« EdellinenJatka »
Clerc, which he cultivated after his return into England, and continued to the end of his life.
During his residence in Holland, he was accused at court of having writ certain tracts against the government, which were afterward discovered to be written , by another person, and upon that suspicion he was deprived of his place of student of Christ-Church.
'Being observed, (says the very unfair writer of his article in Biographia Britannica) * to join in company
* with several English malecontents at the Hague, this 'conduct was communicated by our resident thereto the 'earl of Sunderland, then secretary of state; who ac'quainting the king therewith, his majesty ordered the 'proper methods to be taken for expelling him from the
*college, and application to be made for that purpose 'to bish. Fell, the dean: in obedience to this command, 'the necessary information was given by his lordship, 'who at the same time wrote to our author, to appear 'and answer for himself, on the first of January ensuing: 'but immediately receiving an express command to turn 'him out, was obliged to comply therewith, and accord'ingly Mr. Locke was removed from his student's place
* on the sixteenth of Nov. 1684.'—But in order to a more complete view of these iniquitous proceedings, it may not be improper to annex the several letters between lord Sunderland and bp. Fell on the occasion, from Dr. Birch's papers in the Museum. The first from lord Sunderland runs thus: 'Whitehall, Nov. 6, 1684. 'The king having been given to understand that one 'Locke, who belonged to the late earl of Shaftesbury, 'and has, upon several occasions, behaved himself very
*factiously against the government, is a student of
*Christ-Church; his majesty commands me to signify 'to your lordship, that he would have him removed from 'being a student, and that, in order thereunto, your 'lordship would let him know the method of doing it.' &c. The bishop answered, Nov. 8, 1684. 'To the 'right hon. the earl of Sunderland, principal secretary 'of state : right honourable, I have received the honour
*of your lordship's letter, wherein you are pleased to
*inquire concerning Mr. Locke's being a student of *this house, of which I have this account to render: «that he being, as your lordship is truly informed, a
* person who was much trusted by the late earl of Shaftes£ bury, and who is suspected to be ill affected to the go'vernment, I have for divers years had an eye upon 'him; but so close has his guard been on himself, that 'after several strict inquiries, I may confidently affirm, 'there is not any man in the college, however familiar 'with him, who had heard him speak a word either 'against or so much as concerning the government; 'and although very frequently, both in public and pri'vate, discourses have been purposely introduced to the 'disparagement of his master, the earl of Shaftesbury, 'his party and designs; he could never be provoked to 'take any notice, or discover in word or look the least
* concern. So that I believe there is not a man in the 'world so much master of taciturnity and passion. He 'has here a physician's place, which frees him from the 'exercise of the college, and the obligation which others
*have to residence in it, and he is now abroad for want
*of health; but notwithstanding this, I have summoned 'him to return home, which is done with this prospect, 'that if he comes not back, he will be liable to expul- 'sion for contumacy; and if he does, he will be an
*swerable to the law for that which he shall be found 'to have done amiss. It being probable that, though 'he may have been thus cautious here where he knew 'himself suspected, he has laid himself more open at 'London, where a general liberty of speaking was used, 'and where the execrable designs against his majesty 'and government were managed and pursued. If he 'don't return by the first of January, which is the time
*limited to him, I shall be enabled of course to proceed 'against him to expulsion. But if this method seems 'not effectual or speedy enough, and his majesty, our * founder and visitor, shall please to command his im'mediate remove, upon the receipt thereof, directed to 'the dean and chapter, it shall accordingly be executed, 'by your lordship's,' &c. Lord Sunderland's second letter to the bishop of Oxon: 'My lord, having com* municated your lordship's of the 8th to his majesty, he c has thought fit to direct me to send you the inclosed
*concerning his commands for the immediate expulsion 'of Mr. Locke.' The inclosed warrant, addressed to the dean and chapter, Nov. 12. 'Whereas we have re'ceived information of the factious and disloyal be'haviour of Locke, one of the students of that our col'lege; we have thought fit hereby to signify our will and 'pleasure to you, that you forthwith remove him from 'his student's place, and deprive him of all rights and 'advantages thereunto belonging, for which this shall 'be your warrant. And so we bid you heartily fare'well. Given at our court of Whitehall, the 11th day 'of Nov. 1684. By his majesty's command, Sunder'land.' The bishop answered thus: Nov. 16. 'Right
*honourable, I hold myself bound to signify to your 'lordship, that his majesty's command for the expulsion 'of Mr. Locke from this college is fully executed/ The last letter from lord Sunderland to the bishop of Oxon: ' I have your lordship's of the 16th, and have ac'quainted his majesty therewith, who is well satisfied'with the college's ready obedience to his commands • * for the expulsion of Mr. Locke.'
With regard to bishop Fell's conduct on this occasion, Dr. Birch observes, that notwithstanding his many good qualities, he was capable of some excesses in cases where the interest of party could bias him. Life of Tillotson, p. 100, first edition. What has been urged on the bishop's side as rather favouring Mr. Locke, seems only to prove that all he acted against him might be done with some degree of reluctance; but yet notwithstanding the respect and kindness which he bore toward Mr. Locke, bishop Fell, it seems, on the clearest conviction of his inoffensiveness, under so many trials, had no thoughts of serving him so far as to run the least hazard of suffering for him, or with him. His candour towards Mr. Locke on a former occasion, when application was making for his being admitted to a doctor's degree at Oxon, on a visit from the prince of Orange, will appear sufficiently fromlord Shaftes bury's letter to the said Dr. Fell, annexed in Vol. Ix. p. S2l, of this edition.
