Under the Protector, of whom he speaks with singular candour, the government was absolute-and, on his death, fell wholly into the hands of the army. He speaks with contempt and severe censure of Monk for the precipitate and unconditional submission into which he hurried the country at the Restoration; and makes the following candid reflection on the subsequent punishment of the regicides.

this question, it is much to be doubted whether | represented them, as an expedient, admirably in this singular proceeding has not, as much as any deed adapted to the real object of upholding the other circumstance, served to raise the character present king's power, by the defeat of the exclu of the English nation in the opinion of Europe in sion, but never likely to take effect for their pregeneral. He who has read, and still more he who tended purpose of controuling that of his successor; has heard in conversation, discussions upon this and supported them for that very reason. But such subject, by foreigners, must have perceived, that, a principle of conduct was too fraudulent to be even in the minds of those who condemn the act, avowed; nor ought it perhaps, in candour, to be the impression made by it has been far more that imputed to the majority of the party. To those of respect and admiration, than that of disgust and who acted with good faith, and meant that the rehorror. The truth is, that the guilt of the action,strictions should really take place, and be effectual, that is to say, the taking away the life of the surely it ought to have occurred (and to those who King, is what most men in the place of Cromwell most prized the prerogatives of the crown, it ought and his associates would have incurred. What most forcibly to have occurred), that, in consenting there is of splendour and of magnanimity in it, I to curtail the powers of the crown, rather than to mean the publicity and solemnity of the act, is alter the succession, they were adopting the greater, what few would be capable of displaying. It is a in order to avoid the lesser evil. The question of, degrading fact to human nature, that even the what are to be the powers of the crown? is surely sending away of the Duke of Gloucester was an of superior importance to that of, who shall wear it? instance of generosity almost unexampled in the Those, at least, who consider the royal prerogative history of transactions of this nature."-pp. 13-17. as vested in the king, not for his own sake, but for questions as much above the other in dignity, as that of his subjects, must consider the one of these the rights of the public are more valuable than those of an individual. In this view, the prerogatives of the crown are in substance and effect the rights of the people: and these rights of the people were not to be sacrificed to the purpose of preserving the succes who, on account of his religious persuasion, was sion to the most favoured prince, much less to one justly feared and suspected. In truth, the ques tion between the exclusion and restrictions seems peculiarly calculated to ascertain the different views in which the different parties in this country have "With respect to the execution of those who seen, and perhaps ever will see, the prerogatives were accused of having been more immediately con- of the crown. The Whigs, who consider them as cerned in the King's death, that of Scrope, who a trust for the people, a doctrine which the Tories had come in upon the proclamation, and of the themselves, when pushed in argument, will somemilitary officers who had attended the trial, was a times admit, naturally think it their duty rather to violation of every principle of law and justice. But change the manager of the trust, than to impair the the fate of the others, though highly dishonourable subject of it; while others, who consider them as to Monk, whose whole power had arisen from his the right or property of the king, will as naturally zeal in their service, and the favour and confidence act as they would do in the case of any other prop with which they had rewarded him, and not per-erty, and consent to the loss or annihilation of any haps very creditable to the nation, of which many had applauded, more had supported, and almost all had acquiesced in the act, is not certainly to be impated as a crime to the King, or to those of his advisers who were of the Cavalier party. The passion of revenge, though properly condemned both by philosophy and religion, yet when it is excited by njurious treatment of persons justly dear to us, is among the most excusable of human frailties; and if Charles, in his general conduct, had shown stronger feelings of gratitude for services performed to his father, his character, in the eyes of many, would be rather raised than lowered by this example of severity against the regicides."—pp. 22, 23.

part of it, for the purpose of preserving the remainder to him, whom they style the rightful owner, If the people be the sovereign, and the king the delegate, it is better to change the bailiff than to injure the farm; but if the king be the proprietor, it is better the farm should be impaired, nay, part of it destroyed, than that the whole should pass according to the Whigs (not in the case of a Popish over to an usurper. The royal prerogative ought, successor only, but in all cases), to be reduced to such powers as are in their exercise beneficial to the people; and of the benefit of these they will not rashly suffer the people to be deprived, whether the executive power be in the hands of an heredi. The mean and unprincipled submission of tary, or of an elected king; of a regent, or of any Charles to Louis XIV., and the profligate pre-other hand, they who consider prerogative with other denomination of magistrate; while, on the tences upon which he was perpetually solicit-reference only to royalty, will, with equal readi ing an increase of his disgraceful stipend, are ness, consent either to the extension or the sus mentioned with becoming reprobation. The pension of its exercise, as the ocensional interests delusion of the Popish plot is noticed at some of the prince may seem to require."—pp. 37-39. length; and some admirable remarks are introduced with reference to the debates on the

expediency of passing a bill for excluding the Duke of York from the Crown, or of imposing certain restrictions on him in the event of his succession. The following observations are distinguished for their soundness, as well as their acuteness; and are applicable, in principle, to every period of our history in which it can be necessary to recur to the true principles of the constitution.

