Morice. Every thing sent to him was narrowly searched; even some pigeon-pies were opened: "it is the first time," says Pope, "dead pigeons have been suspected of carry"ing intelligence!"†

It was amidst great and general excitement that the new Parliament met on the 9th of October. The King's Speech gave a short account of the conspiracy:- "I "should less wonder at it," he said, "had I, in any one "instance since my accession to the throne, invaded the "liberty or property of my subjects." With equal justice he observed on the infatuation of some Jacobites and the malice of others, "By forming plots they depre"ciate all property that is vested in the Public Funds, "and then complain of the low state of credit; they "make an increase of the national expenses necessary, "and then clamour at the burthen of taxes, and endeavour to impute to my government, as grievances, the "mischiefs and calamities which they alone create and "occasion." The first business of the Commons, after again placing Mr. Compton in the Chair, was to hurry through a Bill suspending the Habeas Corpus Act for one year. Mr. Spencer Cowper, and Sir Joseph Jekyll, observed that the Act had never yet been suspended for so long a period, and proposed six months, declaring, that at the end of that period they would, if necessary, readily agree to a further suspension. Yet notwithstanding the popularity and plausibility of this amendment, it was rejected by 246 votes against 193.

66

The next subject with both Houses was the Pretender's Declaration. It appears that James had been so far deluded by the sanguine hopes of his agents, or by his own, as to believe that the British people were groaning under a state of bondage and oppression, and that the King himself was ready to cast off an uneasy and precarious Crown. Under these impressions, he issued from Lucca, on the 22d of September, a strange manifesto, proposing, that if George will quietly deliver to him the throne of his fathers, he will, in return, bestow upon George the

* Preface to his Correspondence, p. vi. Mr. Morice used to stand in an open area, and the Bishop to look out of a two-pair of stairs window, and thus only were they allowed to converse!

† Pope to Gay, Sept. 11. 1722.

title of King in his native dominions, and invite all other States to confirm it; with a promise to leave his succession to the British dominions secure, if ever, in due course, his natural right should take place. This declaration was printed and distributed in England. Both Houses expressed their astonishment at its "surprising "insolence:" it was ordered to be burnt by the common hangman; and a joint Address was presented to His Majesty, assuring him that the designs of the public enemy shall be found "impracticable against a Prince relying on and supported by the vigour and duty of a British “Parliament, and the affections of his people."

66

Walpole, availing himself of the general resentment, next proposed to raise 100,000l. by a tax upon the estates of Roman Catholics. The project of Stanhope to relieve them from the Penal Laws, which was still on foot at the beginning of the South Sea Scheme*, had been arrested, first by the crash, and then by his death. Moderation to the Roman Catholics had always been one of his leading principles of government. Other maxims now prevailed; a system of general and indiscriminate punishment, which was, at least, nearly allied to persecution, and which, if it did not find every Roman Catholic a Jacobite, was quite sure to make him so. Many, said Walpole, had been guilty-an excellent reason for punishing all! With a better feeling did Onslow (afterwards Speaker) declare his abhorrence of persecuting any others on account of their opinions in religion. Sir Joseph Jekyll, after praising the moderation and wisdom of the King, wished he could say the same of those who had the honour to serve him. But the proposal of Walpole was quite in accordance with the temper of the times; it was not only carried by 217 against 168, but, on a subsequent motion, was even extended to all nonjurors.† The House, however, favourably entertained a singular petition from the family of the Pendrills, praying to be exempted from * Mr. Brodrick to Lord Midleton, January 24. 1720. Refer to my first vol. p. 326.

I am sorry to find Coxe assert, in a blind panegyrical spirit, that though scarcely conformable to justice, the policy of this measure "was unquestionable." How far more correct and enlightened were the views (published by himself) of Speaker Onslow! See Coxe's Walpole, vol. i. p. 175., and vol. ii. p. 555.

the tax on account of the services of their ancestors in preserving Charles the Second after the battle of Worcester.*