After the death of king Charles II. Mr. William Penn,' who had known our author at the university, used his interest with king James to procure a pardon for him; and would have obtained it, if Mr. Locke had not answered, that he had no occasion for a pardon, since he had not been guilty of any crime.
In the year 1685, when the duke of Monmouth and his party were making preparations in Holland for his unfortunate enterprize, the English envoy at the Hague had orders to demand Mr. Locke and eighty-three other persons to be delivered up by the states-general: upon which he lay concealed to the year following *.
* Mr. Le Clerc observes, that Mr. Locke had no correspondence with the duke of Monmouth, having no great opinion of his undertaking. Besides, his natural temper was timorous, not resolute, and he was far from being fond of commotions. He had been at the end of the year 1684 at Utrecht, and returned in the spring to Amsterdam, with a design to go again to Utrecht, as he actually did, to avoid being charged with having any share in the duke of Monmouth's enterprize. He had before some inclination to lodge with his friend Mr. Guenelon, but he excused himself, it not being the custom of that city, to admit strangers to lodge, though he received Mr Locke with great civility. But when Mr. Guenelon saw that his friend was in real danger, he served him with great generosity. He spoke to Mr. Veen, his father-in-law, and engaged him to receive Mr. Locke into his house. Upon this Mr. Locke came to Amsterdam, where he lay concealed at Mr. Veen's two or three months. In the mean time, Mr. Limborch took care to deliver him the letters which were written to him, and had the custody of Mr. Locke's will, who desired him to send it to some of his relations, whom he named, if he should die. One of the principal magistrates of the city was consulted, whether he might continue there in safety? That magistrate answered, ' They could not protect him, if the king of England should de'mand him 5 but he should not be betrayed, and his landlord should • have timely notice when there should be occasion.' This gave him confidence; and he continued with Mr. Veen for some time, without going abroad, except at night, for fear of being known. In the mean time, he was persuaded to go to Cleves, but returned in about two months, and lodged again at Mr. Veen's. At the end of the year he went to lodge with Mr. Guenelon, where he was likewise the year following. In lo'SO', he began to appear again in public, because it was sufficiently known, that he had no share in the duke of Monmouth's invasion. In autumn he went to Utrecht, and at the end of the year returned to Amsterdam, and lodged at Mr. Guenelon's as before.
During this concealment, our author wrote his • Let'ter of Toleration,' in Latin, in 1685; which was printed in duodecimo, at Gouda*, 1689, under the following title, * Epistola de Tolerantia; ad Clarissimum Virum, 'T. a. R. P. T. o. L. A. [Theologiae apud Remonstrantes 'Professorem, Tyrannidis Osorem, Limburgium, Am'stelodamensem :] scripta a p. A. P. O. I. L. A.' [Pacis Amico, Persecutionis Osore, Joanne Lockio, Anglo.] t
At Amsterdam he formed a weekly assembly, consisting of Mr. Limborch, Mr. Le Clerc, and others, for conversation upon important subjects, and had drawn
* In the fol. edit, of 1714, it is said to have been printed at Tergaw.
f This letter was translated into English by Mr. Popple, (who was nephew to Andrew Marvel, and author of the ' Rational Catechism') licensed 1689; and printed twice in London : the first time in 1689, in quarto, and again in, 1690, in duodecimo.
It was too much to be expected, that such a performance should pass without animadversion. Accordingly, there issued from/Oxford, printed at the Theatre,' 16\jO, in quarto, a small tract, intitled, « The Argument 'of the Letter concerning Toleration, briefly considered and answered.— 'Imprimatur, Jonathan Edwards, Vice-Can. Oxon.'
A. Wood, in his ' Athenae Oxonienses,' tells us, that the author was Jonas Proast, M. A. of Queen's College, Oxford; and he is elsewhere mentioned as archdeacon.
In the same year Mr. Locke published, in quarto, 'A second Letter 'concerning Toleration. To the author of The Argument of the Letter 'concerning Toleration briefly considered and answered.'
To this Mr. Proast replied, under a perplexing title, in, 'A third Let- 'ter concerning Toleration; in Defence of the Argument of the Letter * concerning Toleration, briefly considered and answered." Prinfed at Oxford, 1691, in quarto.
In answer to it, in 1692, Mr. Locke published 'A third Letter for 'Toleration. To the Author of the third Letter concerning Tolera'tion.'—In quarto.
After twelve years silence, another tract appeared, written by Mr. Proast, intitled, 'A second Letter to the Author of three Letters for 'Toleration. From the Author of the Argument of the Letter concern* ing Toleration briefly considered and answered. And of the Defence 'of it. With-a postscript, taking some notice of two passages in The 'Rights of the Protestant Dissenters.' Printed at Oxford, 1704, in quarto.—' Imprimatur, Timo. Halton, Pro-Vice-Can. Oxon.'
Mr. Locke began a reply, which was left unfinished, and published in his posthumous works. Preface to the 4to edition of the Letters concerning Toleration.