that the Treasurer's obstinate perseverance in error had at length rendered his removal inevitable; but that wary minister adds, that they who had the most sanguine hopes of the final success of the Catholic cause were obliged to own that, at that moment, the public temper was inflamed and exasperated, and that the cry of the people was, that since Rochester was dismissed because he would not become a Catholic, there must be a design to expel all Protestants from office.

The fall of Rochester was preceded, and probably quickened, by an important change in the administration of Scotland, and it was also connected with a revolution in the government of Ireland, of both which events it is now necessary to relate the most important particulars.

.

CHAPTER IV.

SCOTLAND.

Administration of Queensberry.—Conversion of Perth.-Measures contemplated by the King.-Debates in Parliament on the King's Letter.-Proposed Bill of Toleration.-Unsatisfactory to James.-Adjournment of Parliament.-Exercise of

Prerogative.

IRELAND.

Character of Tyrconnel.-Review of the State of Ireland.—Arrival of Tyrconnel.— His Appointment as Lord Deputy.-Advancement of Catholics to Offices.-Tyrconnel aims at the Sovereign Power in Ireland.-Intrigues with France.

THE government of Scotland, under the episcopal ministers of Charles II., was such, that, to the Presbyterians, who formed the majority of the people, "their native country had, by the prevalence of prosecution and violence, become as insecure as a den of robbers." The chief place in the administration had been filled for some years by Queensberry, a man of ability, the leader of the Episcopal party, who, in that character as well as from a matri

a

D'Adda, 31 Dec. 1686 (10 Jan. 1687). Presentamente pare che gli animi suono inaspriti della voce che corre tra il popolo d'esser cacciato il detto ministro per non essere Cattolico, percio tirarsi al esterminio de Protestanti,

b Hume, c. ii. vii. 4th edit. 1757.

monial connexion between their families, was disposed to an union of councils with Rochester. Adopting the principles of his English friends, he seemed ready to sacrifice the remaining liberties of his country, but resolved to adhere to the Established Church. The acts of the first session in the reign of James are such as to have extorted from a great historian of calm temper, and friendly to the house of Stuart, the reflection that "nothing could exceed the abject servility of the Scotch nation during this period but the arbitrary severity of the administration." Not content with servility and cruelty for the moment, they laid down principles which would render slavery universal and perpetual, by assuring the King “that they abhor and detest all principles and positions which are contrary or derogatory to the King's sacred, supreme, absolute power and authority, which none, whether persons or collective bodies, can participate of, in any manner or on any pretext, but in dependence on him and by commission from him."e

d

But the jealousies between the King's party and that of the Church among the Scotch ministers were sooner visible than those between the corresponding factions in the English council, and they seem, in some degree, to have limited the severities which followed the revolt of Argyle. The privy council, at the intercession of some ladies of distinction, prevented the Marquis of Athol from hanging Mr. Charles Campbell, then confined by a fever, at the gates of his father's castle of Inverary; and it was probably by their representations that James was induced to recall instructions which he had issued to the Duke of Queensberry for the suppression of the name of Campbell, which would have amounted to a proscription of several noblemen, a considerable body of gentry, and the most numerous and powerful tribe in the kingdom. They did not, however, hesitate in the execution of the King's orders to dispense with the test in the case of four peers and twenty-two gentlemen, who were required by law to take it before they exercised the office of commissioners to assess the supply in their respective counties." The Earl of Perth, the Chancellor of Scotland, began now to attack Queensberry by means somewhat similar to those employed

e

Lord Drumlanerig, the son of Queensberry, had married Lady

the niece of Lady Rochester.

Acta Parl. viii. 459.-18th April, 1688.

d Fountainhall's Chron. Notes, i. 366.—16th July, 1685. • Warrant, 1st June, 1685. State Paper Office. Warrant, 7th Dec. 1685. State Paper Office.

b

Boyle,

Hume, James II. c. 1.

