Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

and, unlike most advocates, the light which had shone at the Bar was not quenched in the closer atmosphere of the Senate. And though it seems that the old by-word was applied to him of "Cowper-law-to hang a man first, “and then judge him,” * — I believe that it proceeded from party resentment rather than from any real fault.

After the close of the Commons' Committee, one was also appointed by the Lords; but its Report did not add materially to the proofs already known. Layer had been already tried at the King's Bench, and condemned to death; he was reprieved for examination before these Committees; but not disclosing as much as was hoped, he was executed at Tyburn, and his head affixed at Temple Bar. In a more lenient spirit, Bills of Pains and Penalties were introduced against Plunkett and Kelly, subjecting them to imprisonment during pleasure, and to confiscation of their property. These Bills passed both Houses by large majorities. With respect to the head of these subalterns, the Bishop of Rochester, a Bill was brought in by Yonge (afterwards Sir William) enacting his banishment and deprivation, but without forfeiture of goods; that it should be felony to correspond with him without the King's licence; and that the King should have no power to pardon him without consent of Parliament.

The Bishop, on receiving a copy of this Bill, wrote to the Speaker, requesting to have Sir Constantine Phipps and Mr. Wynne as his counsel, and Mr. Morice as his solicitor, and that they might have free access to him in private. This was granted. He next applied to the Lords, stating that as, by a Standing Order of their House of January 20. 1673, no Lord might appear by counsel before the other House, he was at a loss how to act, and humbly requested their direction. The Lords determined that leave should be given him to be heard by counsel or otherwise, as he might think proper; but Atterbury, who had probably only taken these steps with the view of raising difficulties, or creating a grievance to complain of, wrote a letter to the Speaker, on the very day he was expected to make his defence, to the effect that he should

* See vol. i. p. 198., or the evidence at Lord Wintoun's trial.

decline giving that House any trouble, and content himself with the opportunity, if the Bill went on, of making his defence before another House, of which he had the honour to be a member.

Accordingly, the Bill having passed the Commons without a division, the Bishop was brought to the Bar of the House of Lords on the 6th of May. The evidence against him being first gone through, some was produced on his side. Amongst his witnesses were Erasmus Lewis, to prove, from his official experience, how easily hand-writing may be counterfeited; and Pope, to depose to the Bishop's domestic habits and literary employments. Pope had but few words to speak, and in those few we are told that he made several blunders. But those on whom Atterbury most relied were three persons who invalidated the confessions of Mr. Neynoe, as taken before his escape and death, and who alleged that Walpole had tampered with that witness. One of them (Mr. Skeene) stated that having asked Neynoe, whether, in real truth, he knew any thing of a plot, Neynoe answered, that he knew of two; one of Mr. Walpole's against some great men, the other of his own, which was only to get eighteen or twenty thousand pounds from Mr. Walpole! It should be observed, however, that of these three witnesses, one at least was of very suspicious character, having been convicted, whipt, and pilloried, at Dublin, for a treasonable libel. Their charges made it necessary for Walpole himself to appear as a witness, and disavow them. On this occasion, the Bishop used all his art to perplex the Minister, and make him contradict himself, but did not succeed; "a greater trial of skill," observes Speaker Onslow," than scarce ever happened between two such "combatants; the one fighting for his reputation, the "other for his acquittal."*

* Atterbury always looked upon Walpole as the prime author of his ruin. The epitaph which he wrote for himself in his exile thus concludes:

:

HOC FACINORIS

CONSCIVIT, AGGRESSUS EST, PERPETRAVIT
(EPISCOPORUM PRÆCIPUE SUFFRAGIIS ADJUTUS)

ROBERTUS ISTE WALPOLE

QUEM NULLA NESCIET POSTERITAS !

See his Correspondence, vol. i. p. 302.

Whatever vindication there may be for Jacobite principles in general, it is shocking to find a clergyman, and a prelate, swear allegiance to the King whom he was plotting to dethrone, and solemnly protest his innocence while labouring under a consciousness of guilt. The Bishop's own defence, which was spoken on the 11th of May *, begins with a touching recital of the hardships he had suffered in captivity. "By which means," he adds, "what little strength and use of my limbs I had when "committed, in August last, is now so far impaired, that "I am very unfit to appear before your Lordships on any "occasion, especially when I am to make my defence "against a Bill of so extraordinary a nature." Atterbury next enters into a masterly review, and, so far as was possible, refutation, of the evidence against him; and proceeds, in a high strain of eloquence, to ask what motives could have driven him into a conspiracy. "What "could tempt me, my Lords, thus to step out of my way? "Was it ambition, and a desire of climbing into a higher "station in the Church? There is not a man of my "Order further removed from views of this kind than I Was money my aim? I always despised "it, too much, perhaps, considering the occasion I may 66 now have for it. Out of a poor Bishoprick of 500l. a year, I did in eight years' time lay out 20007. upon the "house and the appurtenances; and because I knew the "circumstances in which my predecessor left his family, "I took not one shilling for dilapidations; and the rest "of my income has all been spent as that of a Bishop "should be, in hospitality and charity. Was I "influenced by any dislike of the Established Religion, any secret inclination towards Popery, a church of greater pomp and power? Malice has ventured even "thus far to asperse me. I have, my Lords, ever since "I knew what Popery was, disliked it; and the better I "knew it, the more I opposed it. . . Thirty-seven

66

66

66

[ocr errors]

am...