"It is not easy to conceive upon what principles even the Tories could justify their support of the restrictions. Many among them, no doubt, saw the provisions in the same light in which the Whigs

Of the reality of any design to assassinate the King, by those engaged in what was called the Rye-House Plot, Mr. Fox appears to en tertain considerable doubt, partly on account of the improbability of many of the circumstances, and partly on account of the uniform and resolute denial of Rumbold, the chief of that party, in circumstances when he had no Of the condemnation of Russell and Sydney, conceivable inducement to disguise the truth. be felt by all friends to liberty at the recol he speaks with the indignation which must lection of that disgraceful proceeding. The following passage is one of the most eloquent

and one of the most characteristic in the whole | quis of Halifax, for having given an opinion volume.

"Upon evidence such as has been stated, was his great and excellent man (Sydney) condemned to die. Pardon was not to be expected. Mr. Hume says, that such an interference on the part of the King, though it might have been an act of heroic generosity, could not be regarded as an indispensable duty. He might have said, with more propriety, that it was idle to expect that the government, after having incurred so much guilt in order to obtain the sentence, should, by remitting it, relinquish the object just when it is within its grasp. The same historian considers the jury as highly blameable and so do I; But what was their guilt, in comparison of that of the court who tried, and of the government who prosecuted, in this infamous cause? Yet the jury, being the only party that can with any colour be stated as acting independ ently of the government, is the only one mentioned by him as blameable. The prosecutor is wholly omitted in his censure, and so is the court; this last, not from any tenderness for the judge (who, to do this author justice, is no favourite with him),

in council that the North American colonies should be made participant in the benefits of the English constitution, gives occasion to the following natural reflection.

that, even at this early period, a question relative "There is something curious in discovering, to North American liberty, and even to North American taxation, was considered as the test of principles friendly or adverse, to arbitary power at home. But the truth is, that among the several controversies which have arisen, there is no other wherein the natural rights of man on the one hand, and the authority of artificial institution on the other, as applied respectively, by the Whigs and Tories, to the English constitution, are so fairly put in issue, or by which the line of separation between the two parties is so strongly and distinctly marked." -p. 60.

The introductory chapter is closed by the following profound and important remarks, which may indeed serve as a key to the whole transactions of the ensuing reign.

but lest the odious connection between that branch of the judicature and the government should strike "Whoever reviews the interesting period which the reader too forcibly: For Jefferies, in this in- we have been discussing, upon the principle recomstance, ought to be regarded as the mere tool and mended in the outset of this chapter, will find, that, instrument (a fit one, no doubt) of the prince who from the consideration of the past, to prognosticate had appointed him for the purpose of this and simi- the future, would, at the moment of Charles' delar services. Lastly, the King is gravely intro- mise, be no easy task. Between two persons, one duced on the question of pardon, as if he had had of whom should expect that the country would reno prior concern in the cause, and were now to main sunk in slavery, the other, that the cause of decide upon the propriety of extending mercy to a freedom would revive and triumph, it would be criminal condemned by a court of judicature! difficult to decide, whose reasons were better supNor are we once reminded what that judicature ported, whose speculations the more probable. I was, by whom appointed, by whom influenced, should guess that he who desponded, had looked by whom called upon to receive that detestable more at the state of the public; while he who was evidence, the very recollection of which, even at sanguine, had fixed his eyes more attentively upon this distance of time, fires every honest heart with the person who was about to mount the throne. indignation. As well might we palliate the mur- Upon reviewing the two great parties of the nation, ders of Tiberius; who seldom put to death his vic- one observation occurs very forcibly, and that is, tims without a previous decree of his senate. The that the great strength of the Whigs consisted in moral of all this seems to be, that whenever a their being able to brand their adversaries as favourprince can, by intimidation, corruption, illegal evi-ers of Popery; that of the Tories (as far as their dence, or other such means, obtain a verdict against strength depended upon opinion, and not merely. a subject whom he dislikes, he may cause him to upon the power of the crown), in their finding col be executed without any breach of indispensable our to represent the Whigs as republicans. From duty; nay, that it is an act of heroic generosity, if he this observation we may draw a further inference, spares him. I never reflect on Mr. Hume's state- that, in proportion to the rashness of the crown, in ment of this matter but with the deepest regret. avowing and pressing forward the cause of Popery, Widely as I differ from him upon many other occa- and to the moderation and steadiness of the Whigs, sions, this appears to me to be the most reprehen- in adhering to the form of monarchy, would be the sible passage of his whole work. A spirit of adu- chance of the people of England, for changing an lation towards deceased princes, though in a good ignominious despotism for glory, liberty, and hap measure free from the imputation of interested piness."-pp. 66, 67. meanness, which is justly attached to flattery, when apphed to living monarchs; yet, as it is less intelligible with respect to its motives than the other, so is it in its consequences still more pernicious to the general interests of mankind. Fear of censure from contemporaries will seldom have much effect upon men in situations of unlimited authority. They will too often flatter themselves, that the same power which enables them to commit the crime, will secure them from reproach. The dread of posthumous infamy, therefore, being the only restraint, their consciences excepted, upon the passions of such persons, it is lamentable that this last defence (feeble enough at best), should in any degree be impaired; and impaired it must be, if not totally destroyed, when tyrants can hope to find in a man like Hume, no less eminent for the integrity and benevolence of his heart, than for the depth and soundness of his understanding, an apologist for even their foulest murders."-pp. 48-50.