a

by Sunderland against Rochester. Queensberry had two years before procured the appointment of Perth, as it was believed, by a sum of 27,000l. of public money, to the Duchess of Portsmouth. Under a new reign, when that lady was by no means a favourite, both Queensberry and Perth apprehended a severe inquisition into this misapplication of public money. Perth, whether actuated by fear or ambition, made haste to consult his security and advancement by conforming to the religion of the court, on which Lord Halifax observed, that "his faith had made him whole." Queensberry adhered to the Established Church. The Chancellor soon began to exercise that ascendency which he acquired by his conversion, in such a manner as to provoke immediate demonstrations of the zeal against the Church of Rome, which the Scotch Presbyterians carried farther than any other reformed community. He issued an order against the sale of any books without license, which was universally understood as intended to prevent the circulation of controversial writings against the King's religion. Glen, a bookseller in Edinburgh, when he received this warning, said, that he had one book which strongly condemned popery, and desired to know whether he might continue to sell it. Being asked what the book was, he answered, "The Bible." Shortly afterwards the populace manifested their indignation at the public celebration of mass by riots, in the suppression of which several persons were killed. A law to inflict adequate penalties on such offences against the security of religious worship would have been perfectly just. But as the laws of Scotland had, however unjustly, made it a crime to be present at the celebration of mass, it was said, with some plausibility, that the rioters had only dispersed an unlawful assembly. The lawyers evaded this difficulty by the ingenious expedient of keeping out of view the origin and object of the tumults, and prosecuted the offenders, merely for rioting in violation of certain ancient statutes, some of which rendered that offence capital. This riot was pursued with such singular barbarity, that one Keith, who was not present at the tumult, was executed for having said, that he would help the rioters, and for having drank confusion. to all Papists, though he at thes ame time drank the health of the King, and though in both cases he only followed the example of the witnesses on whose evidence he was convicted. Attempts were vainly

b

Fountainhall, i. 390.-28th Jan. 1686.

a

made to persuade this poor man to charge Queensberry with being accessory to the riots, which he had freely ridiculed in private, That nobleman was immediately after removed from the office of treasurer, but he was at the same time appointed Lord President of the Council with a pension, that the court might retain some hold on him during the important discussions at the approaching session of parliament. The King communicated to the secret committee of the Scotch privy council his intended instructions to the commissioner relative to the measures to be proposed to parliament. They comprehended the repeal of the test, the abrogation of the sanguinary laws as far as they related to papists, the admission of these last to all civil and military employments, and the confirmation of all the King's dispensations, even in the reigns of his successors, unless they were recalled by parliament. On these terms he declared his willingness to assent to any law (not repugnant to these things) for securing the Protestant religion, the personal dignities, offices, and possessions of the clergy, and for continuing all laws against fanaticism. The privy council manifested some unwonted scruples about these propositions. James answered them angrily. Perplexed by this unexpected resistance, as well as by the divisions in the Scottish councils, and the 'repugnance shown by the Episcopalian party to any measure which might bring the privileges of Catholics more near to a level with their own, he commanded the Duke of Hamilton and Sir George Lockhart, President of the Court of Session, to come to London, with a view to ascertain their inclinations, and dispose them favourably to his objects, but under colour of consulting them on the nature of the relief which it might be prudent to propose for the members of his own communion. The Scotch negociators (for as such they seem to have acted) conducted the discussion with no small discretion and dexterity. They professed their readiness to concur in the. repeal of the penal and sanguinary laws against Catholics; observing, however, the difficulty of proposing to confine such an indulgence to one class of dissidents, and the policy of moving for a general toleration, which it would be as much the interests of Presbyterians as of Catholics to promote. They added, that it might be more politic not to propose the repeal of the test as a measure of government, but to leave it to the spontaneous disposition of

parliament, who would very probably repeal a law which in Scotland was aimed against Presbyterians as exclusively as it had in England been intended to exclude Catholics, or to trust to the King's dispensing power, which was there undisputed, as indeed every part of the prerogative was in that country held to be above question, and without limits. a

These propositions embarrassed James and his more zealous counsellors. The King struggled obstinately against the extension of the liberty to the Presbyterians. The Scotch counsellors required, that if the test were repealed, the King should bind himself by the most solemn promise to attempt no farther alteration or abridgment of the privileges of the Protestant clergy. James did not conceal from them his repugnance thus to confirm and to secure the establishment of a heretical church. He imputed the pertinacity of Hamilton to the insinuations of Rochester, and that of Lockhart to the still more obnoxious influence of his father-inlaw, Lord Wharton.b

The Earl of Murray, a recent convert to the Catholic religion, opened the parliament on the 29th of April, and laid before parliament a royal letter, which exhibited traces of the indecision and ambiguity which were the natural consequence of the unsuccessful issue of the conferences in London. He begins with holding out the temptation of a free trade with England, and after tendering an ample amnesty, proceeds to state, that while the King shows these acts of mercy to the enemies of his crown and royal dignity, he cannot be unmindful of his Roman Catholic subjects, who had adhered to the crown in rebellions and usurpations, though they lay under discouragements hardly to be named. He recommends them to the care of parliament, and desires that they may have the protection of the law and the same security with other subjects, without being laid under obligations which their religion will not admit of. "This love," he says, "we expect ye will show to your brethren, as you see we are an indulgent father to you all."e

At the next sitting an answer to the letter was voted, thanking the King for his endeavours to procure a free trade with England, expressing the utmost admiration of the offer of amnesty to such desperate rebels against so merciful a prince, and declaring, as

66