CHAPTER V.

LINCOLN'S INN, AND THE NEIGHBOURHOOD.

Lincoln's Inn -- Ben Jonson's Bricklaying -- Enactments against

Beards -- Oliver Cromwell, More, Hale, and other eminent

Students of Lincoln's Inn -- Lincoln's Inn Fields, or Square --

Houses there built by Inigo Jones -- Pepys's Admiration of the

Comforts of Mr. Povey -- Surgeons' College -- Sir Richard and

Lady Fanshawe, and Lord Sandwich -- Execution of the patriotic

Lord Russell, with an Account of the Circumstances that led to

and accompanied it, and some Remarks on his Character --

Affecting Passages from the Letters of his Widow -- Ludicrous

Story connected with Newcastle House.

Lincoln's Inn, upon the side of Chancery Lane, presents a long, old

front of brick, more simple than clean. It is saturated with the

London smoke. Within is a handsome row of buildings, and a garden, in

which Bickerstaff describes himself as walking, by favour of the

Benchers, who had grown old with him.[194] It will be recollected that

Bickerstaff lived in Shire Lane, which leads into this inn from

Temple-bar. The garden-wall on the side next Chancery Lane is said by

Aubrey to have been the scene of Ben Jonson's performance as a

bricklayer. We have spoken of it in our remarks on that lane; but

shall now add the particulars. "His mother, after his father's death,"

says Aubrey, "married a bricklayer; and 'tis generally said that he

wrought for some time with his father-in-law, and particularly on the

garden-wall of Lincoln's Inn, next to Chancery Lane." Aubrey's report

adds, that "a knight, or bencher, walking through and hearing him

repeat some Greek names out of Homer, discoursing with him, and

finding him to have a wit extraordinary, gave him some exhibition to

maintain him at Trinity College in Cambridge."[195] Fuller says, that

he had been there before at St. John's, and that he was obliged by the

family poverty to return to the bricklaying.[196] "And let them not

blush," says this good-hearted writer, "that have, but those who have

not a lawful calling. He helped in the building of the new structure

of Lincoln's Inn, where, having a trowell in his hand, he had a book

in his pocket." A late editor of Ben Jonson rejects these literary

accounts of the poet's bricklaying as "figments."[197] And he brings

his author's own representations to prove that he left the business,

not for the University, but the continent. As this writer has nothing,

however, to oppose to what Aubrey and Fuller believed respecting the

rest, the reports, so far, are worth as much as they were before.

Nobody was more likely than Ben Jonson to carry a Greek or Latin book

with him on such occasions: nor, as far as that matter goes, to let

others become aware of it.

Pennant's sketch of Lincoln's Inn continues to be the best,

notwithstanding all that has been said of it since his time. He begins

with observing, that "the gate is of brick, but of no small ornament

to the street." This is the gate in Chancery Lane.

"It was built," he continues, "by Sir Thomas Lovel, once a

member of this inn, and afterwards treasurer of the household

to Henry VII. The other parts were rebuilt at different times,

but much about the same period. None of the original building

is left, for it was formed out of the house of the Black

Friars, which fronted Holborn end of the palace of Ralph Nevil,

Chancellor of England, and Bishop of Chichester, built by him

in the reign of Henry III., on a piece of ground granted to him

by the king. It continued to be inhabited by some of the

successors in the see. This was the original site of the

Dominicians or Black Friars, before they removed to the spot

now known by that name. On part of the ground, now covered with

buildings, Henry Lacy, Earl of Lincoln, built an Inne, as it

was in those days called, for himself, in which he died in

1312. The ground did belong to the Black Friars; and was

granted by Edward I. to that great Earl. The whole has retained

his name. One of the Bishops of Chichester, in after times, did

grant leases of the buildings to certain students of the law,

reserving to themselves a rent, and lodgings for themselves

whenever they came to town. This seems to have taken place

about the time of Henry VII."

