Simon; Burnet, ii. 95.; Guardian No. 48. See the excellent letter of Lewis to the Archbishop of Rheims, which is quoted by Voltaire in the Siecle de Louis XIV.

FN 248 In the Nairne papers printed by Macpherson are two memorials from James urging Lewis to invade England. Both were written in January 1692.

FN 249 London Gazette, Feb. 15. 1691/2

FN 250 Memoires de Berwick; Burnet, ii. 92.; Life of James, ii. 478. 491.

FN 251 History of the late Conspiracy, 1693.

FN 252 Life of James, ii. 479. 524. Memorials furnished by Ferguson to Holmes in the Nairne Papers.

FN 253 Life of James, ii. 474.

FN 254 See the Monthly Mercuries of the spring of 1692.

FN 255 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary for April and May 1692; London Gazette, May 9. and 12.

FN 256 Sheridan MS.; Life of James, ii. 492.

FN 257 Life of James, ii. 488.

FN 258 James told Sheridan that the Declaration was written by Melfort. Sheridan MS.

FN 259 A Letter to a Friend concerning a French Invasion to restore the late King James to his Throne, and what may be expected from him should he be successful in it, 1692; A second Letter to a Friend concerning a French Invasion, in which the Declaration lately dispersed under the Title of His Majesty’s most gracious Declaration to all his loving Subjects, commanding their Assistance against the P. of O. and his Adherents, is entirely and exactly published according to the dispersed Copies, with some short Observations upon it, 1692; The Pretences of the French Invasion examined, 1692; Reflections on the late King James’s Declaration, 1692. The two Letters were written, I believe, by Lloyd Bishop of Saint Asaph. Sheridan says, “The King’s Declaration pleas’d none, and was turn’d into ridicule burlesque lines in England.” I do not believe that a defence of this unfortunate Declaration is to be found in any Jacobite tract. A virulent Jacobite writer, in a reply to Dr. Welwood, printed in 1693, says, “As for the Declaration that was printed last year. . . I assure you that it was as much misliked by many, almost all, of the King’s friends, as it can be exposed by his enemies.”

FN 260 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, April 1692.

FN 261 Sheridan MS.; Memoires de Dangeau.

FN 262 London Gazette, May 12. 16. 1692; Gazette de Paris, May 31. 1692.

FN 263 London Gazette, April 28. 1692

FN 264 Ibid. May 2. 5. 12. 16.

FN 265 London Gazette, May 16. 1692; Burchett.

FN 266 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary; London Gazette, May 19. 1692.

FN 267 Russell’s Letter to Nottingham, May 20. 1692, in the London Gazette of May 23.; Particulars of Another Letter from the Fleet published by authority; Burchett; Burnet, ii. 93.; Life of James, ii. 493, 494.; Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary; Memoires de Berwick. See also the contemporary ballad on the battle one of the best specimens of English street poetry, and the Advice to a Painter, 1692.

FN 268 See Delaval’s Letter to Nottingham, dated Cherburg, May 22., in the London Gazette of May 26.

FN 269 London Gaz., May 26. 1692; Burchett’s Memoirs of Transactions at Sea; Baden to the States General, May 24/June 3; Life of James, ii. 494; Russell’s Letters in the Commons’ Journals of Nov. 28. 1692; An Account of the Great Victory, 1692; Monthly Mercuries for June and July 1692; Paris Gazette, May 28/June 7; Van Almonde’s despatch to the States General, dated May 24/June 3. 1692. The French official account will be found in the Monthly Mercury for July. A report drawn up by Foucault, Intendant of the province of Normandy, will be found in M. Capefigue’s Louis XIV.

FN 270 An Account of the late Great Victory, 1692; Monthly Mercury for June; Baden to the States General, May 24/ June 3; Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary.

FN 271 London Gazette, June 2. 1692; Monthly Mercury; Baden to the States General, June 14/24. Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary.

