46

SEVERITY OF THE PARLIAMENT.

The high-church party being now predominant in parliament, as well as in the king's councils, gratified its vengeance against the proscribed sects, by the enactment of laws that would disgrace the most barbarous period of legislation. It is impossible to contemplate their contents, without being stung by their injustice; or to look back upon the men who framed them, without the strongest sentiments of indignation and abhorrence. The rigour with which these laws were executed, occasioned many to leave their country; whilst those who remained behind were subject to every insult that bigotry could devise, or malice execute. The gaols of the kingdom were filled with peaceable subjects, who were despoiled of their property; and the laws of honour, justice, and humanity, were violated as a pious offering to the idol which all men were commanded to worship.

The share which the clergy took in these severities is too much a matter of history to be contradicted, and leaves a stain upon their character, which no ablution can ever wash out. The letter of Sheldon to the bishops of his province upon the passing of the conventicle act, betrays a brutishness of disposition unworthy the name of man; and would have told quite as well from the savages who desolated the nation under a pretence of religion, in the days of Queen Mary. Ward, Bishop of Salisbury, another unfeeling persecutor, exerted himself strenuously in favour of the act just mentioned, "not without the order and direction of the greatest authority both civil and ecclesiastical;" and the reason assigned for it is curious: "Not out of enmity to the Dissenters' persons, as they unjustly suggested, but of love to the repose and welfare of the government!" But, did ever persecutor advance an inferior reason for his conduct? A Papist burns the body for the good of the soul; and a Protestant persecutes his fellow-christians for the welfare of the state! The device in both cases, however it may have passed current in the world, is too hollow to impose upon common sense. But the bishop was as zealous in

CHARACTER OF THE COURT CLERGY.

47

executing the act, as he was in promoting it; "and his Majesty was pleased to own and accept this as good service to the public, and to encourage the bishop in it."* The civilities of princes, says Johnson, are never thrown away.† Ward, who had shifted his religion with the times, did full justice to the sentiment; for, in his diocese, the persecution raged with the greatest violence, many hundred persons being driven from their trades and families, for declining to be of his lordship's religion.

Such men may be complimented by their flatterers as Christians; but whatever name their religion went by, they were no better than wild beasts let loose to devour the flock they pretended to feed, and were a disgrace no less to human nature, than to the religious system of which they professed to be the teachers. Cruelty and injustice form no part of Christianity; nor were they associated before it was established by civil pains and penalties: but Christians no sooner took the place of their Pagan persecutors, than they adopted their spirit; and whilst they mocked the world with their professions, discovered by their conduct how deeply the root of bitterness was seated in their hearts.

To save the credit of the order, it furnished a few men, in the early part of the reign, who were of a more excellent spirit, that by their example, the enemies of religion might not have a total triumph over it, as an engine for gratifying the rapacity and cruelty of ecclesiastics. Rainbow and Wilkins both had the courage to oppose the Conventicle act, as a barbarous invasion of the liberties of their country. Earle, Ward's predecessor, did the same by the Oxford act; concerning which the Lord Treasurer Southampton shrewdly observed, that "Though he liked episcopacy, yet he would not be sworn to it, because he might hereafter be of another opinion." The number of Christian prelates, however, was

*

Pope's Life of Ward, p. 68.

+ Life of Frederic II.

1

48

ANECDOTE OF WILKINS AND COSIN.

too small to have a decisive influence; but they had the argument upon the score of policy, as well as of good morals. This was well illustrated by Wilkins, in a conversation with Cosin, Bishop of Durham, who had censured him for his moderation. Wilkins frankly told him, that he was a better friend to the church than his lordship: "For, while you," says he, "are for setting the top on the picqued end downwards, you wont be able to keep it up any longer than you keep whipping and scourging; whereas I am for setting the broad end downwards, and so 'twill stand of itself."* Wilkins was a philosopher as well as a Christian; but the generality of his brethren were mere courtiers; and whilst they pretended to be the followers of Christ, showed themselves to be the enemies of man.

Calamy's Life of Howe, p. 33.

CHAPTER IV.

The King and Parliament unite in oppressing the People.-Sydney's Account of the Introduction of Bribery.-Marvel's Representation.-De Foe's Account of the Pension-Parliament.-The Springs of Charles's Policy.— His Treaty with the French King.-The Cabal.-Intermission of Parliaments.-Charles's Perfidy to the Dutch.-And to his own Subjects.-Shuts up the Exchequer.-De Foe's Account of its ruinous consequences.-Declaration of Indulgence.-Shaftesbury's Reflections upon it.-Re-called.The King's Duplicity.-Wickedness of Laws to prescribe Religion.-The Test Act.-Opposed by the Court.-The King gives his Assent.-Conduct of the Earl of Bristol.-And of the Dissenters.-Reflections upon it.— ' Their Patriotism praised by De Foe.-His Account of Alderman Love's Speech. And of the Policy of the Court in Religious Matters.-Persecution renewed.-De Foe's Remarks upon the Subversion of Justice.

1670--1677.

DURING the first half of this reign, King Charles and his parliament acted in harmonious concert to enslave the people, and plunder them of their property, which was disposed of in support of his vices, and in purchasing the independence of those who should have been the guardians of the public purse. "It was in this reign," observes one of our political writers, "that that cursed and detestable policy was much improved of bribing parliaments, by distributing all the great employments of England among them, and supplying the want of places with grants of land and money. No man could be preferred to any employment in church or state till he had declared himself an open enemy to our constitution, by asserting despotic power under that nonsensical phrase of passive-obedience, which was more preached up

50

SYDNEY'S ACCOUNT OF BRIBERY.

than all the laws of God and man."* For this device, Sydney informs us, the nation was beholden to Hyde, Clifford, and Danby, "who found a parliament full of lewd young men, chosen by a furious people in spite to the Puritans, whose severity had distasted them. The weakest of all ministers had wit enough to understand that such as these might be easily deluded, corrupted, or bribed. Some were fond of their seats in parliament, and delighted to domineer over their neighbours by continuing in them. Others preferred the cajoleries of the court before the honour of performing their duty to the country that employed them. Some sought to relieve their ruined fortunes, and were most forward to give the king a vast revenue, that from thence they might receive pensions. This emboldened the court to think of making parliaments to be the instruments of our slavery, which had in all ages past been the firmest pillars of our liberty."+ Marvel, who was one of the few honest members, observes, "Such was the number of the constant courtiers, increased by the apostate patriots, who were bought off for that turn, some at six, others ten, one at fifteen thousand pounds in money, besides what offices, lands, and reversions to others, that it is a mercy they gave not away the whole land and liberty of England."+

From such a state of things, the nation could not but reap the bitterest fruits. They are thus described by De Foe: "Did not our fathers in a pension-parliament sell our liberties, and give away our substance to the luxury and tyranny of a party? Did they not sell us to a Popish successor, and to all the miseries of a war that followed? How did they get leave to do this, but by buying the voices of the poor ignorant, debauched people? And why was it that the policy of that age made it a great rule to debauch the morals

Hist of Standing Armies, p. 12. ↑ Disc. on Gov. p. 456, ed. 1763. Marvel's Works, ii. 74.