Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub
[graphic]

If our readers agree with us, that the comparison of the foregoing passages affords satisfactory proof, that Macpherson certainly copied the Life in a place where the Life did not copy the Memoirs, they will not require many observations on one or two examples of that writer's mode of quotation which remain to be produced.

In Ist Macph. State Papers, Vol. I. p. 146, we find an anecdote of Sheldon informing James, in the presence of Lord Sunderland, that he (Sheldon) was directed by Monmouth to acquaint the King that Lord Sunderland had promised to meet him,' in order to join the insurrection. But Macpherson withholds from us the important information, that this anecdote, so extremely improbable in itself, rests only on the testimony of the anonymous writer of James's Life, which he has not thought fit to support by any reference to the King's own Memoirs.

The extract (!st Macph. p. 143), in which King William is charged with prompting Monmouth to invade England to serve his own purposes, the reader will also find to be almost a literal transcript of the Life, and in a part of which the general laboured and declamatory style excludes the supposition of a copy from the Journals.--2d Life James II. p. 25.

It is but justice to observe, that his own language on this subject, which is copied in the next page (2d Life James II. p. 26.) from a MS. called · King James's Loose Sheets,'* is much more cautious, and indeed strictly limited to information said to be received from Holland, that the expeditions of Monmouth and Argyll were countenanced by the Prince of Orange. Monmouth's own letter to James, imploring for mercy, disproves the story; for he appeals to the Prince and Princess of Orange as witnesses of the assurance which he gave them, that he would not stir against the King.' In a note to 1st Macph. State Papers, p. 144, is the following bold assertion_Monmouth confessed every thing to Sheldon. He discovered the intrigues of the Prince of Orange, and of his own abettors in England.' What colour there is for the most important part of this assertion, we cannot venture to conjecture. We have in vain looked for any such story in Macpherson's Extracts, or in the present Life. If other searchers should not be more fortunate, it will be unnecessary to make farther animadversions upon the historical character of Macpherson. Even in a part of the narrative which is copied from the King's Memoirs, that which relates to the supposed project of Lord Churchill, to carry the King prisoner from Warminster to the Dutch camp, Macpherson has two omissions, both of which are suspicious. The King tells us, that this project was generally believed afterwards. Macpherson omits afterwards. He suppresses also the mitigating reflection with which the anecdote is terminated, not indeed by the King, but by the biographer—perhaps they might pretend that it was not with intention to have done him any personal harm, only force him to consent to what they thought reasonable.

* This MS. appears to have formed the tenth volume of the Me. moirs which related to the events of James's own reign.

The curious narrative of the negotiations of Lord Preston and Mr Bulkeley with the English jacobites in 1691, deserves both a closer examination and a more minute comparison with Macpherson's Extracts, than we have now space or leisure to bestow upon it. There is one somewhat remarkable phrase common to Macpherson's Extracts, and to the present works. James's partisans are said in both to have been content " that he might live a Catholic in devotion, but must reign a Protestant in government." This antithesis savours so much more of the style of a compiler, than of the negligent diction of a familiar Journal, that it might be considered in itself as a strong presumption of the Extracts having been made from the Life. To this internal evidence it must be added, that the passage does not profess to be in any respect taken from the original Memoir ;-that scarcely any political memoirs were written by James after his return from Ireland, as we learn from Nairn ; I

† All those memoirs of passages which occurred before his last escape out of England, have been happily preserved, though they were writ on several loose papers, and they may possibly serve hereafter for making a complete and authentic history of his whole life ; they being safely kept by H. M. order in the library of the Scotch College at Paris. But these writ by him since the Reyolution are of a quite different nature.- In these he describes what passed within his soul, filled with sentiments of repentance and devotion. Nairn in 1st Macph. State Papers, p. 246.

From this passage, in which the author speaks of the King as dead, we learn, with absolute certainty, Ist, That the Life was not then composed : 2d, That the King left very few materials for the latter part of it; so that the want of quotation or reference is more fatal to the authority of assertions which relate to this period, than to that of allegations equally unsupported in former portions of the work: 3d, That Macpherson's assertion in p. 260, that the observa. tions on the treaty of Ryswick in 1697, though written by another hand, were done under James's inspection, and corrected by him. self,' is demonstrated to be false by the note of Nairn, which Macpherson himself has published.

[graphic]

--and that, agreeably to that information, we do not find above nine or ten references to his Memoirs in that part of this narrative which relates the occurrences of that period. If, then, Macpherson be presumed to have made his extracts from the Life, what are we to think of his suppression of the strong doubts evidently felt by the biographer, probably in common with the whole Court of St Germains, whether the supposed overtures of Lord Churchill, Lord Godolphin, and Lord Halifax, were sincere. In an extract otherwise full, the following sentence is omitted. It is hard, considering what has happened, to make a right judgement of their intentions, and whether they had any farther aim in what they did, than to secure themselves against the just resentment of an offended Prince, should he fortune to return by other means.' In like manner, the following sentence is omitted. Lord Dartmouth's proffer of service, which he sent by Mr Lloid, though it was probably more sincere, proved of as little use as the rest.' In the passage which relates to the charges made by Sir John Fenwick, the following sentence, omitted by Macpherson, is very important, if not altogether decisive. For the Prince of Orange, looking never the worse upon my Lord Godolphin and Admiral Russell, was an argument he had been no stranger to their practices; but it was a check on others, who perhaps meant better ; of which number, whether my Lord Churchill was to be counted or no, is still a mystery, and the vail is like to remain upon it.' The historical importance of the last words will be felt, if we keep in mind that they were written after 1702, and that they must be considered as expressing the general opinion of the court of St Germains at that period. The effect of the suppression of these passages is to give a character of conviction and certainty to the narrative in Macpherson's Notes, instead of that hesitation and doubt, at last approaching to disbelief, which he found in his sole authority.

