This unhappy and ill-advised affair, will ever remain one of the
darkest blemishes on the uniformly pacific but inglorious reign of the
royal pupil of Buchanan;--the whole detail is an ungrateful one of
intrigue and ill-faith, and however justly Buckingham may be accused
of exerting his baleful influence to dissolve the treaty, and that he
did so in the wantonness of his power is now past doubt; the disgrace
which should have attached to him, still hangs round the memory of the
timid king and his weak yet gallantly-disposed son. I am more inclined
to allow a high-mindedness of feeling to Charles than to his father.
The king, who supposed the entire art of reigning lay in dissimulation,
may not be charged with an over-scrupulous nicety in his observations
of the rules of fair dealing; but the young prince, at this period,
had the sentiments without the vanity of a knight-errant, his only
error was in the constitutional weakness which bent to the arrogance
of Buckingham’s somewhat stronger mind. With such a disposition, the
favorite found it as easy to persuade Charles to break off the match,
as he had with facility advised him to the romantic journey--as rash
as it was impolitic. It would be almost an unprofitable occupation to
search for Buckingham’s motives, they are quite unattainable, and,
like hunting the hare in a wagon, conjecture might lead us on, but we
should, at every step, be farther from our object. It is the received
opinion, that the prince’s visit was begun in caprice; and with caprice
it ended. Buckingham viewed it, perhaps, at first as a mere adventure,
and he terminated it, because his wounded pride suggested to him that
_he_ was not the favorite actor in the piece. His terms were, “Ego
et rex meus,” and a less-distinguished station would not satisfy the
haughty insolence of Somerset’s succession in the precarious favor of
the king.
Our British Solomon who willed, but could not restore, the Palatinate
to his son-in-law, had long been accustomed to consider the union of
Charles with the Infanta, as the only available means left by which he
could secure the object he had so much at heart. He was not made of
the stern stuff, which in other kings would have set a whole army in
motion. That “sagacious simpleton” was never in so turbulent a vein.
His most powerful weapon was an ambassador, and the best of these were
but sad specimens of diplomacy, and thus, weak as he was, both in the
cabinet and field, we may guess at his rapture when the marriage was
agreed to by the Court of Spain--the restoration of the Palatinate
talked of as a wedding present, and the bride’s dowry two millions of
eight.
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