Amongst the foremost evils (and they were many) of this persecuting spirit, was the frightful degree of perjury which it produced. For as the estates of nonjurors were to be taxed, it became necessary to determine precisely who were nonjurors or not; in other words, almost the whole nation was to be summoned to swear allegiance to the Government. Nor was it explicitly stated what would be the consequence of this refusal, but a sort of vague threat was hung over them; and it seemed a trap in which, when once caught, men might hereafter be subjected not only to the largest fines, but even to forfeiture and confiscation. "I saw a great deal of it," says Speaker Onslow, "and it was a strange, as well as ridiculous, sight "to see people crowding at the Quarter Sessions to give 66 a testimony of their allegiance to a Government, and "cursing it at the same time for giving them the trouble "of so doing, and for the fright they were put into by it; "and I am satisfied more real disaffection to the King and "his family arose from it than from any thing which happened in that time." Some of the Jacobites consulted their Prince as to the course which they should pursue in this emergency, but he prudently avoided any positive answer. It was thought very desirable that they should act together as a body, in one course or the other, but no such general arrangement could be compassed. The greater number were inclined to swear, and did so, saying that they had rather venture themselves in the hand of God than of such men as they had to do with. Yet they still retained all their first principles; and the oath, however it might torture their consciences, did not influence their conduct. Such is, I fear, the inevitable result of any oath imposed by any government for its security. Examples of that kind are too common in all countries. Swearing allegiance to King George did not

66

*Commons' Journals, vol. xx. p. 210.

† Mr. Lockhart to James, Sept. 10. 1723. James's answer, Nov.

24. 1723.

Lockhart's Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 108.

shut out all the Jacobites from Parliament; swearing allegiance to King Louis Philippe does not shut out all the Carlists from the Chambers. Nay more, so far may right principle be distorted by faction, that such breach of faith is not only excused but even praised by the party which it aids. The Jacobites, beyond all doubt, applauded their leader, Mr. Shippen-that worthy, publicspirited man, they probably said, who has had the courage to swear against his conscience on purpose to serve the good cause! There were, of course, numerous exceptions; but I am speaking of the general effect. And though we might reasonably infer from theory that men whom we find honourable and high-minded in private life, and in far more trifling transactions, would be scrupulously bound by the solemn and public obligation of an oath, yet experience, I apprehend, would teach the very reverse.

It was not till after these preliminaries, that a Select Committee was appointed to examine Layer and others, in relation to the plot. The Report of this Committee, drawn up by Pulteney, their Chairman, and read to the House on the 1st of March, is a very long and circumstantial document. The evidence which it gives touching Atterbury, though founded on many trifling incidents, such as the dog Harlequin, and dark hints in intercepted letters, was yet, by their combination, as I think, more than sufficient to satisfy any candid minds. The Opposition, however, did not belong to that class; they not only asserted the innocence of Atterbury, and of the rest, but maintained that the plot itself was a chimera, devised by Ministers for the basest purposes of faction. The incident of Harlequin especially was held up to ridicule. Swift, who during the last nine years had prudently kept aloof, at Dublin, from party warfare, could not resist this tempting opportunity to resume it, and poured forth one of his happiest strains of satire on the "horrid conspiracy" discovered by a French dog, who "confessed, as plain as he could bark, then with "his forefoot set his mark!"* To this conspiracy he afterwards alluded in Gulliver's Travels, as "the work

* Swift's Works, vol. x. p. 462. Scott's ed.

66

"manship of persons who desire to raise their own "character of profound politicians; to restore new vigour to a crazy administration; to stifle or divert general discontents; and to fill their coffers with for. "feitures."* Such is party justice!

66

From the Report of the Committee, or the Evidence appended, it appeared that several other Peers had been named in the depositions: Lords Scarsdale, Strafford, Craven, Gower, Bathurst, Bingley, and Cowper. They all took an early occasion to repel the imputation in the House of Lords. Cowper, especially, said that after having on so many occasions, and in the most difficult times, given undoubted proofs of his zeal for the Protestant Succession, he had just reason to be offended to see his name bandied about in a list of a chimerical club. It was replied by Townshend, that his Lordship's name being part of an examination, there was an absolute necessity for inserting it; but that the Committee were entirely satisfied of his innocence, and that it was only surprising that a peer of so much ability and merit should thence proceed to ridicule as a fiction a wellproved conspiracy, and from one false circumstance infer that no part of it was true. It is certain that the Jacobites had some vague hopes of Lord Cowper. I have seen, in the Stuart Papers, a letter of solicitation to him from Lord Mar, and another apparently addressed by James himself. But I found nothing whatever to show that he had accepted or even answered these overtures, and it would require strong proofs indeed to outweigh those afforded to the contrary by the whole course and tenour of his life. This is almost the last public transaction in which that eminent man took part: he died the same year, on the 10th of October, of a strangury. On his death-bed, he ordered that his son should never travel. His memory deserves high respect: in him a profound knowledge of law was supported by a ready eloquence, and adorned by elegant accomplishments;

*Swift's Works, vol. xii. p. 244.

† Lord Mar's letter is dated Sept. 17. 1717. The Pretender's is endorsed "To Mr. C-r," and might be designed for Mr. Cæsar, though the contents render it less likely.

Spence's Anecdotes, p. 333.