A Popular History of England, From the Earliest Times to the Reign of Queen Victoria; Vol. IIIGuizot, François
History
A Popular History of England, From the Earliest Times to the Reign of Queen Victoria; Vol. III
Guizot, François
Great Britain -- History
The insurgents were completely defeated, and the massacre would
have been great if the duke had not imposed a limit to the
vengeance of Graham of Claverhouse, already famous, who had once
been conquered by the fanatics. When Monmouth returned to
England, the king remarked to him that if he himself had been
engaged in the affair, he should not have concerned himself so
much about the prisoners. "I do not kill in cold blood," replied
the duke; "that is the work of a butcher." The moderation which
the young duke exhibited in victory may have been politic as well
as charitable and humane. Some fumes of greatness had begun to
mount to his head: he imagined that he foresaw a future hitherto
unhoped for. Moved by personal hostility towards the Prince of
Orange, the cause of which has never been made known, Lord
Shaftesbury, who pursued with ardor his campaign in favor of the
Bill of Exclusion, extended his animosity to the Protestant
children of the Duke of York. A rumor began to spread that the
birth of Monmouth was legitimate, and that the king had secretly
espoused his mother, Lucy Walters. Long unknown, under the name
of James Croft, because he had been confided in his infancy to
the care of Lord Croft, Monmouth had recently married the
daughter of the Duke of Buccleuch, the greatest heiress in
Scotland; he bore his name joined to the title of the Duke of
Monmouth, which the king had given him. Handsome, brave,
thoughtless, he had inspired in Charles II. an attachment of
which the adroit Shaftesbury reckoned upon availing himself in
the rivalry which he sought to establish between the young man
and the Duke of York. When James was recalled from Brussels by
his brother, he required that Monmouth should be stripped of his
appointment and sent back to the Continent.
{380}
Meanwhile the new Parliament had met (October, 1680); it was more
ardently Protestant and patriotic than its predecessors. The
Exclusion Bill was passed by a great majority; for a moment there
was reason to believe that it would be adopted by the House of
Lords. Godolphin advised the king to yield to public feeling; the
Duchess of Portsmouth, the French favorite of Charles, implored
him not to rush upon his ruin. He hesitated for some days,
endeavoring to conclude a bargain with the Legislature. But
mutual distrust was deep-seated and carefully nourished by very
different influences. The royal honor and a remnant of natural
affection mingled with the anger of a sovereign upon whom his
people sought to impose an unjust law. Charles II. adopted his
course, and engaged in a contest against the Exclusion Bill,
being present himself at the sittings of the House of Lords. The
debate was long and violent; more than once hands grasped the
hilts of swords: the eloquence of Halifax prevailed over the
alliance of Shaftesbury, Essex, and the treacherous Sunderland;
the Bill was rejected by a very large majority.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account