Buckingham, observes Hume, "in order to fortify himself against the
resentment of James"--on the conduct of the duke in the Spanish match,
when James was latterly hearing every day Buckingham against Bristol,
and Bristol against Buckingham--"had affected popularity, and entered
into the cabals of the puritans; but afterwards, being secure of the
confidence of Charles, he had since abandoned this party; and on that
account was the more exposed to their hatred and resentment."
The political coquetry of a minister coalescing with an opposition
party, when he was on the point of being disgraced, would doubtless open
an involved scene of intrigue; and what one exacted, and the other was
content to yield, towards the mutual accommodation, might add one more
example to the large chapter of political infirmity. Both workmen
attempting to convert each other into tools, by first trying their
respective malleability on the anvil, are liable to be disconcerted by
even a slight accident, whenever that proves, to perfect conviction, how
little they can depend on each other, and that each party comes to
cheat, and not to be cheated!
This piece of secret history is in part recoverable from good
authority. The two great actors were the Duke of Buckingham and Dr.
Preston, the master of Emmanual College, and the head of the puritan
party.
Dr. Preston was an eminent character, who from his youth was not without
ambition. His scholastic learning, the subtilty of his genius, and his
more elegant accomplishments, had attracted the notice of James, at
whose table he was perhaps more than once honoured as a guest; a
suspicion of his puritanic principles was perhaps the only obstacle to
his court preferment; yet Preston unquestionably designed to play a
political part. He retained the favour of James by the king's hope of
withdrawing the doctor from the opposition party, and commanded the
favour of Buckingham by the fears of that minister; when, to employ the
quaint style of Hacket, the duke foresaw that "he might come to be tried
in the furnace of the next sessions of parliament, and he had need to
make the refiners his friends:" most of these "refiners" were the
puritanic or opposition party. Appointed one of the chaplains of Prince
Charles, Dr. Preston had the advantage of being in frequent attendance;
and as Hacket tells us, "this politic man felt the pulse of the court,
and wanted not the intelligence of all dark mysteries through the Scotch
in his highness's bed-chamber." A close communication took place between
the duke and Preston, who, as Hacket describes, was "a good crow to
smell carrion." He obtained an easy admission to the duke's closet at
least thrice a week, and their notable conferences Buckingham appears to
have communicated to his confidential friends. Preston, intent on
carrying all his points, skilfully commenced with the smaller ones. He
winded the duke circuitously,--he worked at him subterraneously. This
wary politician was too sagacious to propose what he had at heart--the
extirpation of the hierarchy! The thunder of James's voice, "No bishop!
no king!" in the conference at Hampton Court, still echoed in the ear of
the puritan. He assured the duke that the love of the people was his
only anchor, which could only be secured by the most popular measures. A
new sort of reformation was easy to execute. Cathedrals and collegiate
churches maintained by vast wealth, and the lands of the chapter, only
fed "fat, lazy, and unprofitable drones." The dissolution of the
foundations of deans and chapters would open an ample source to pay the
king's debts, and scatter the streams of patronage. "You would then
become the darling of the commonwealth;" I give the words as I find
them in Hacket. "If a crumb stick in the throat of any considerable man
that attempts an opposition, it will be easy to wash it down with
manors, woods, royalties, tythes, &c." It would be furnishing the wants
of a number of gentlemen; and he quoted a Greek proverb, "that when a
great oak falls, every neighbour may scuffle for a faggot."
Dr. Preston was willing to perform the part which Knox had acted in
Scotland! He might have been certain of a party to maintain this
national violation of property; for he who calls out "Plunder!" will
ever find a gang. These acts of national injustice, so much desired by
revolutionists, are never beneficial to the people; they never partake
of the spoliation, and the whole terminates in the gratification of
private rapacity.
It was not, however, easy to obtain such perpetual access to the
minister, and at the same time escape from the watchful. Archbishop
Williams, the lord keeper, got sufficient hints from the king; and in a
tedious conference with the duke, he wished to convince him that Preston
had only offered him "flitten milk, out of which he should churn
nothing!" The duke was, however, smitten by the new project, and made a
remarkable answer: "You lose yourself in generalities: make it out to
me, in particular, if you can, that the motion you pick at will find
repulse, and be baffled in the House of Commons. I know not how you
bishops may struggle, but I am much deluded if a great part of the
knights and burgesses would not be glad to see this alteration." We are
told on this, that Archbishop Williams took out a list of the members of
the House of Commons, and convinced the minister that an overwhelming
majority would oppose this projected revolution, and that in consequence
the duke gave it up.
But this anterior decision of the duke may be doubtful, since Preston
still retained the high favour of the minister, after the death of
James. When James died at Theobalds, where Dr. Preston happened to be in
attendance, he had the honour of returning to town in the new king's
coach with the Duke of Buckingham. The doctor's servile adulation of the
minister gave even great offence to the over-zealous puritans. That he
was at length discarded is certain; but this was owing not to any
deficient subserviency on the side of our politician, but to one of
those unlucky circumstances which have often put an end to temporary
political connexions, by enabling one party to discover what the other
thinks of him.
I draw this curious fact from a manuscript narrative in the handwriting
of the learned William Wotton. When the puritanic party foolishly became
jealous of the man who seemed to be working at root and branch for their
purposes, they addressed a letter to Preston, remonstrating with him for
his servile attachment to the minister; on which he confidently returned
an answer, assuring them that he was as fully convinced of the vileness
and profligacy of the Duke of Buckingham's character as any man could
be, but that there was no way to come at him but by the lowest flattery,
and that it was necessary for the glory of God that such instruments
should be made use of as could be had; and for that reason, and that
alone, he showed that respect to the reigning favourite, and not for any
real honour that he had for him. This letter proved fatal; some
officious hand conveyed it to the duke! When Preston came, as usual, the
duke took his opportunity of asking him what he had ever done to
disoblige him, that he should describe him in such black characters to
his own party? Preston, in amazement, denied the fact, and poured forth
professions of honour and gratitude. The duke showed him his own letter.
Dr. Preston instantaneously felt a political apoplexy; the labours of
some years were lost in a single morning. The baffled politician was
turned out of Wallingford House, never more to see the enraged minister!
And from that moment Buckingham wholly abandoned the puritans, and
cultivated the friendship of Laud. This happened soon after James the
First's death. Wotton adds, "This story I had from one who was extremely
well versed in the secret history of the time."[284]