he that knows something knows all things In that Letter also 't is fit to observe that the King was sufficiently inform'd that the French desired Peace upon the Terms sent by the Secretary but thinks it not fit to stay till the Desire was formally receiv'd and the Embassadour as formally impower'd to propose for fear the time should be lost of effecting the Peace that is for fear the Market should be miss'd of contracting for so much Money as might secure against the Troubles of Parliaments for some years And if Adjournments and Prorogations have been the usual prudence certainly a well-bought Dissolution for three years at least must needs be thought admirable Politiques The second is That the Propositions were not originally the Kings but the Confederates so that the King was to gain nothing by making the Market either higher or lower and the French had often experience that his Majesty would not do otherways This second way of Arguing is as strenuous as the former and bears equal resemblance to the reason and nature of it for 't is still grounded upon the Propositions That they were originally the Confederates who at that time were too much discourag'd to hope or propose any thing equal to the Common Interest And therefore the Market was to be made up in the preventing that which might raise their spirits the meeting of Parliaments Which Mr. Coleman whose policy agreed with this Lords declares to be the Fountain of their Resolutions So that the Logick appears this There was no Markets to be made of the Propositions Ergo there was no Market to be made of Parliaments The third continues in the same Method which is laid down as a full justification of his Majesties Honour in that point and that he had no designe of getting the Money for the purposes suggested against the Earl of Danby for in that case he would not have considered the gain or loss of the Confederates And Mr. Mountague is expresly forbidden in the Letter to mention the Money at all in case the French King did not accept those very Propositions of the Confederates and in the Terms as his Majesty recelv'd them from his Embassadour at the Hague This Argument also is like the rest grounded upon the Propositions and is made to prove that the Money was not designed for ill purposes because there was so great a care expressed of sticking entirely to the Propositions Sure he forgets that but a little before he says That this Lord in his Letter assures him that they were sufficiently inform'd the French desired Peace upon those Propositions It seems strange then that the justness of sticking to them should be so insisted upon when the French had given their permission by the approbation of them I wish that in this Paragraph the Argument and respect for his Majesties Honour had been better defended or wholly let alone but first to bring the Kings Honour in question and then to argue so ill in the defence of it was two great though not equal Crimes for no guilt but Treason can exceed or equal that of too boldly medling with that sacred Subject The Fourth is a new sort of Argument from the last words of the Letter where the Earl tells Mr. Mountague That he believes that would be the last time any Proposals of Peace would be made and that he is confident they will not be accepted wherefore he might accordingly take the Kings Measures and his own How to apply this Argument for any use to this Lord I know not it onely expresses an apprehension or opinion That the Proposals would not be accepted sure he cannot mean the Proposals that he says were received from the Confederates for those he was informed were desir'd by the French it could be onely the Propositions for the Money that probably gave the apprehensions of the refusal After these four Observations he proceeds to that expression about the Parliament which he supposes has been a principal Cause of giving them offence and plainly avows that he has heard this Lord say That His Majesty caused that expression to be used onely for a Motive to perswade the King of France to give a greater Sum than Six Millins of Livers which then had been offered and because otherways in the ill posture things then stood betwixt the two Kings the French King might suspect whether the King of England would agree to any Peace at all And these being the whole Contents of the Letter and it being writ by His Majesties express Order you will easily conclude this Lord could not be so hardly prosecuted for that onely were there no other Causes for it when in truth he believes there are very few Subjects but would take it ill not to be obeyed by their Servants and their Servants might as justly expect their Masters protection for their Obedience Before I enter upon the Argument of this Paragraph 't is fit that I should first avoid the Crime that I presume to Condemn in this Lord for if I should endeavour to prove the thing to be ill in its own nature and by silence leave the King entituled to it I should share the guilt so common to this Lord I will therefore first endeavour to do my self that Justice which the law does the Nation to separate the King from wrong or dishonour and I will after in a more proper place examine the Argument drawn from Obedience I need not go about to prove the well-known Maxime of the Law That the