Of an act of attainder, we shall never speak without disapprobation. But the importance of this publication, as detecting the infidelity of Macpherson's Extracts, is no where more apparent than in the case of Sir John Fenwick. Our readers will recollect, that the indictment against Sir John had been found on the evidence of two witnesses, one of whom (Goodman) had been prevailed upon to leave the kingdom before trial, which by law rendered it impossible to convict Sir John of treason.. The only extenuation of the attainder was, that the Jacobites had prevailed on Goodman to fly. Macpherson found, in the Life before us, the following admission of that fact by the Court of St Germains, which he deliberately withheld from the knowledge of the public. • Before they could bring him (Sir. John Fenwick) to a tryal, some of the King's friends had prevailed with Mr Goodman to withdraw himself into France. 2d Life James II. 557.

The various negociations relating to the Jacobite plots to assassinate King William, and Sir G. Barclay's mission to London, in which he thought himself authorized by James's commission to engage in that design, are to be found at length in. this work, and they are the more important, because James's sentiments on the assassination are given partly in his own words. Plans of assassination were proposed to him at different periods, from 1693 to 1696. He refused to give any authority for such an attempt. But it does not appear that he ceased to keep up the closest connexion with those who had proposed it, or that he considered them in any worse light than as faithful and zealous partisans, transported by their zeal beyond the bounds of prudence or propriety. There are no traces of that • vehemence' with which Macpherson supposes James to have rejected the proposal. Twice, if we may believe James's own words, his Majesty would not hear of it, looking upon the project as impracticable, and exposeing his friends, when he had no prospect of seconding them.' A warrant to seize William's person, which would have been in fact an order for his assassination, was again refused in 1695, to Clench or Crosbie, whom James, as it appears in the sequel, suspected of being employed by King William. To require indeed an express warrant for such an act, was a demand of a very extraordinary nature, which might be refused without any strong repugnance to assassination. We are told by James, that notwithstanding these refusals, “ upon Sir George Barclay's being in London, with a power to levy war, they (the assassins) proposed their old project to him, which it seems he accepted of, and prepared to attack the Pce of Orange, with about fortie hors, on the road, as he went too or 'came from bunting at Richmond, whereas his commission imported no such thing.' 2d Life James II. p. 543. from King James's Memoirs, tom. 9. p. 400. Sir G. Barclay's narrative follows. It does not appear

that he forfeited James's favour after his return to France. Charnock's vindication of the assassination, upon the principles of tyrannicide, is stated by the biographer at length, and without

We hear much of James's sorrow for the death of his partisans, and for the injury done to his cause. But it will not be easy to find any history of a projected assassination, in which the calmness of the narrative is less disturbed by vehewent abhorrence of the crime.

any blame.

ART. VII. A Narrative of Events which have recently occurred

in the Island of Ceylon, written by a Gentleman on the spot. 8vo. pp. 73. London. Egerton, 1815. .

There is perhaps no passage in the history of our oriental poli

cy which exhibits so strong a contrast to the ostensible principles of our conduct in Europe, as the short and successful war described in these pages. While we were exhausting every phrase of indignation against the aggressions of France, the proceedings of our own viceroys in the East, generally afforded examples of the very defects which we ascribed to the enemy; and it must also be admitted, that their talents, both in the cabinet and in the field, never failed to secure those advantages which for so many years made us envy the enterprizes of the French government. At the present moment, while we are protecting the Bourbon dynasty, and all other legitimate rulers, upon the principle of supporting hereditary right, without much regard to merit, our Indian governors are acting upon

the

very opposite principle, calling hereditary sovereigns to account for their misconduct, and dethroning them for maltreating their own subjects. The tract before us is understood to come from bigh authority; and the story of the Kandian war is told in it with so much clearness, and in such good plain language, that we have much satisfaction in following the narrative.

The contest arose in the following manner. Our unfortunate attack in 1803, had failed from being premature. The tyranny of the King, though intolerable, had not yet lasted long enough to spread a spirit of insurrection through his people ; but, intoxicated with his success on that occasion, he had given vent to all his passions and caprices; and many partial rebellions in consequence broke out. The period seemed approaching when the natives generally might be expected to rise against him, and solicit our interposition in their behalf. This crisis was hastened by the following occurrence. Early in the year 1814, the first Adikar, or prime minister, who was also governor of a province, was summoned to Court, to answer some charge made against him. He prudently declined, from an accurate knowledge of the process of impeachment in that country, which is considerably shorter, and more efficacious than in this. His province rose and joined his standard; he immediately opened a communication with General Brownrigg, offering to surrender his district to us; but this was prudently declined, as the measure seemed still somewhat premature. The proceedings taken by the · Legitimate Monarch' of Kandy, upon this ocVOL. XXVI. NO. 52.

Еe

« FöregåendeFortsätt »