The uncontrouled tyranny of Charles' adninistration in his latter days, is depicted with much force and fidelity; and the clamour aised by his other ministers against the Mar

James was known to have had so large a share in the councils of his brother, that no one expected any material change of system from his accession. The Church, indeed, it was feared, might be less safe under a professed Catholic; and the severity of his temper might inspire some dread of an aggravated oppression. It seems to be Mr. Fox's great object, in this first chapter, to prove that the object of his early policy was, not to establish the Catholic religion, but to make himself absolute and independent of his Parliament.

The fact itself, he conceives, is completely established by the manner in which his se cret negotiations with France were carried on; in the whole of which, he was zealously served by ministers, no one of whom had the slightest leaning towards Popery, or could ever be brought to countenance the measures which he afterwards pursued in its favour. It is made still more evident by the complexior

S

of his proceedings in Scotland; where the test, which he enforced at the point of the bayonet, was a Protestant test,-so much so, indeed, that he himself could not take it, and the objects of his persecution, dissenters from the Protestant church of England. We consider this point therefore-and it is one of no small importance in the history of this period -as now sufficiently established.

It does not seem necessary to follow the author into the detail of that sordid and degrading connexion which James was so anxious to establish, by becoming, like his brother, the pensioner of the French monarch. The bitter and dignified contempt with which it is treated by Mr. Fox, may be guessed at from the following account of the first remittance.

"Within a very few days from that in which the latter of them had passed, he (the French ambassador) was empowered to accompany the delivery of a letter from his master, with the agreeable news of having received from him bills of exchange to the amount of five hundred thousand livres, to be used in whatever manner might be convenient to the King of England's service. The account which Barillon gives of the manner in which this sum was received, is altogether ridiculous: the King's eyes were full of tears! and three of his ministers, Rochester, Sunderland, and Godolphin, came severally to the French ambassador, to express the sense their master had of the obligation, in terms the most lavish. Indeed, demonstrations of gratitude from the King directly, as well as through his ministers, for this supply, were such as, if they had been used by some unfortunate individual, who, with his whole family, had been saved, by the timely succour of some kind and powerful protector, from a gaol and all its horrors, would be deemed rather too strong than too weak. Barillon himself seems surprised when he relates them; but imputes them to what was probably their real cause, to the apprehensions that had been entertained (very unreasonable ones!), that the King of France might no longer choose to interfere in the affairs of Eng land, and, consequently, that his support could not be relied on for the grand object of assimilating this government to his own."-pp. 83, 84.

After this, Lord Churchill is sent to Paris on the part of the tributary King.

very reverse is the fact. But, in one case, they were the tools of a king plotting against his people; in the other, the ministers of a free government acting upon enlarged principles, and with energies which no state that is not in some degree republican can supply. How forcibly must the contemplation of these men in such opposite situations teach persons engaged in political life, that a free and popular government is desirable, not only for the public good, but for their own greatness and consideration, for every object of generous ambition."—pp. 88, 89.

