The life and times of George Villiers, duke of Buckingham, Volume 2 (of 3): From original and authentic sourcesThomson, A. T., Mrs.
History
The life and times of George Villiers, duke of Buckingham, Volume 2 (of 3): From original and authentic sources
Thomson, A. T., Mrs.
Buckingham, George Villiers, Duke of, 1592-1628
The decision of the junto exonerated Philip IV. from any hollowness in
his share of the treaty. They blamed the Earl of Bristol for not
revoking the proxy, which was left in his hands sooner, and thus
stopping those preparations for the nuptials which had rendered the King
of Spain ridiculous. But when they voted that that Monarch should be
defied with open war, till amends were made to the Prince Palatine for
the wrongs he had suffered, the majority of the conference hesitated,
and refused to say more than that the “girths of peace were slack, but
not broken.” Buckingham had now become wholly impatient of opposition;
scarcely any of the council had voted to his satisfaction. Sometimes
strange scenes were witnessed in the conference; the fiery Duke would
arise, and “chafe against” those who opposed him from room to room, “as
a hen who has lost her brood, and clucks up and down when there is none
to follow her.” Upon meeting Lord Belfast, one of the party adverse to
his wishes, he asked him contemptuously, “Are you turned too? and flung
from him; upon which Lord Belfast, in a manly and candid letter,
announced his resolution to conform in all things to the pleasure of his
royal master.” But the greatest anger was displayed by Buckingham
against the Lord Keeper, who seldom spoke, but who, when he gave his
opinion, swayed that of the majority.[89]
Footnote 89:
Hacket, p. 69.
Buckingham was not of a character to dissemble his feelings; and his
displeasure was shown, not only in his countenance, but expressed in
angry expostulations. He told Bishop Laud that the Lord Keeper had so
strangely forgotten himself to him that he seemed to be “dead in his
affections.” Laud, who was devotedly attached to the favourite and his
family, meeting Williams in the withdrawing-chamber at Whitehall, “fell
into very hot words with him,” which were reported to the Duke.
Eventually, however, these differences were healed, and, in February,
1624, a reconciliation was effected through the mediation of Laud. From
henceforth, nothing but an appearance of friendship subsisted between
Buckingham and Williams. “The wound,” says Dr. Heylyn, “was only
stunned, not healed, and festered the more dangerously, because the
secret rancour of it could not be discerned.”[90]
Footnote 90:
Heylyn’s Life of Laud, p. 113.
The issue of all this was that the Duke insisted on a parliament, by way
of appeal;[91] and during the heat of these Court cabals, that body was
assembled at Westminster in February.
Footnote 91:
Hacket, p. 169.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account