FN 272 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary; Monthly Mercury.

FN 273 London Gazette, June 9.; Baden to the States General, June 7/17

FN 274 Baden to the States General, June. 3/13

FN 275 Baden to the States General, May 24/June 3; Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary.

FN 276 An Account of the late Great Victory, 1692; Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary.

FN 277 Baden to the States General, June 7/17. 1692.

FN 278 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary.

FN 279 I give one short sentence as a specimen: “O fie that ever it should be said that a clergyman have committed such durty actions!”

FN 280 Gutch, Collectanea Curiosa.

FN 281 My account of this plot is chiefly taken from Sprat’s Relation of the late Wicked Contrivance of Stephen Blackhead and Robert Young, 1692. There are very few better narratives in the language.

FN 282 Baden to the States General, Feb. 14/24 1693.

FN 283 Postman, April 13. and 20. 1700; Postboy, April 18.; Flying Post, April 20.

FN 284 London Gazette, March 14. 1692.

FN 285 The Swedes came, it is true, but not till the campaign was over. London Gazette, Sept, 10 1691,

FN 286 William to Heinsius March 14/24. 1692.

FN 287 William to Heinsius, Feb. 2/12 1692.

FN 288 Ibid. Jan 12/22 1692.

FN 289 Ibid. Jan. 19/29. 1692.

FN 290 Burnet, ii. 82 83.; Correspondence of William and Heinsius, passim.

FN 291 Memoires de Torcy.

FN 292 William to Heinsius, Oct 28/Nov 8 1691.

FN 293 Ibid. Jan. 19/29. 1692.

FN 294 His letters to Heinsius are full of this subject.

FN 295 See the Letters from Rome among the Nairne Papers. Those in 1692 are from Lytcott; those in 1693 from Cardinal Howard; those in 1694 from Bishop Ellis; those in 1695 from Lord Perth. They all tell the same story.

FN 296 William’s correspondence with Heinsius; London Gazette, Feb. 4. 1691. In a pasquinade published in 1693, and entitled “La Foire d’Ausbourg, Ballet Allegorique,” the Elector of Saxony is introduced saying

“Moy, je diray naivement,
Qu’une jartiere d’Angleterre
Feroit tout Mon empressement;
Et je ne vois rien sur la terre
Ou je trouve plus d’agrement.”

FN 297 William’s correspondence with Heinsius. There is a curious account of Schoening in the Memoirs of Count Dohna.

FN 298 Burnet, ii. 84.

FN 299 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary.

FN 300 Monthly Mercuries of January and April 1693; Burnet, ii. 84. In the Burnet MS. Hail. 6584, is a warm eulogy on the Elector of Bavaria. When the MS. was written he was allied with England against France. In the History, which was prepared for publication when he was allied with France against England, the eulogy is omitted.

FN 301 “Nec pluribus impar.”

FN 302 Memoires de Saint Simon; Dangeau; Racine’s Letters, and Narrative entitled Relation de ce qui s’est passe au Siege de Namur; Monthly Mercury, May 1692.

FN 303 Memoires de Saint Simon; Racine to Boileau , May 21. 1692.

FN 304 Monthly Mercury for June; William to Heinsius May 26/ June 5 1692.

FN 305 William to Heinsius, May 26/June 5 1692.

FN 306 Monthly Mercuries of June and July 1692; London Gazettes of June; Gazette de Paris; Memoires de Saint Simon; Journal de Dangeau; William to Heinsius, May 30/June 9 June 2/12 June 11/21; Vernon’s Letters to Colt, printed in Tindal’s History; Racine’s Narrative, and Letters to Boileau of June 15. and 24.

FN 307 Memoires de Saint Simon.

FN 308 London Gazette, May 30. 1692; Memoires de Saint Simon; Journal de Dangeau; Boyer’s History of William III.

