The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol. I., Part F.: From Charles II. to James II.
David Hume · en
When Argyle took the test as a privy counsellor, he subjoined, in the
duke’s presence, an explanation, which he had beforehand communicated to
that prince, and which he believed to have been approved by him. It
was in these words “I have considered the test, and am very desirous
of giving obedience as far as I can. I am confident that the parliament
never intended to impose contradictory oaths: therefore I think no man
can explain it but for himself. Accordingly, I take it as far as it is
consistent with itself and the Protestant religion. And I do declare,
that I mean not to bind myself, in my station, and in a lawful way, from
wishing and endeavoring any alteration which I think to the advantage
of church or state, and not repugnant to the Protestant religion and my
loyalty: and this I understand as a part of my oath.” The duke, as was
natural, heard these words with great tranquillity: no one took the
least offence: Argyle was admitted to sit that day in council: and it
was impossible to imagine, that a capital offence had been committed,
where occasion seemed not to have been given so much as for a frown or
reprimand.
Argyle was much surprised, a few days after, to find that a warrant
was issued for committing him to prison; that he was indicted for high
treason, leasing-making, and perjury; and that from these innocent words
an accusation was extracted, by which he was to forfeit honors, life,
and fortune. It is needless to enter into particulars where the iniquity
of the whole is so apparent. Though the sword of justice was displayed,
even her semblance was not put on; and the forms alone of law were
preserved, in order to sanctify, or rather aggravate, the oppression.
Of five judges, three did not scruple to find the guilt of treason and
leasing-making to have been incurred by the prisoner: a jury of fifteen
noblemen gave verdict against him: and the king, being consulted,
ordered the sentence to be pronounced, but the execution of it to be
suspended till further orders.
It was pretended by the duke and his creatures, that Argyle’s life and
fortune were not in any danger, and that the sole reason for pushing the
trial to such extremities against him was, in order to make him renounce
some hereditary jurisdictions, which gave his family a dangerous
authority in the highlands, and obstructed the course of public justice.
But allowing the end to be justifiable, the means were infamous;
and such as were incompatible, not only with a free, but a civilized
government. Argyle had therefore no reason to trust any longer to the
justice or mercy of such enemies: he made his escape from prison; and
till he should find a ship for Holland he concealed himself during some
time in London. The king heard of his lurking-place, but would not allow
him to be arrested.[*] All the parts, however, of his sentence, as far
as the government in Scotland had power, were rigorously executed; his
estate confiscated, his arms reversed and torn.