Scotland. should recur. This jealousy on the King's part, added to that unmanly hatred of thought and of business which made him the tool of whoever would in earnest undertake to use him, was all that was needed to accomplish the purpose of the Chancellor. The entreaties of the ancestral subjects of the Stuarts were derided; the costly struggles of Dunbar and Preston and Worcester Prelacy rewere forgotten. Prelacy was restored in Scot- instated in land. A royal proclamation forbade all meetings of synods and presbyteries. Ministers, September. established in their cures since the death of the late King, were deprived of their livings unless instituted anew by the prelates. The management of the affairs of the Church was committed to James Sharpe, rewarded for his apostasy from the Kirk by being made Archbishop of St. Andrews, and primate. Again the wind was sown which was again to be reaped a whirlwind. 1661. Marquis of May 21 The memory of the Marquis of Montrose called for blood, like the shades of Laud and Strafford. The marvellous exploits of that daring soldier had more than once promised to restore the royal cause in the darkest crises of its decline.' Defeated at last, and taken prisoner, he had been brought to Edinburgh, Montrose. and there executed, after many indignities. 1650. The severity of his treatment was imputed to the Marquis of Argyll, chief of the great house of Campbell, who was then the leader of the Covenanters and the foremost among Scottish statesmen. Charles the Second, immediately after the death of Montrose, had made an accommodation, and professed himself a Presbyterian ; and, at his coronation at Scone, Argyll placed Marquis of the crown upon his head. When Cromwell over- Argyll ran Scotland after his victory at Dunbar, that 1 In his professions to the Marquis of Argyll, and to the Scottish Parliament, respecting his relations to Montrose, 1651. Jan. 1. Charles the Second emulated the unsurpassable dishonesty of his father. (See Lingard, VII. 26.) nobleman had been obliged to yield to the necessity of the times. He had held high employments under the great Protector, and had sat as a commoner in the Parliament called by Richard. At the Restoration he came to London, to pay his duty to the sovereign, but was committed to the Tower, whence he was presently sent back to Edinburgh. When it was made. clear that no misdemeanors yet alleged were sufficient for his conviction as a traitor, some letters were produced, said to have been formerly written by him to Monk, and containing expressions of hostility to the King. On this evidence he was condemned; and, lest the royal clemency should be extended to him, he was allowed only forty-eight hours to make his prepMay 27. aration. He suffered with intrepid serenity, expressing in his last words his devotion to the Covenant; and his head was fixed upon the spike which, just eleven years before, had borne the head of James Graham of Montrose. 1661. So far all things had gone on prosperously for the Court. The quiet aspect of affairs at home allowed its attention to be turned abroad. The English merchants were impatient of the commercial rivalry of the Hollanders. Parliament was irritated by a charge of some depredations committed by Dutch officers, for which, however, reasonable satisfaction had been offered. Downing, the English Minister at the Hague, was quarrelsome and overbearing. The King, as far as he paid attention to the business, was influenced by the hope of securing for his own use some of the grants for the public service which foreign hostilities would induce, and by partiality for his young nephew, the Prince of Orange, whose hereditary consequence was now overborne by the popular party. The Duke of York, the King's brother, hated the Hollanders for their Protestantism, and was ambitious of renown as a naval commander. A squadron was sent to seize some Dutch settlements in Africa. The Dutch complained, and, when their complaints were neglected, reluctantly began to arm. Their Admiral, De Ruyter, recovered the African factories.1 The English made reprisals on Dutch ships. Attempts, diligently made by the Dutch to heal the quarrel, failed, and war was formally declared by the King Holland. France and Denmark took part of England. with his enemy. War with 1665. Feb. 22. The vicissitudes of the sharp conflict of the next two years and a half need not be here described. A succession of alternate successes of the great naval powers terminated in an adventure deeply mortifying to English pride. The Dutch Admiral, De Ruyter, sailed up the Thames, took Sheerness, and burned six ships of war at their anchors. Repeating the insult, he came up as far as Tilbury fort. His guns were heard on the Royal Exchange; and a question of evacuating the Tower of London was seriously entertained in the Privy Council. In these humiliating circumstances, England concluded a treaty of peace, on favorable