FN 309 Memoires de Saint Simon; Voltaire, Siecle de Louis XIV. Voltaire speaks with a contempt which is probably just of the account of this affair in the Causes Celebres. See also the Letters of Madame de Sevigne during the months of January and February 1680. In several English lampoons Luxemburg is nicknamed Aesop, from his deformity, and called a wizard, in allusion to his dealings with La Voisin. In one Jacobite allegory he is the necromancer Grandorsio. In Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary for June 1692 he is called a conjuror. I have seen two or three English caricatures of Luxemburg’s figure.

FN 310 Memoires de Saint Simon; Memoires de Villars; Racine to Boileau, May 21. 1692.

FN 311 Narcissus Luttrell, April 28. 1692.

FN 312 London Gazette Aug. 4. 8. 11. 1692; Gazette de Paris, Aug. 9. 16.; Voltaire, Siecle de Louis XIV.; Burnet, ii. 97; Memoires de Berwick; Dykvelt’s Letter to the States General dated August 4. 1692. See also the very interesting debate which took place in the House of Commons on Nov. 21. 1692. An English translation of Luxemburg’s very elaborate and artful despatch will be found in the Monthly Mercury for September 1692. The original has recently been printed in the new edition of Dangeau. Lewis pronounced it the best despatch that he had ever seen. The editor of the Monthly Mercury maintains that it was manufactured at Paris. “To think otherwise,” he says, “is mere folly; as if Luxemburg could be at so much leisure to write such a long letter, more like a pedant than a general, or rather the monitor of a school, giving an account to his master how the rest of the boys behaved themselves.” In the Monthly Mercury will be found also the French official list of killed and wounded. Of all the accounts of the battle that which seems to me the best is in the Memoirs of Feuquieres. It is illustrated by a map. Feuquieres divides his praise and blame very fairly between the generals. The traditions of the English mess tables have been preserved by Sterne, who was brought up at the knees of old soldiers of William. “‘There was Cutts’s’ continued the Corporal, clapping the forefinger of his right hand upon the thumb of his left, and counting round his hand; ‘there was Cutts’s, Mackay’s Angus’s, Graham’s and Leven’s, all cut to pieces; and so had the English Lifeguards too, had it not been for some regiments on the right, who marched up boldly to their relief, and received the enemy’s fire in their faces before any one of their own platoons discharged a musket. They’ll go to heaven for it,’ added Trim.”

FN 313 Voltaire, Siecle de Louis XIV.

FN 314 Langhorne, the chief lay agent of the Jesuits in England, always, as he owned to Tillotson, selected tools on this principle. Burnet, i. 230.

FN 315 I have taken the history of Grandval’s plot chiefly from Grandval’s own confession. I have not mentioned Madame de Maintenon, because Grandval, in his confession, did not mention her. The accusation brought against her rests solely on the authority of Dumont. See also a True Account of the horrid Conspiracy against the Life of His most Sacred Majesty William III. 1692; Reflections upon the late horrid Conspiracy contrived by some of the French Court to murder His Majesty in Flanders 1692: Burnet, ii. 92.; Vernon’s letters from the camp to Colt, published by Tindal; the London Gazette, Aug, 11. The Paris Gazette contains not one word on the subject,–a most significant silence.

FN 316 London Gazette, Oct. 20. 24. 1692.

FN 317 See his report in Burchett.

FN 318 London Gazette, July 28. 1692. See the resolutions of the Council of War in Burchett. In a letter to Nottingham, dated July 10, Russell says, “Six weeks will near conclude what we call summer.” Lords Journals, Dec. 19. 1692.

FN 319 Monthly Mercury, Aug. and Sept. 1692.

FN 320 Evelyn’s Diary, July 25. 1692; Burnet, ii. 94, 95., and Lord Dartmouth’s Note. The history of the quarrel between Russell and Nottingham will be best learned from the Parliamentary Journals and Debates of the Session of 1692/3.

FN 321 Commons’ Journals, Nov. 19. 1692; Burnet, ii. 95.; Grey’s Debates, Nov. 21. 1692; Paris Gazettes of August and September; Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, Sept.

