Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 3.djvu/515

] (this hand is the foe of tyrants). He then hastened to Paris to persuade Louis that it was his interest to re-establish the republic in England. He did not succeed in that, nor in obtaining the one hundred thousand livres which he solicited for the purpose of overturning Charles's government; but he consented to receive five hundred pounds per annum of Louis's money to serve his purposes in England. This is a blot which must ever cling to the character of Sidney. We cannot admit that a patriot shall receive money from the enemy of his country under any plea, and that Louis was such an enemy, he must have been a shallow politician who did not perceive. If, as his apologists assert, he received the money to save his country, that makes worse of it; for though it well became him to endeavour to save the liberties of his country, it ill became him to receive the pay of the enemy to do the work of a friend. That was to add duplicity to sordidness. In fact, Sidney was a man of fortune, and ought to have laboured for his country for the work's sake. Nothing could be clearer than that Louis only employed the patriots for his own purposes, which were to keep the king in his chains, and prevent the efficient aid of protestant England to protestant Holland, and the other countries that he sought to subject to his ambitious plans.

In other respects Sidney was rather a zealous republican than a far-seeing one. The fate of the commonwealth, the scenes of the restoration, all demonstrated most vividly that England was by no means ripe for a republic, and that, therefore, a republic was an impossibility. A wise man would, accordingly—however he might lament the rejection of his favourite scheme of government—have submitted, contenting himself in diffusing around him his better views, as he might suppose them, but would not attempt what was utterly impracticable, and which, even were it by some means practicable, would still be unjust, for a small minority has no right to force on a large majority a government, however admirable, which is opposed to its views and wishes.

With these defects, the character of Algernon Sidney is worthy of admiration, from his deep and unshakable attachment to the liberties of his country. It is only justice at the same time to Charles, to state that he at one time granted a pardon to Sidney for all past offences, which he declared that "he valued not at a lower rate than the saving of his life;" and it would have been nobler and more grateful in him to have united with the whigs only for the maintenance of constitutional liberty, than in seeking entirely to overturn the throne of his benefactor.

A very different man at this epoch obtained his pardon, and played a very different part. The weak, impulsive, ambitious, and yet vacillating Monmouth was by means of Halifax reconciled to his father. Halifax, who was known as a minister by the name of the trimmer, though he had aided the tories in gaining the ascendant, no sooner saw the lengths to which they were driving, than he began to incline to the other side. His tendency was always to trim the balance. When the whigs were in the ascendant he was a decided tory: he did his best to throw out the exclusion bill, and when it was thrown out he was one of the first to advocate measures for preventing the mischiefs of a popish succession. His genius was not to stimulate some great principle, and bear it on in triumph, but to keep the prevailing crisis from running into extravagance. He was, like Danby, an enemy to the French alliance; he loathed the doctrine of passive obedience; he was opposed to long absence of parliaments; he dared to intercede for Russell and Sidney, when the tory faction were demanding their blood; he saw the undue influence that the duke of York had acquired by the late triumph over the whigs, and he began to patronise Monmouth as a counterpoise; he wrote some letters for Monmouth, professing great penitence, and Monmouth copied and sent them, and the king at once relented. On the 20th of October Charles received him at the house of major Long, in the city; and though he assumed an air of displeasure, and upbraided him with the heinous nature of his crimes, he added words which showed that he meant to forgive. On the 11th of November there was another private interview, and Halifax laboured hard to remove all difficulties. The king offered him full forgiveness, but on condition that he submitted himself entirely to his pleasure. On the 24th of November he threw himself at the feet of the king and the duke of York, and implored their forgiveness, promising to be the first man, in case of the king's death, to draw the sword for the maintenance of the duke's claims. The duke had been prepared beforehand for this scene, and accorded apparently his forgiveness. But Monmouth was then weak enough to be induced to confirm the testimony of lord Howard against his late associates, and to reveal the particulars of their negotiations with Argyll in Scotland. This he did under solemn assurances that all should remain secret, and nothing should be done which should humiliate him. Having done this, his outlawry was reversed, a full pardon formally drawn, and a present of six thousand pounds was made him by the king to start afresh with.

No sooner, however, was this done than he saw with consternation his submission and confession published in the "Gazette." He denied that he had revealed anything to the king which confirmed the sentences lately passed on Russell and Sidney. The king was enraged, and insisted that he should in writing contradict these assertions. He was again cowardly enough to comply, and immediately being assailed by the reproaches of his late friends, and especially of Hampden, whose turn was approaching, and who said that Monmouth had sealed his doom, he hastened to Charles, and in great excitement and distress demanded back his letter. Charles assured him that it should never be produced in any court as evidence against the prisoners, and advised him to take some time to reflect on the consequences of the withdrawal to himself. But the next morning, the 7th of December, renewing his entreaty for the letter, it was returned him in exchange for a less decisive statement, and Charles bade him never come into his presence again. He then retired to his seat in the country, and once more offered to sign a paper as strong as the last. Even Charles felt the infamy of this proceeding, and refused the offer.

But still it was determined to make use of him, and he was subpœnaed to give evidence on the approaching trial of Hampden. He pleaded the promise that his confession, should not be used against the prisoners, but he was told