Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 3.djvu/472

458 Lauderdale, Arlington, and Buckingham. Against Lauderdale were objected his maladministration in Scotland; and in truth, if he had had his due for his cruelties there, he would long ago have lost his head. Against Buckingham and Arlington were charged the crimes of the cabal generally, and against Arlington, in particular, peculation and embezzlement.

Buckingham and Arlington condescended to defend themselves at the bar of the commons, for which they received a vote of censure from the peers, as derogatory to their dignity as members of the upper house; and a standing order was made that no peer should answer an accusation before the commons in person, by counsel, or by letter, on penalty of being committed to the custody of the black rod, or to the Tower, during the pleasure of the house. Buckingham threw much of the blame on Arlington, whom he hated, and Arlington retorted it on Buckingham.

Charles, however, so far displayed no disposition to remove those obnoxious ministers, but he pressed for liberal supplies, and the commons, on their part, were in no haste to grant them. They were now nearly sick of the Dutch war, from which no honour, but much expense flowed. The tide of success was now fast running in favour of the States. Spain and Austria were in the field to support William of Orange. Monteouculli, the Austrian general, had eluded Turenne, and laid siege to Bonn, and William having reduced Naerden, had formed a junction with Montecuculli; Bonn was taken, and the French army was compelled to retreat.

Charles himself not having been able in the autumn to draw his pension from Louis, and parliament now holding fast its purse-strings, he was ready to listen to terms from Holland. On this the States offered, through the Spanish ambassador, Del Fresno, the terms which they refused at the congress of Cologne. The conquests on both sides should be restored, the honour of the flag conceded to England, and eight hundred thousand crowns should be paid Charles for indemnification for the expenses of the war. Had the terms been far inferior, the fact of the money would probably have decided the matter with Charles. As to the dignity of stadtholder for William, the States themselves settled that, by conferring it on him and his heirs for ever, before the time of their treaty, and nothing whatever was said of the ten thousand pounds for liberty to fish. On the 9th of February the treaty was signed, and on the 11th announced to parliament by Charles. Louis got information of these proceedings before this announcement, and sent through Ruvigni an offer of a large sum, but it was too late. Charles said he had gone too far, but that he would still remain the friend of Louis, and endeavour to mediate betwixt him and the stadtholder. Charles had clearly broken faith with Louis, having repeatedly bound himself to make no peace without him; but then Louis had not paid the stipulated sum, and what could the poor lung do without money? On the other hand, however, though he had made peace with Holland, yet he left his army under Monmouth with the French to fight against it.

Whilst parliament continued to sit, the duke of York was in continual terror of some measure to exclude him from the throne. Such measures were attempted; a bill was proposed in the lords by Carlisle, and warmly supported by Shaftesbury and Halifax, to make the penalty for marrying a catholic the forfeiture of the throne. It was thrown out, but to prevent the introduction of some fresh scheme, James importuned Charles to prorogue parliament. The king replied that it was impossible without supplies. To obviate this the duke applied to the king of France, who, equally apprehensive of the parliament, which condemned the Dutch war, sent Charles five hundred thousand crowns, and parliament was immediately prorogued till the 10th of November. During the summer Charles, to reduce the opposition of the house of commons, concluded to dismiss Buckingham and Arlington from the ministry; but he gave to Arlington the post of chamberlain of the household. Whilst in that situation, Arlington strongly recommended to the king a marriage betwixt William of Orange and Mary, the eldest daughter of the duke of York. He represented how much this was likely to please the protestant interest. Charles readily consented to it, but the English party with whom William was in close communication, warned him against it, as likely to persuade the English people that he was in league with the king and the duke of York against their liberties. William, therefore, curtly turned aside the proposal.

Parliament reassembled on the 13th of April, 1675. Buckingham had now joined Shaftesbury and the opposition, and under this government the house of commons demanded that the English troops under Monmouth should be recalled from the continent. Dutch money was said to have stimulated this demand, and a fiery debate succeeded—so fiery, indeed, that members were very near drawing their swords on one another; but Danby applied the antidote in a liberal distribution of English money, and the patriots left Monmouth and turned their fury on Lauderdale again, but without succeeding in displacing him. Danby himself was threatened with impeachment, but he threw fresh oil on the troubled waters in the shape of more gold from the treasury, and the storm blew over.

In the lords, however, a most atrocious attempt was made by this unprincipled minister. He seized on the no-popery cry to introduce a measure which would at once enslave parliament. This was an oath as a special test for parliament; every member of which was to take, as well as all officers of state and privy councilors, the passive obedience oath already required of magistrates. Danby had secured the advocacy of the bench of bishops—bishops Morley and Ward speaking zealously in its favour. But Shaftesbury, Buckingham, and the opposition generally, resisted it with all their power. They said whilst the oath was limited, the high court of parliament remained free to define or control it; but if parliament itself took it, it became tongue-tied for ever, and the birthright of Englishmen was lost. The debate lasted seventeen days, dining which time Charles himself attended to watch its progress. He went to take his stand by the fire, and Marvell said the opposition had to fight it out with the sun, i.e., with the fireside always in their faces. Eventually ministers were compelled to alter the penalty of the oath from exclusion from parliament to a fine of five hundred pounds, and exclusion from any office or