Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 10.djvu/111

, for whom the king's infatuation had become stronger than ever, is said to have proposed a strange scheme. The Duke of York was to be sent back to Scotland, and Monmouth brought over to England, a reconciliation being thus effected with the Prince of Orange at the cost of a change of policy towards France. But the precise history of this design remains obscure, and the part said to have been assigned to the Duchess of Portsmouth is highly improbable (, ii. 464–6;, i. 116–17; Secret History of Whitehall, letter lxxii.) It seems certain that Monmouth came over on a short visit, though statements differ as to whether he actually saw his father. Whatever speculations may have been rife as to the possibility of a change of policy both at home and abroad, they were cut short by the death of Charles II. Since his serious illness in 1679 the care which he took of his health had helped to prevent a relapse, though Luttrell, in May 1682, notes his having suffered at Windsor from a serious distemper (i. 190). On the night of 1 Feb. 1685 he had been supping with the Duchess of Portsmouth; next morning he was seized by an apoplectic fit. At first his malady seemed to give way to remedies, and the news of his recovery spread through the country, where it was received with demonstrations of joy (, 471–2). But on the night of the 4th he grew worse, and shortly before noon on the 6th he died (, i. 327). The narratives differ as to the question whether the queen attended his deathbed, at which the Duchess of Portsmouth seems certainly to have been present. An edifying account of the last words consciously spoken by Charles II was composed by his brother (, Life of James II, i. 749); the pathetic 'Let not poor Nelly starve !' has the authority of Burnet (ii. 478). The rumours which attributed his death to poison seem to have had no foundation (see Hatton Correspondence, ii. 61–4 ;, Original Letters, 2nd series, iv. 74–6 ; , ii. 376 n.; , ii. 473–8, and note to 476 on the opinion of the Duchess of Portsmouth; Examen and his Life of Lord Guilford, ii. 107. The whole evidence is well reviewed by , iii. 371–80). The remains of the king, which seem to have been exposed to unwarrantable neglect, were interred on 17 Feb. in Henry VII's chapel with solemnities that were thought inadequate (, i. 330 ;, 475–7). Doubtless not a few Englishmen moralised, after the fashion of Evelyn, over the end of Charles II in the midst, of such a court as his.

Charles II died a professed catholic. What there was of reverence in him — and it was little even in his boyhood (cf., Diary, 26) — had been driven out by the experiences of his earlier days. While he cared nothing for the church of England (, ii. 296) he hated presbyterianism (ib. i. 197); and notwithstanding his declarations of indulgence there is no sign that the persecutions of protestant nonconformity in his reign disturbed his peace of mind. Thus it is probable that he would have contented himself with 'a religion all of his own' had it not been for the repeated efforts made during his exile to lead him over to the church of Rome. There were rumours of communications from him to the pope when in Scotland in 1650, and again in 1662, which latter Whitelocke was said to have originally inserted in his 'Memoirs' and then torn out (Secret History of the Reigns of Charles II and James II,, 18); and Burnet asserts (i. 135) that in 1655 he was actually converted by Cardinal Retz, Lord Aubigny likewise having much to do with the matter (cf. , vii. 62–4). It would also seem that during his residence at Paris Olier, a zealous propagandist, had intercourse with Charles on the subject of religion (Vie de M. Olier, cit. in Gent. Mag. u. i.); and he was stated to have declared himself in private to be a catholic some time before the treaty of the Pyrenees in 1659 (, Life of Ormonde, cit. in, ii. 61 n.; cf. Somers Tracts, viii. 225). There can be little doubt that when Charles came back to England he was virtually a catholic, but there is no satisfactory evidence that he had ever actually been received into the church of Rome. His hesitation to declare himself after his restoration requires no explanation; of his strong catholic sympathies during the whole of its course there can be no doubt whatever. His two declarations of indulgence were passed for the benefit of his catholic subjects (, ii. 331), and his undertaking to France in the treaty of Dover was in consonance with his personal wishes. Shortly after his marriage he sent Sir Richard Bellings [q. v.] to Rome, one of whose commissions was to propose to Pope Alexander VII terms upon which the king and the nation should be reconciled to Rome. The negotiation was afterwards laid aside, but in August 1668, about the time when the Duke of York's conversion became known to him, Charles II corresponded with Oliva, the general of the jesuits at Rome, who sent to London a novice of his order. The instructions of this agent are unknown, but the transaction is all the more significant inasmuch as the young novice in question, who was known in Rome under the name of James La Cloche, was a natural son of Charles II, born to him