FN 322 See Bart’s Letters of Nobility, and the Paris Gazettes of the autumn of 1692.

FN 323 Memoires de Du Guay Trouin.

FN 324 London Gazette, Aug. 11. 1692; Evelyn’s Diary, Aug. 10.; Monthly Mercury for September; A Full Account of the late dreadful Earthquake at Port Royal in Jamaica, licensed Sept. 9. 1692.

FN 325 Evelyn’s Diary, June 25. Oct. 1. 1690; Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, June 1692, May 1693; Monthly Mercury, April, May, and June 1693; Tom Brown’s Description of a Country Life, 1692.

FN 326 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, Nov. 1692.

FN 327 See, for example, the London Gazette of Jan. 12. 1692

FN 328 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, Dec. 1692.

FN 329 Ibid. Jan. 1693.

FN 330 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, July 1692.

FN 331 Evelyn’s Diary, Nov. 20. 1692: Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary; London Gazette, Nov. 24.; Hop to the Greffier of the States General, Nov. 18/28

FN 332 London Gazette, Dec. 19. 1692.

FN 333 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, Dec. 1692.

FN 334 Ibid. Nov. 1692.

FN 335 Ibid. August 1692.

FN 336 Hop to the Greffier of the States General, Dec 23/Jan 2 1693. The Dutch despatches of this year are filled with stories of robberies.

FN 337 Hop to the Greffier of the States General, Dec 23/Jan 2 1693; Historical Records of the Queen’s Bays, published by authority; Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, Nov. 15.

FN 338 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, Dee. 22.

FN 339 Ibid. Dec. 1692; Hop, Jan. 3/13 Hop calls Whitney, “den befaamsten roover in Engelandt.”

FN 340 London Gazette January 2. 1692/3.

FN 341 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, Jan. 1692/3.

FN 342 Ibid. Dec. 1692.

FN 343 Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, January and February; Hop Jan 31/Feb 10 and Feb 3/13 1693; Letter to Secretary Trenchard, 1694; New Court Contrivances or more Sham Plots still, 1693.

FN 344 Lords’ and Commons’ Journals, Nov. 4., Jan. 1692.

FN 345 Commons’ Journals, Nov. 10 1692.

FN 346 See the Lords’ Journals from Nov. 7. to Nov. 18. 1692; Burnet, ii. 102. Tindall’s account of these proceedings was taken from letters addressed by Warre, Under Secretary of State, to Colt, envoy at Hanover. Letter to Mr. Secretary Trenchard, 1694.

FN 347 Lords’ Journals, Dec. 7.; Tindal, from the Colt Papers; Burnet, ii. 105.

FN 348 Grey’s Debates, Nov. 21. and 23. 1692.

FN 349 Grey’s Debates, Nov. 21. 1692; Colt Papers in Tindal.

FN 350 Tindal, Colt Papers; Commons’ Journals, Jan. 11. 1693.

FN 351 Colt Papers in Tindal; Lords’ Journals from Dec. 6. to Dec. 19. 1692; inclusive,

FN 352 As to the proceedings of this day in the House of Commons, see the Journals, Dec. 20, and the letter of Robert Wilmot, M.P. for Derby, to his colleague Anchitel Grey, in Grey’s Debates.

FN 353 Commons’ Journals, Jan. 4. 1692/3.

FN 354 Colt Papers in Tindal; Commons’ Journals, Dec. 16. 1692, Jan. 11 1692; Burnet ii. 104.

FN 355 The peculiar antipathy of the English nobles to the Dutch favourites is mentioned in a highly interesting note written by Renaudot in 1698, and preserved among the Archives of the French Foreign Office.

FN 356 Colt Papers in Tindal; Lords’ Journals, Nov. 28. and 29. 1692, Feb. 18. and 24. 1692/3.

