Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

could persuade the Earl of Essex to comply, and ended with entreating Hyde to employ persuasions to the same effect. Essex coming up, Bedford left them alone together, and, falling upon the pending bill of attainder, Hyde observed that "there was a disagreement upon the point of treason, but if they declined that, they should all agree that there were crimes and misdemeanors evidently enough proved to deserve so severe a censure as would absolutely take away all power from the Earl of Strafford that might prove dangerous to the kingdom." Essex's laconic reply was,-"Stone-dead hath no fellow." But Hyde might surely oblige the Earl of Bedford by sounding a powerful leader of the popular party in the Lords, as to the expediency of a less rigorous course against the great state delinquent, without having altered his own opinion that he should suffer as a traitor; and we must ever remember that if he had taken a different part from Lord Falkland upon this subject, his name would have been among "the Straffordians." It certainly does astonish us that such men, however they may have condemned the conduct of Strafford, could bring themselves to believe that he was guilty of the crime of high treason; for they could hardly have been deceived by the wicked sophistry of St. John, that an attempt to subvert the fundamental laws of the kingdom was high treason at common-law, and still remains so,-or by the base opinion delivered by the Judges, that this amounts to high treason under the statute of Edward III. But we ought to decide upon acts according to the notions of the enlightened and the honorable in the times when they were committed, and we must be slow to reprobate the execution of Strafford, which was approved by Hyde and by Falkland.'

1 Hist. Reb. b. i.

Although the King's death was the act of a small section, that of Strafford was with the consent of the great bulk of the nation. The recent publication, by the Camden Society, of Sir Ralph Verney's notes, taken in pencil during the Long Parliament, affords convincing evidence of the strong part taken by Hyde against the Court.

CHAPTER LXXV.

CONTINUATION OF THE LIFE OF LORD CLARENDON TILL HE WAS SENT TO BRISTOL WITH THE CHARGE OF PRINCE CHARLES.

I

N the "History of the Rebellion" there is strong, and I think just, censure thrown upon the bill which was next brought forward "for the perpetual parliament," as it was afterwards called; but there is as little doubt that "the noble Historian" not only acquiesced in it, but applauded it. He says, "it is not credible what an universal reception and concurrence it met with, although it was to remove the landmarks and to destroy the foundation of the kingdom." The truth is, that he and others saw the mischiefs which arise from abrupt dissolutions, but were blind to the dangers of an irresponsible oligarchy uncontrollable by constitutional means-to be overthrown only by military despotism. It is deeply to be regretted that the reasonable amendment, carried in the Lords, was rejected by the Lower House,-limiting the operation of the bill to two years, within which time it might have been reasonably expected that all grievances might be redressed, and all constitutional controversies adjusted,—so that the power of dissolving the parliament might be safely restored to the Crown.

But although Hyde was carried away by the general impulse-when the bill had passed, he soon saw "that the Commons now that they could not be dissolved without their own consent (the apprehension and fear whereof had always before kept them within some bounds of modesty), they called any power they pleased to assume to themselves a branch of their privileges of which they were the only proper judges." He now changed his party, but (I must say), without being at all liable to the imputation of a change from mercenary motives, which

1 Hist. Reb. b. i. The House resolved, on the motion of Sergeant Wilde, "that when they had declared what was the law of the land, it was a breach of their privileges that it should not be obeyed;" and this doctrine they applied even to their right to issue orders to raise troops in the King's name to fight against his person.

He did

is conveyed by the modern word "ratting." not, like Wentworth, barter his principles for preferment and power. He thought, very plausibly, that enough had been done to redress grievances, and that the danger now was from popular usurpation, much more than from an extension of prerogative. Whatever opinion might be entertained of the King's sincerity or secret inclinations, the royal assent had been given to statutes which, in some measure, adapted the constitution to the actual circumstances of the country. And although there was a pestilent set of lawyers, who contended that acts of parliament limiting the prerogative were not binding, the same national energy which had extorted these acts would have been ready to defend them. Hyde threw his weight into the royal scale, that it might not kick the beam. He says that his resolution was much strengthened by conversations he had about this time with some of the popular leaders who betrayed their anti-monarchical views. "I do not think one man wise enough to govern us all," said Henry Martin, and Fiennes, at this time a furious presbyterian, told him "that there were many who would encounter the worst extremities of civil war if the King should resist the abolition of episcopacy, for that there was a great number of good men who wished to lose their lives before they would ever submit to that government." "

It was upon a church question that he split with his old friends. After the failure of the first attempt to exclude the Bishops from parliament, a Select Committee had reported, "That the legislative and judicial power of Bishops in the House of Peers is a great hindrance to the discharge of their spiritual functions, prejudicial to the Commonwealth, and fit to be taken away." Against a bill founded on this resolution, Hyde made an earnest speech, arguing that it went to change the whole frame and constitution of the kingdom, and of the parliament itself.

