Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 4.djvu/166

152 miserable with the prospects on the continent and his fast-failing health. The commons now determined to impeach Portland and Somers on the ground of their concern in the second partition treaty, contrary to the constitutional usages of the country. They passed a resolution that "William earl of Portland, by negotiating and concluding the treaty of partition, which was destructive to the trade of this kingdom and dangerous to the peace of Europe, was guilty of a high crime and misdemeanour." They ordered Sir John Leveson Gower to impeach him at the bar of the lords, and named a committee to prepare the articles against him. They then demanded a conference with the lords, and desired them to communicate the particulars of what had passed before them between the earl of Portland and secretary Vernon, as well as what information they had obtained in regard to the treaties of partition of the Spanish monarchy. To this demand the lords demurred, and, returning no answer for six days, the commons applied to his majesty for copies of the treaty of the grand alliance, of the treaties of partition, and of the powers granted for negotiating these treaties. The copies were accordingly furnished by the king; but secretary Vernon informed the house that there were no instructions in writing. On this the commons had another conference with the lords, and they then received, through Sheffield, marquis of Normanby, and afterwards duke of Buckingham, two papers in Latin, the first containing full powers granted at Loo, July 1st, 1690, to the earls of Portland and Jersey to treat with France, Holland, and Germany for peace, but containing nothing regarding the Spanish succession; the second, dated at Kensington, January 2nd, 1690-1700, with full powers to sign the second treaty of partition. Normanby also handed to them a paper containing the following statement made in writing by the earl of Portland, when charged by them with acting in this negotiation. It was not, however, signed by him:—"At the beginning of the summer, '99, when I was in Holland at my country house, and when the king would have me be concerned in the negotiating of this treaty with the emperor, the French king and the States, being very unwilling to meddle with business again, from which I was retired, before I would engage myself I would advise with my friends in Holland, and writ into England to the secretary Vernon, as my particular friend, whether it was advisable for me to engage in any business again. To which Mr. Vernon answered in substance that it would not engage me but for a little while; that I, being upon the place and generally acquainted with the foreign ministers, it would be easier for the king, and properer for me to be employed in it than anybody else that must be otherwise sent for on purpose."

These and some other memorandums were ordered to be translated and laid before a committee, and, on examining these, the animus of the commons against Portland and Somers became glaringly apparent. Though it was shown that the earl of Jersey, Mr. Vernon, and Sir Joseph Williamson had been equally concerned in the management of the treaty—Williamson having actually signed it—yet these persons were carefully passed over, and the whole vial of wrath poured on the heads of Portland, Somers, Orford, and Halifax, the two latter being added to the accused. To procure fresh matter against them, the pirate, captain Kydd, was brought from Newgate, where he was now lying, and examined at the bar of the house. Burnet says, "Their enemies tried again what use could be made of Kydd's business, for he was taken in our northern plantations in America and brought over. He was examined by the house; but either he could not lay a probable story together, or remnants of honesty, raised in him by the near prospect of death, restrained him. He accused no person of having advised or encouraged his turning pirate; he had never talked alone with any of the lords, and never at all with lord Somers: he said he had no orders from them but to pursue his voyage against the pirates in Madagascar. All endeavours were used to persuade him to accuse the lords, he was assured that, if he did it, he should be preserved, and, if he did not, he should certainly die for his piracy. Yet this did not prevail on him to charge them; so he, with some of his crew, were hanged, there appearing not so much as a colour to fasten any imputation on those lords."

These lords and others, it will be recollected, had, at their own expense, sent out Kydd to put down the pirates, and when he had betrayed them, any treasure found on him or his ship was ordered to be paid over to them to reimburse them. This, too, was seized on as a crime, and contrary to the constitution, but it would not stand in law; and so far from attaching blame to them, the highest legal authorities declared that it was quite proper, and that their whole conduct in that business had been highly patriotic and meritorious. The conduct of Kydd also showed that though the fascination of a roving sea life had led him astray, as it had done the buccaneers, yet, like them, amid much crime, there was a fine, honest nature in the man, which made him prefer death to the baseness of accusing honourable men. So vindictively, however, did the commons adhere to this attempt to implicate such men as Portland and Somers in piracy and lawless plunder, that the matter was not dismissed until it had been four times debated, and then only by a small majority.

They then turned to a more legitimate argument. In consenting to act in a negotiation with foreign powers unknown to the cabinet, though known to several members of it, and though commanded by the king, they had fairly incurred the censure of parliament, as they had clearly sinned against the constitution. On this head they now resolved to impeach them, and on this ground alone they ought to have stood. Somers, in affixing the great seal to a carte blanche for the king to fill up in treaty with France and Holland as they might agree, and that only at the command of the king, had certainly committed a serious offence. The moment that he heard that the question of his impeachment was mooted in the commons, he desired to be heard at their bar. He was admitted, and stated in self-defence that when he received the king's letter with the order to send over the necessary powers with all secresy and despatch, he did not think he was authorised to put a stop by his refusal to a treaty of so much consequence, the life of the king of Spain hanging, as it were, by a thread; for had the king died before the treaty was finished, then he should have been blamed for defeating the treaty. That he considered the king's letter to be really a warrant; nevertheless, he had objected to various particulars, and proposed others which