FN 357 Grey’s Debates, Nov 18. 1692; Commons’ Journals, Nov. 18., Dec. 1. 1692.

FN 358 See Cibber’s Apology, and Mountford’s Greenwich Park.

FN 359 See Cibber’s Apology, Tom Brown’s Works, and indeed the works of every man of wit and pleasure about town.

FN 360 The chief source of information about this case is the report of the trial, which will be found in Howell’s Collection. See Evelyn’s Diary, February 4. 1692/3. I have taken some circumstances from Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary, from a letter to Sancroft which is among the Tanner MSS in the Bodleian Library, and from two letters addressed by Brewer to Wharton, which are also in the Bodleian Library.

FN 361 Commons’ Journals, Nov. 14. 1692.

FN 362 Commons’ Journals of the Session, particularly of Nov. 17., Dec. 10., Feb. 25., March 3.; Colt Papers in Tindal.

FN 363 Commons’ Journals, Dec. 10.; Tindal, Colt Papers.

FN 364 See Coke’s Institutes, part iv. chapter 1. In 1566 a subsidy was 120,000L.; in 1598, 78,000L.; when Coke wrote his Institutes, about the end of the reign of James I. 70,000L. Clarendon tells us that, in 1640, twelve subsidies were estimated at about 600,000L.

FN 365 See the old Land Tax Acts, and the debates on the Land Tax Redemption Bill of 1798.

FN 366 Lords’ Journals Jan. 16, 17, 18, 19, 20.; Commons’ Journals, Jan. 17, 18. 20. 1692; Tindal, from the Colt Papers; Burnet, ii. 104, 105. Burnet has used an incorrect expression, which Tindal, Ralph and others have copied. He says that the question was whether the Lords should tax themselves. The Lords did not claim any right to alter the amount of taxation laid on them by the bill as it came up to them. They only demanded that their estates should be valued, not by the ordinary commissioners, but by special commissioners of higher rank.

FN 367 Commons’ Journals, Dec. 2/12. 1692,

FN 368 For this account of the origin of stockjobbing in the City of London I am chiefly indebted to a most curious periodical paper, entitled, “Collection for the Improvement of Husbandry and Trade, by J. Houghton, F.R.S.” It is in fact a weekly history of the commercial speculations of that time. I have looked through the files of several years. In No. 33., March 17. 1693, Houghton says: “The buying and selling of Actions is one of the great trades now on foot. I find a great many do not understand the affair.” On June 13. and June 22. 1694, he traces the whole progress of stockjobbing. On July 13. of the same year he makes the first mention of time bargains. Whoever is desirous to know more about the companies mentioned in the text may consult Houghton’s Collection and a pamphlet entitled Anglia Tutamen, published in 1695.

FN 369 Commons’ Journals; Stat. 4 W. & M. c. 3.

FN 370 See a very remarkable note in Hume’s History of England, Appendix III.

FN 371 Wealth of Nations, book v. chap. iii.

FN 372 Wesley was struck with this anomaly in 1745. See his Journal.

FN 373 Pepys, June 10. 1668.

FN 374 See the Politics, iv. 13.

FN 375 The bill will be found among the archives of the House of Lords.

FN 376 Lords’ Journals, Jan. 3. 1692/3.

FN 377 Introduction to the Copies and Extracts of some Letters written to and from the Earl of Danby, now Duke of Leeds, published by His Grace’s Direction, 1710.

FN 378 Commons’ Journals; Grey’s Debates. The bill itself is among the archives of the House of Lords.

FN 379 Dunton’s Life and Errors; Autobiography of Edmund Bohun, privately printed in 1853. This autobiography is, in the highest degree, curious and interesting.

FN 380 Vox Cleri, 1689.

FN 381 Bohun was the author of the History of the Desertion, published immediately after the Revolution. In that work he propounded his favourite theory. “For my part,” he says, “I am amazed to see men scruple the submitting to the present King; for, if ever man had a just cause of war, he had; and that