Lord Falkland defended it—according to Hyde-as the only expedient to save the church, but dealt by no means tenderly with the arguments of his friend against it, and boldly insisted that both on spiritual and civil considerations the Bishops ought to be excluded.

1 Life, i. 92.

This encounter in debate did not interrupt their friendship. After the difference of opinion between them had for a short time extended to some matters of minor importance, it entirely vanished, and they continued ever after politically, as well as personally, united, for there was now manifested a clear intention to upset the Church and the Monarchy.

The bill for excluding the Bishops from parliament having passed the Commons, it was followed by a bill "for the utter abolishing and taking away of all Archbishops, Bishops, their Chancellors and Commissioners, Deans and Chapters, Archdeacons, Prebendaries, Choristers, and Canons, and other under Officers, out of the Church of England." This Hyde strenuously opposed, but the second reading was carried by a majority of 139 to 108. When it got into a committee of the whole House,-by way of a manœuvre, that he might be silenced, he was placed in the chair; but he, considering counter-manœuvring pious in such a cause, tells us, that by dexterous management as Chairman, he was enabled greatly to obtruct it, and as it contained clauses for the new government of the Church, about which few were agreed, it had made but little progress when parliamentary proceedings were suspended by the King's journey into Scotland."

Before then an event had taken place which had a powerful influence on the destiny of Hyde. He had held no intercourse with the Court, and there, till very lately, he had been regarded with bitter aversion. But one day, while the "Episcopacy Abolition Bill" was in Committee, he was informed by Mr. Percy, brother of the Earl of Northumberland, that the King desired to speak with him. He went, and the following is his account of the interview, written, however, many years after. Charles told him "that he heard from all hands how much he was beholden to him, and that when all his servants in the 12 Parl. Hist. 725, 792, 814, 916.

While this committee was sitting, he continued on terms of great courtesy with the promoters of the bill. He says, "the House keeping those disorderly hours, and seldom rising till after four of the clock in the afternoon, they frequently importuned him to dine with them at Mr. Pym's lodging, which was at Sir Richard Manby's house, in a little court behind Westminster Hall, where he and Mr. Hampden, Sir Arthur Hazelrig, and two or three more, upon a stock kept a table where they transacted much business, and invited thither those of whose conversion they had any hope."-It ap pears that Hyde often accepted the invitation.-Life, i. 80.

House of Commons either neglected his service or could not appear usefully in it, he took all occasion to do him service; for which he thought fit to give him his own thanks, and to assure him that he would remember it to his advantage. The King took notice of his affection for the Church, for which he said he thanked him more than all the rest, which the other acknowledged with all the duty that became him, and said that he was very happy that his Majesty was pleased with what he did; but if he had commanded him to have withdrawn his affection and reverence for the Church, he would not have obeyed him, which, his Majesty said, made him love him the better. Then he discoursed of the passion of the House, and of the bill then brought in against Episcopacy, and asked him whether he thought they would be able to carry it? To which he answered, that he believed they could not; at least, that it would be very long first. 'Nay,' replied the King, if you will look to it, that they do not carry it before I go for Scotland, which will be when the armies are disbanded, I will undertake for the Church after that time.' Why, then,' said the other, 'by the grace of God, it will not be in much danger.' With which the King was well pleased, and dismissed him with very gracious expressions.'

[ocr errors]

Hyde was now a regular adherent to the royal cause, and if we forget the insincerity of Charles and the supposed necessity of imposing harder conditions for securing what had been obtained, we should be disposed severely to blame those who wished still further to humble the Crown: but Hampden and Whitelock, who were attached to the constitution, and who, at the opening of the parliament, had hardly differed from any sentiment of Hyde and Falkland, remained unsatisfied; and as they well knew the character of the King and the circumstances of the times, we must be slow to blame the course which they adopted. It led in the result to civil war; but if Charles had been allowed quietly to carry into effect his plans in Scotland, and with a well supplied treasury to support an army in England,-all the bills to which he had recently assented might have been treated like the Petition of Right; he might have wreaked the vengeance which he certainly meditated upon the popular leaders; and he

1 Life, i. 93.

« AnteriorContinuar »