King can do no wrong and if he cannot be liable to do wrong none can entitle him to be the Author of wrong done and this is not onely matter of Law but grounded upon Prudence and Necessity for to allow it to be possible that a King could do wrong and yet that he is accountable to none but God were to grant there is a mischief without the Compass of the Laws and 't were rational if the King could commit the offence that he should be subject to Men to judge the punishment therefore justly 't is said of the Antient Lawyer Bracton who wrote in Hen. 3. time Ipse autem Rex non debet esse sub homine sed sub Deo c. and by the same reason the Kings Honour is as little subject to Men as his person accordingly the Act of the 13th of the King expresses a care of the Preservation of His Majesty by declaring That in his Honour and Happiness consisted the good and welfare of his people so that of consequence any one that attributes dishonour to the King is an Offender against the good and welfare of the people On the other side if any Favourite or Councellor should be discharged from ill Actions or Counsels by charging the King with the allowance or knowledge of them what an encouragement might this be for guilty men and what an Asylum to fly too when the guilt is committed In the same Act there is a heavy sentence on any that shall
say the King is a Papist or shall any ways by Word or Writing publish or utter any thing to incite people to the hatred or dislike of the Kings Person I would desire any to consider whether any of these Crimes would be answered by Pleading that what was said was spoken by the Kings knowledge and allowance it would appear the King that can do no wrong cannot avow the wrong done to him and his people If this should appear rigorous to any let them but equally compare the inconveniencies on both sides and it will appear by this way some particular men of shaken Consciences and Principles may suffer by their own folly but by the other way the Publick may suffer under the protected guilt of a few Corrupted or Ambitious persons And since in all Ages it appears how soft men are to the Impressions of Wealth and Power how just will it seem there should be no excuse for ill Councils and those that will undertake the care of great things ought to bear the weight and hazard of the Employment This would increase the care of doing well and opposing ill and great men would find it better and safer to depend upon their own Vertues than on their Flatteries and Truth will then appear the best Policy when Falshood becomes the greatest danger And I will venture to adde this farther Remark That this Lord has been bolder in this way than ever any Subject was and it looks like an ill return to his Gracious and Bountiful Master that he never entitles him to any thing for his Honour but as I observed before in the business of the Goldsmiths he wholly attributes the good Action to himself and would make the Kings Treasure purchase his honour and esteem I have heard of such generous Friends that have charg'd themselves with their Friends Misfortunes to make themselves capable to suffer for them but this Lord has not acted so for his King but on the contrary would fix ill things on him for if what was charg'd upon him had been avowable there was no need to make any other Plea than what might proceed from the nature of the thing This brings me to consider the Expression about the Parliament which he might justly indeed suppose had been a principal cause of giving offence Having now with just duty separated the King from the concern of this matter I dare proceed to consider it with the reason of the Paragraph I agree with the Author That the Clause that gave the Parliament Offence he might have added and every English-man that read it besides was this In case the Conditions of the Peace shall be accepted the King expects to have Six Millions of Livres yearly for three years from the time that this agreement shall be signed betwixt His Majesty and the King of France because it will be two or three years before he can hope to find his Parliament in an humour to give him Supplies after the having made any Peace with France The reason given for this Clause is remarkable That it was inserted onely for a Motive to perswade the King of France to give a greater Sum than six Millions of Livres because otherwise in the ill posture things stood in the French King might suspect whether the King of England would agree to any Peace at all I cannot imagine the force of this Argument unless it be to shew That there was no Motive to the French King to give Money largely nor to make him believe the King of England was firm to him but the Conditions of keeping off Parliaments How clearly does it now appear That this way onely the French believed their Interest was to be supported and as if the old Arts of Adjournments and Prorogations had not been sufficient it is projected now to let a Lease of Parliaments to the French for three years and 't is reasonably guest they would have been out of humour to grant Supplies when Supplies were gotten from others to destroy them but how after three years the Parliament should be brought in humour is not to be supposed 't is more probable that the Lease would have been renewed The next Objection to