terms, due to the prowess of her fleets in the early part of the war, Breda. and to a sense of the greatness of her spirit and resources, as well as to jealousy entertained by the Dutch of some equivocal movements on the part of their French allies. The original grounds of the dispute were passed over in silence. Acadie, in America, was surrendered to the King of France; but New Netherland, which had been taken by the English, as will hereafter be related, remained in their hands. Peace of 1667. July 10. The people of England chafed against that official mis 1 The "Discourse written by Sir George Downing" at this time, ("given at the Hague, this 16th of December, 1664,") is a specimen of diplomatic insolence perhaps unequalled since the times of Roman brutality. The tricky envoy half pretends to call in question the authenticity of the argument of the "Estates General of the United Provinces," which he undertakes to answer. Plague in 1665. Fire of Lon don. 1666. Sept. 2-7. management to which they imputed the defeat of their expectations from this war. And their ill-humor was increased by the occurrence of two great calamities, under which they could not even have the relief of complaining of their rulers. In the first year of the war, a pestilence had broken out in London, which in six months destroyed a hundred thousand lives. A year afterwards, a fire devastated the city for six days and nights. Beginning near London Bridge, it spread in one direction to the Tower, and in the other nearly to Temple Bar, consuming thirteen thousand houses, and laying waste four hundred streets, and four hundred and thirty-six acres of land. The vague but violent discontent which prevailed vented itself in an outcry against Lord Clarendon. From the time of his accession to the management of af fairs, he had made enemies in all quarters except among the clergymen, and not a few of the clergy he had offended by his abstinence from jobs in the distribution of patronage. The Catholics hated him for his vigilant and uncompromising Protestantism. The Protestant dissenters bore him no good-will for shutting up their places of worship, and turning their ministers out of their homes to beggary. Covenanting Scotland owed him a terrible reckoning. The resentment of disappointed suitors among the royalists accumulated a strong interest against him; for, where there were so many to be gratified, and they so craving, it was impossible for him to satisfy all; and, though he was charged with being covetous, it was not believed to be serviceable, or even to be safe, to approach him with a bribe.1 The mob of courtiers hated him, because of his blameless private life, and of that Lord Clarendon's fall from power. 1 I am not ignorant that a different opinion has been maintained in respect to Lord Clarendon's reputation among his contemporaries, in this particular; and I have carefully read the "His torical Inquiries" of the late Lord Dover upon the point; but without being satisfied of the correctness of the judgment there expressed. loathing for their practices which he took little pains to conceal. The seraglio hated him, because he paid it no respect, and because all his influence over the royal mind was sure to be adverse to its sway. The King was turned against him by the disgust and the scoffs of his mistresses, and because the cautions of the grave minister were distasteful and wearisome to the royal ear. By his own son-in-law the Duke of York had seduced, and then married, Clarendon's daughter - he came to be scarcely tolerated, because the one was a Romish, the other an Anglican devotee. His stern temper, as it was manifested in measures of authority, or in private intercourse, provoked hostility; and his proud unconcern about recommending himself by a gracious deportment had its powerful effect to his disadvantage; for, among the qualifications for public service, no small account is apt to be made of a readiness to promise, to compliment, and to smile. 1653. 1662. The fall of a minister cannot be long delayed, when the sovereign, the courtiers, and the people have ceased to love him. Peace was scarcely made before a universal clamor arose against the man to whom were imputed the disgraces and the unprofitable issue of the war. Dunkirk, in the Low Countries, had been taken by Cromwell from the Spanish. To supply his needs or his pleasures, Charles, in the second year after his restoration, had sold it to the King of France. The dishonor of this transaction was now charged upon Clarendon. He had built a costly mansion near St. James's Palace; it was called in derision Dunkirk House, and he was accused of having paid for it by official peculation. The King took from him Aug. 30. the great seal; Parliament, coming together soon after, thanked the King for so doing, and was answered by an assurance that Clarendon should never again be employed. This was not enough. The House 1667. Oct. 15. |