Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 37.djvu/353

 

MIDDLESEX,. [See, 1575–1645.]

MIDDLETON. [See also .]

MIDDLETON,. [See .]

MIDDLETON, CHARLES, second and titular  (1640?–1719), secretary of state to James II, born about 1640, was eldest son of John, first earl of Middleton [q. v.], by his wife Grizel, daughter of Sir James Durham of Pitkerrow, and widow first of Sir Alexander Fotheringham of Ballindrone, and secondly of Sir Gilbert Ramsay of Balmain. He accompanied his father in his highland campaign against Cromwell in 1653–4, and after his defeat at Lochgarry escaped with him to France. At the Restoration he was appointed by Charles II envoy extraordinary to the court of Vienna. In 1673 he succeeded his father in the earldom of Middleton, but not in the estates, which were all seized by creditors.

Middleton was one of those who in May 1682 accompanied James, duke of York, in the Gloucester frigate, to bring the duchess from Scotland, and when the frigate was wrecked on the Yorkshire coast made his escape in the small boat [see ]. Shortly afterwards he was sworn a member of the Scottish privy council; on 26 Sept. was appointed joint secretary of Scotland with the Earl of Moray; on 11 July 1684 was sworn a privy councillor of England; on the 15th of the same month was admitted an extraordinary lord of session of Scotland; and on 25 Aug. was appointed to succeed Godolphin as secretary of state for England. In February 1686 he resigned the office of extraordinary lord of session in favour of his brother-in-law, Patrick Lyon, first earl of Strathmore [q. v.]

After the accession of King James in 1685 Middleton, who on 15 April was returned member for Winchelsea (Official Return of Members of Parliament, i. 556), was entrusted, along with Richard Graham, viscount Preston [q. v.], with the chief management of the House of Commons. By his ‘good judgment and lively apprehension’ (, Own Time, ed. 1838, p. 384) he succeeded, perhaps as well as any other could, in covering the more glaring errors and defects of the blundering and ill-fated policy of the king. Although his wife was a catholic, he himself ‘was without much religion’ (ib.), and as long as James reigned in England withstood every effort of James to convert him to catholicism. A priest sent by James to instruct him in the principles of the old faith began with transubstantiation, and as a first step in his argument said, ‘You believe the Trinity?’ upon which Middleton replied, ‘Who told you so?’ (ib. p. 435).

In the first parliament of James, Middleton adopted every possible expedient to secure the support of the commons to the proposal for a standing army, and to overcome the opposition to the infringements of the Test Act; but at the same time he was well aware of the dangers attending the purpose on which the king was bent, and did his utmost to induce him to consent to a compromise. In such circumstances it was probably owing chiefly to his wife's influence with the queen that he was retained in office, but he justified the confidence reposed in him by remaining faithful to James to the last. After the king's sudden withdrawal to Feversham he declined to attend the meeting of the lords and privy council called to consider the steps to be taken in the crisis (, Life of James II, ii. 259). Nevertheless he was one of the four nobles deputed by them to invite the king to return to Whitehall, and was present with him at Whitehall when a message came from the Prince of Orange that James should retire from London. At the king's request he arranged for his withdrawal to Rochester. Subsequently he waited on the king there to surrender the seals of the secretary's office, and endeavoured to induce him to abandon his projected flight and to summon a parliament. It was to him that the king, after making his secret escape, left the paper containing his reasons for ‘withdrawing himself from England.’

On the flight of the king Middleton remained in England, but did not come to terms with the new government. He was practically the head of the less extreme section of the Jacobites known as the ‘compounders,’ and made it his chief aim to set on foot a movement for a restoration, accompanied by guarantees which would have restrained James from persevering in his former fatal policy. How far he sincerely believed in the possibility of restraining him by any guarantees is, however, doubtful. Yet there is no reason to suppose that he had any connection with the earlier plots to effect his restoration by force, although at the time of