this Letter he says has been That it was Writ the 25th of March 78. which was five days after the Parliament had past an act to raise Money for an actual War with France This is confest to be true but Answered First That an Act to raise Money for a War is no Declaration of the War But that Act was grounded upon a Message from the King to the Parliament for an Actual War and 't was so declared to be by one of the Secretaries in the House of Commons but now 't will be hard for this impartial Friend to advise his Lord which to stand to whether the King was Author of the Message sent by the Secretary or of the Clause in his Letter for sure though he has been very bold with the King yet he would not make him own Contradictions at the same time The second is That till such Declaration all Treaties are lawful and even then too if the King pleases in whom the sole power of making Peace and War is made by Law There is no question but in the time of War declared the King may treat of Peace but whether this Lord may treat for it in such a way as by the clause of the Letter is the more proper Question Thirdly he says That the Kings Embassadours were then at Nimegen treating of Peace and were indeed never recall'd nor forbidden to treat the Peace and can it be thought a fault for a Minister to obey the Kings Orders at home on the same Subject upon which other Ministers were acting at the same time abroad This is the usual manner of Arguing but it it affords some new matter of Answer which arises from observing that the Ministers abroad treated upon the same Subject as this Lord did at home which implies they all treated for so much Money to be the price of Parliaments or else this Minister may be in fault though the others were not But I suppose the Ministers were not so bold upon this point abroad as this Minister was at home and if not the Argument is at an end The fourth Argument is composed of no new matter till at the latter end 't is said That had it been a Crime his Majesties Embassadour at Paris must be in as much if not more fault to have obeyed the Kings Orders at second hand as this Lord was to obey his Majesties immediate Commands from his own mouth and signed by his hand I have before taken notice how little it adds or diminishes to any Offence to compare it with what others have committed it being onely just and proper that every thing should bear its own weight But if it were not so I should not trouble my self to dispute whether the same fault was greatest in the first or second concoction but possibly the
not give this Lord time to reduce things in such a posture as might be wisht and makes a Query Whether it be not the most unsafe as well as most unjust practice for a Nation to discourage such Ministers as endeavour to draw their Master to his Kingdoms Interest Here the Impartial Author lays the Foundation of his ensuing Arguments and resolving to Charge this Lords Crimes on the King he first boldly attempts to make him a fit Subject to bear it and to lessen his own Impeachment draws up one against his Soveraign That he had forsaken the Interest of his Kingdom and wanted this Lord to draw him to it With this gratitude he seldom fails to pay his Majesty in every particular and having declar'd what a profest Enemy this Lord was to the French Interest believing it destructive to this Nation he desires That the Proceedings of this Lord may be impartially considered Page 9. and see whether they have not all tended to the diminishing the French Interest since his time and if it have diminish'd it will be hard to finde who else there was besides himself neer his Majesty who had power and inclination to do it c. The Issue then to be joyn'd is upon the Question begg'd Whether the French Interest was diminish'd by this Lords Proceedings but it will easily be granted that 't would be hard to finde any neer his Majesty besides himself that had power And then I hope if it appears that the French Interest grew enlarg'd in his days 't is as reasonable to apply his Power and Inclination to be the Causes of it as it is for his impartial Friend to use them for the contrary I will pass over some Instances he gives which cannot amount to the proof of the whole as the breaking the League with France Peace made with the Dutch the Duke of Monmouth call'd from the French Service the Match with the Prince of Orange all which are attributed to this Lord as the Custom is of any reputed Good At which I will not quarrel because I have yielded the point that he had all Power but I will onely put him in mind of the Address from Parliament to the King to recall the Forces from France and the Bills pass'd in several Sessions to that purpose even in those years when the French so clearly ow'd Success to the English and the Marriage of the Lady Mary unless the Consequences had been happier might rather be thought the disposer of the Prince of Orange to the Peace that follow'd than be a prejudice to the Interest of France which prosper'd most after it In the same Paragraph 't is said That every one knows that this Match altered the mindes of the Duke of York and Duke of Monmouth that from being the greatest Asserters of the French Interest they became as forward as any for the War of France And this Conversion it seems assisted