As James, in the outset of his reign, professed a resolution to adhere to the system of government established by his brother, and made this declaration in the first place, to his Scottish Parliament, Mr. Fox thinks it neces sary to take a slight retrospective view of the proceedings of Charles towards that unhappy country; and details, from unquestionable auand atrocious cruelty, as to justify him in thorities, such a scene of intolerant oppression saying, that the state of that kingdom was "a state of more absolute slavery than at that time subsisted in any part of Christendom."

In both Parliaments, the King's revenue was granted for life, in terms of his demand, without discussion or hesitation; and Mr. Hume is censured with severity, and apparently with justice, for having presented his readers with a summary of the arguments which he would have them believe were actually used in the House of Commons on both sides of this question. "This misrepresentation," Mr. Fox observes, "is of no small importance, inasmuch as, by intimating that such a question could be debated at all, and much more, that it was debated with the enlightened views and bold topics of argument with which his genius has supplied him, he gives us a very false notion of the character of the Parliament, and of the times which he is describing. It is not improbable, that if the arguments had been used, which this his torian supposes, the utterer of them would it is certain that he would not have been have been expelled, or sent to the Tower; and heard with any degree of attention, or even patience."-p. 142.

The last chapter is more occupied with narrative, and less with argument and reflection, than that which precedes it. It contains the story of the unfortunate and desperate expeditions of Argyle and Monmouth, and of the condemnation and death of their unhappy leaders. Mr. Fox, though convinced that the misgovernment was such as fully to justify resistance by arms, seems to admit that both those enterprises were rash and injudicious. With his usual candour and openness, he observes, that "the prudential reasons against resistance at that time were exceedingly strong; and that there is no point, indeed, in human concerns, wherein the dictates of virtue and of worldly prudence are so identified, as in this great question of resistance by force to established governments."

"How little could Barillon guess, that he was negotiating with one who was destined to be at the head of an administration which, in a few years, would send the same Lord Churchill, not to Paris to implore Lewis for succours towards enslaving England, or to thank him for pensions to her monarch, but to combine all Europe against him in the cause of liberty to route his armies, to take his towns, to humble his pride, and to shake to the foundation that fabric of power which it had been the business of a long life to raise, at the expense of every sentiment of tenderness to his subjects, and of justice and good faith to foreign nations! I is with difficulty the reader can persuade himself that the Godolphin and Churchill here mentioned, are the same persons who were afterwards, one in the cabinet, one in the field, the great conductors of the war of the Succession. How little do they appear in the one instance! how great in the other! And the investigation of the cause to which this excessive difference is principally owing, will produce a most useful lesson. Is the difference to be attributed to any superiority of genius in the prince whom they served in the latter period of their lives? had been concerted together, and were inThe expeditions of Monmouth and Argyle Queen Anne's capacity appears to have been intended to take effect at the same moment. ferior even to her father's. Did they enjoy, in a greater degree, her favour and confidence? The Monmouth, however, who was reluctantly

forced upon the enterprise, was not so soon | The name of the person to whom this anecdote reready; and Argyle landed in the Highlands lates is not mentioned; and the truth of it may with a very small force before the Duke had therefore be fairly considered as liable to that degree of doubt with which men of judgment receive sailed from Holland. The details of his ir every species of traditional history. Woodrow, resolute councils and ineffectual marches, are however, whose veracity is above suspicion, says given at far too great length. Though they he had it from the most unquestionable authority. give occasion to one profound and important It is not in itself unlikely; and who is there that remark, which we do not recollect ever to would not wish it true? What a satisfactory spechave met with before; but, of the justice of in the zenith of his power, envying his victim! tacle to a philosophical mind, to see the oppressor, which, most of those who have acted with What an acknowledgment of the superiority of virparties must have had melancholy and fatal tue! What an affecting and forcible testimony to experience. It is introduced when speaking the value of that peace of mind, which innocence of the disunion that prevailed among Argyle's alone can confer! We know not who this man was; but when we reflect, that the guilt which agonized him was probably incurred for the sake of some vain title, or at least of some increase of wealth, which he did not want, and possibly knew not how to enjoy, our disgust is turned into something like compassion for that very foolish class of men, whom the world calls wise in their generation."

(April, 1805.)

Mémoires d'un Temoin de la Révolution; ou Journal des faits qui se sont passé sous ses yeux, et qui ont preparé et fixé la Constitution Française. Ouvrage Posthume de JEAN SYLVAIN BAILLY, Premier Président de l'Assemblée Nationale Constituant, Premier Maire de Paris, et Membre des Trois Académies. 8vo. 3 tomes. Paris: 1804.*