....

66 years ago I wrote in defence of Martin Luther. "And whatever happens to me, I will suffer any thing,

* This Defence, as printed in the Parl. History, is mutilated and imperfect. But it is correctly given from an authentic MS. in Atterbury's Correspondence, vol. ii. pp. 105-180.

66

66

[ocr errors]

66

"and would by God's grace, burn at the stake, rather "than, in any material point, depart from the Protestant "Religion, as professed in the Church of England. . . . . "Once more, can I be supposed to favour arbitrary power? The whole tenour of my life speaks otherwise. "I was always a friend to the liberty of the subject, and, "to the best of my power, a constant maintainer of it. "I may have been mistaken, perhaps, in the measures I "took for its support at junctures when it was thought expedient for the state to seem to neglect public liberty, "in order, I suppose, to secure it. . . . . I am here, my "Lords, and have been here, expecting, for eight months, an immediate trial. I have, my Lords, declined no "impeachment no due course of law that might have "been taken. . . . . The correspondence with the Earl "of Clarendon was made treason, but with me it is only felony ; ; yet he was allowed an intercourse with his "children by the express words of the Act: mine are "not so much as to write, so much as to send any message, to me, without a Sign Manual! . . . . The great man I mentioned carried a great fortune with him into a foreign country: he had the languages, and was well acquainted abroad; he had spent the best part of his years in exile, and was therefore every way qualified "to support it. The reverse of all this is my case. "Indeed, I am like him in nothing but his innocence and "his punishment. It is in no man's power to make us "differ in the one, but it is in your Lordships' power to "distinguish us widely in the other, and I hope your "Lordships will do it. .. Shall I, my Lords, be de"prived of all that is valuable to an Englishman (for, in "the circumstances to which I am to be reduced, life "itself is scarce valuable) by such an evidence as this?"such an evidence as would not be admitted in any "other cause, or any other court, nor allowed, I verily believe, to condemn a Jew in the Inquisition of Spain "or Portugal?"

66

[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]

He thus concludes: "If, after all, it shall still be "thought by your Lordships that there is any seeming "strength in the proofs produced against me; if by

66

private persuasions of my guilt, founded on unseen, "unknown motives; if for any reasons or necessities of

"state, of which I am no competent judge, your Lord"ships shall be induced to proceed on this Bill, God's "will be done! Naked came I out of my mother's womb, "and naked shall I return; and whether He gives or "takes away, blessed be the name of the Lord!"

The Bishop having ended this most eloquent and affecting defence, and one of the counsel for the Bill having replied, the Lords took their debate on the question, That this Bill do pass. The ablest speeches on the Bishop's side were the Duke of Wharton's and Lord Cowper's; the latter not merely maintaining Atterbury's innocence, but inveighing against any Parliamentary deprivation of a Bishop. "The old champions of our "Church," said he, "used to argue very learnedly that 66 to make or to degrade Bishops was not the business of "the state; that there is a spiritual relation between the 66 Bishop and his flock, derived from the church, with "which the state has nothing to do. What the thoughts "of our reverend prelates are upon these points does not yet fully appear; something of their conduct intimates 66 as if our old divines were mistaken." In fact, most of the Bishops were now taking a forward and eager part against their brother; and one of them, (Wynne, of St. Asaph,) very little to his honour, even went so far as to volunteer evidence, which, when close pressed, he was not able to maintain. Their hostility provoked a bitter sarcasm from Lord Bathurst. Turning to their bench, he exclaimed, that he could hardly account for the inveterate malice some persons bore the learned and ingenious Bishop of Rochester, unless they were possessed with the infatuation of the wild Indians, who fondly believe they will inherit not only the spoils, but even the abilities, of any great enemy they kill!

On a division, 43 Peers voted against the Bill, but 83 for it; and it received the Royal Assent on the 27th of the same month.

On the whole of this transaction we may, undoubtedly, condemn the vindictive severity which oppressed Atter

*"This speech," says Dr. King, "was heard with universal admi"ration, and was, indeed, not unworthy of the oldest senator, or "the most able and eloquent lawyer." (Anecdotes of his own Times, p. 35.

« EdellinenJatka »