by the Power and Inclination of this Lord brought on the Actual War with France for which the Parliament gave their Money and by this we see it own'd that all were French but this Lord and people not so mistaken it seems that have been constantly jealous of it But whether the Dukes of York and Monmouth have reason to thank him for declaring their Conversions I know not since he condemns them for an errour which we found ill effects of but none on the contrary by the Conversion and then he says the King had good intentions c. which implies that he never had any good before as if he had now drawn him to his Kingdoms Interest And as this Lord was pleas'd to order it he never appears to have better after it for whatever he is accus'd of he charges upon the King and acts as if agreed with what he pretended to know of the Opinion of the French Vid. His Speech in the House of Lords at his Charge that they had the Kings Person and Government in the last degree of Contempt I know not whether that Lord shrunk when he spoke those words in the House of Peers but next the owning of such an Opinion of the King 't was an audacious Crime to own a Belief that any could retain such a Judgment of him I hope this Lord is the onely person that thinks it either probable or possible But leaving this point with blushes to have repeated such a thing I will set down some general Observations of Publick Affairs which will best shew whether the Diminution or Increase of the French Interest was likely to be intended or effected in his time In the first place to lay a Foundation to build upon I suppose it may be taken for granted that the Parliament did ever appear warmly averse to that Interest and of consequence must give the greatest apprehensions to the French that from them might proceed the onely fatal Opposition and which was not probably to be diverted either by Skill or Money In March 76 the Commons in Parliament presented an Address most humbly offering to his Majesties consideration That the mindes of his People were disquieted with the manifest dangers arising by the Growth and Power of the French King c. And therefore humbly presented their Desires that his Majesty would strengthen Himself with stricter Alliances to quiet the mindes of his People and preserve the Netherlands The Kings Answer agreed That the preservation of Flanders was of great consequence But it seems not being thought particular enough it begot a second Address on March the 26th wherein they again more strictly prest the King to enter into such Alliances as might obtain those Ends. And in case that in pursuance of such Alliances his Majesty should be engaged in a War with the French King they promise chearfully upon notice of it in Parliament so to supply the King as that he might prosecute the same with success And in their Address of the 29th of Jan. 77 they humbly desired no Treaty but such a one as might put the French King in no better an Estate than he was after the Pyrenean Treaty This sufficiently shew'd the temper of the Parliament and their Judgment That War it self was more suitable to the Interest of England than the growth of the French Power But this begot great Debates and shew'd so many influenc'd that they appear'd ill Witnesses for the boasted Power and Inclination and presently after while things of this great nature here had heavie motions the frontier Towns were taken as Valenciennes and St. Omers c. I will not delay to set down the particular Reasons and Arguments that were raised against this constant Sense of the Parliament nor the sharp Reprehensions they sometimes received from the Notions of their too-much invading the Kings sole Power in Peace and War It shall suffice to observe That those Reprehensions Arguments and Delays did not seem to tend to the Diminution of the French Interest But to proceed to make it yet more clear that
the growth of the French Interest and Power was nourisht in the time of this Lords Power and Inclination let it be fairly Examined what Proceedings here could most favour their growing Interest I will presume then to assert That nothing could contribute more to it than all means used to hinder the Parliaments engaging the King according to their judgment and probably since it appeared that notwithstanding all opposition by Debates and displeasure shewed to some of the Addresses they rather grew more warm than cooler in the pursuit what was left but frequent Prorogations and Adjournments to divert the weighty Stream of the Parliament from running with unresistible violence against the French Interest Mr. Coleman was of this opinion as plainly appears in his long Letter where he saies that it was their dependancy on the Parliament that encouraged the Confederates to continue the War and that their Dissolution would break all their Measures and there says that the good Father he writ to before so concurred in his Politiques that he assured him the King of France would assist it with his Power and Purse Colemans Tryal pag. 40. and a little after gives an Account of the useful Prorogation to the 13th of April being to a day so high in the Spring that the thrifty Monsieur Rovigny thought would put the Confederates beyond their Measures Page 48. and it appears this Lord concurr'd also in their Politiques that a Prorogation or Adjournment was ever a help at a Pinch for in his Letter to Mr. Mountague dated the 7th of Jan. 77 8. he says That the principal cause of the Adjournment for Thirteen days was to see if an Expedient for Peace might be found in that time and the effect of the Adjournment hath hitherto been that no body will believe other than that the Peace is already Concluded betwixt us and France I will not here set down the frequent Adjournments and Prorogations that were made but onely observe they kept pace with the Success of the French and were most frequent when they were most prosperous and that this hapned in the years 77 and 78. when the Power and Inclination was boasted of and in the same years the French grew so enlarged with Success that it is improbable any but the Concerned Party should immediately affirm that this Lords proceedings tended to the diminishing the French Interest in his time Since then the contrary so clearly appears That in this Lords time the French Interest grew so enlarged I hope it will seem more proper to give the words their true application and to say If it thus increas'd it will be hard to find who else there was near His Majesty who had power and inclination to do it I come now to the last great particular of this Lords Proceedings towards the diminishing the French Interest viz. The Letter which was produced to the House of Commons and hastned or rather necessitated by this Lords Power and Inclination for 't were hard to find any other about His Majesty that could or would have endeavoured to have Mr. Mountagues Cabinets so violently seized and had he believed as his Impartial Friend affirms That the Letter might justly have born a wise and useful Construction both to the King and Kingdom he would not by so unusual a violence have implyed a guilt in his own opinion which is confirmed by that Secresie he enjoyns the Embassadour to use in the Negotiation for fear of giving offence at home I will here continue my Method not to delay upon arguing Particulars and Circumstances where the right judgment must be drawn from the general which is the subject matter it self as that Mr. Montague confesses great Honour in this Lord and that by a Letter to the King himself says That the Earl of Danby might have had more than ever he got by being Lord Treasurer if he would have prevailed with the King to agree to the Propositions of the French King and a little after cryes That if the Ministers intended the setting up an Arbitrary Power at home they would certainly neither have disobliged the French King as they have done nor refused his Money What Character Mr. Mountague gives this Lord in former Letters or what opinion the French had of him was onely lyable to a Reflection made by a Member of the House of Commons when the Letters were read That if the French had an apprehension that this Lord was not once their Friend he was confident his own Letters shewed that they had reason now to have a kinder opinion of him What the Letter to the King himself was how my Lord of Danby might have got Money we know not but it appears by his Letter now that Money would have been accepted but for the last Assertion That the Ministers had disobliged the French needs no confutation but what has been said of the whole course of things which I fear they will never be so just to repay England by Counsels as weak as those which so much contributed to their Successes From these Arguments he concludes That it would puzzle the most uncharitable Censurer to find another cause than their unwillingness to enslave their Country why Money from the French was refused If this be a good consequence That to accept French Money is to enslave the Nation I hope it follows that the Sum of Six Millions of Livres yearly to be paid for three years and offered to be accepted was for the same purpose The last Evidences instead of Coffee-houses is now offered from Gazettes and the Dutchess of Mazarines Lodgings the first declares the ill-will the French had for this Lord and the other being a place where the present French Ambassadour is apt to speak more freely he used such Discourses as would convince any man c. If the French Gazettes gave such an Account of him 't is answered as the other was That they had no such occasion now and for the other proof I have heard that the Dutchess of Mazarines Chamber has been more used to the free Discourses of the Confederate Ministers than the French Embassadours But among these weighty Arguments and Evidences I wonder 't is omitted that this Lord drunk a Confusion to the French at the late Bishop of Canterbury's house at dinner and I think it as full and cogent as most of the others But I am now brought close to the matter by being desired to observe four things First That the Propositions sent was onely a Copy of what Mr. Montague was to receive from the Secretary so that the thing it self was no Secret to them This Argument seems very strange because the Secretaries knew of the Propositions for the Peace which was likewise known to the Forreign Ministers Ergo the treating for so much Money for three years to beget a right temper in Parliaments was no Secret to them neither though enjoyn'd to be so especially to the Secretary The Logick would be as good to conclude That