"The chapel," continues our author, "was designed by Inigo

Jones; it is built upon massy pillars, and affords, under its

shelter, an excellent walk. This work evinces that Inigo never

was designed for a Gothic architect. The Lord Chancellor holds

his sittings in the great hall. This, like that of the Temple,

had its revels, and great Christmasses. Instead of the Lord of

Misrule, it had its King of the Cocknies. They had also a Jack

Straw; but in the time of Queen Elizabeth he, and all his

adherents, were utterly banished. I must not omit, that in the

same reign sumptuary laws were made to regulate the dress of

the members of the house; who were forbidden to wear long hair,

or great ruffs, cloaks, boots, or spurs. In the reign of Henry

VIII. beards were prohibited at the great table, under pain of

paying double commons. His daughter, Elizabeth, in the first

year of her reign, confined them to a fortnight's growth, under

penalty of 3s. 4d.: but the fashion prevailed so strongly, that

the prohibition was repealed, and no manner of size limited to

that venerable excrescence."[198]

'Tis merry in the hall,

When beards wag all,

says the proverb; but the lawyers in those days had already so many

refreshments to their solemnity, in masks and revels, that it was

thought necessary to provide for decency of mastication in ordinary.

Attempts to regulate trifles of this sort, however, have always been

found more difficult than any others, the impertinence of the

interference being in proportion. Think of the officers watching the

illegal growth of the beard; the vexation of the "dandies," who wanted

their beards out of doors; and the resentment of the unservile part of

the elders! He that parted with his beard, rather than his three and

fourpence, would be looked upon as an alien.

In the hall of Lincoln's Inn is Hogarth's celebrated failure of "Paul

preaching before Felix." It seems hard upon a great man to exhibit a

specimen of what he could not do. However, the subject does not appear

to have been of the society's choosing. A bequest had been made them

which produced a commission to Hogarth, probably in expectation that

he would illustrate some of the consequences of good laws in his usual

manner.

Old Fortescue was of Lincoln's Inn; Spelman, the great antiquary; Sir

Thomas More; Cromwell; Sir Mathew Hale; Lord Chancellor Egerton,

otherwise known by his title of Lord Ellesmere; Shaftesbury, the

statesman; and Lord Mansfield. Dr. Donne also studied there for a

short time, but left the Inn to enjoy an inheritance, and became a

clergyman. However, he returned to it in after life as preacher of the

lecture; which office he held about two years, to the great

satisfaction of his hearers. Tillotson was another preacher. It is

difficult to present to one's imagination the venerable judges in

their younger days; to think of Hale as a gay fellow (which he was

till an accident made him otherwise); or fancy that Sir Thomas More

had any other face but the profound and ponderous one in his pictures.

His face, indeed, must have been full of meaning enough at all times;

for at twenty-one he was a stirring youth in Parliament; and at twenty

he took to wearing a hair-shirt, as an aid to his meditations. It is

interesting to fancy him passing us in the Inn square, with a glance

of his deep eye; we (of posterity) being in the secret of his

hair-shirt, which the less informed passengers are not.

The account of Hale's change of character, on his entrance into

Lincoln's Inn, merits to be repeated.

"At Oxford," says his biographer, "he fell into many levities

and extravagances, and was preparing to go along with his

tutor, who went chaplain to Lord Vere, into the Low Countries,

with a resolution of entering himself into the Prince of

Orange's army, when he was diverted from his design by being

engaged in a lawsuit with Sir William Whitmore, who laid claim

to part of his estate. Afterwards, by the persuasions of

Serjeant Glanville, who happened to be his counsel in this

case, and had an opportunity of observing his capacity, he

resolved upon the study of the law, and was admitted of

Lincoln's Inn, November 8, 1629. Sensible of the time he had

lost in frivolous pursuits, he now studied at the rate of

sixteen hours a-day, and threw aside all appearance of vanity

in his apparel. He is said, indeed, to have neglected his dress

so much, that, being a strong and well-built man, he was once

taken by a press-gang, as a person very fit for sea-service,

which pleasant mistake made him regard more decency in his

clothes for the future, though never to any degree of

extravagant finery. What confirmed him still more in a serious

and regular way of life was an accident, which is related to

have befallen one of his companions. Hale, with other young

students of the Inn, being invited out of town, one of the

company called for so much wine, that notwithstanding all Hale

could do to prevent it, he went on in his excess till he fell

down in a fit, seemingly dead, and was with some difficulty

recovered. This particularly affected Hale, in whom the

principles of religion had been early implanted; and,

therefore, retiring into another room, and falling down upon

his knees, he prayed earnestly to God, both for his friend,

that he might be restored to life again, and for himself, that

he might be forgiven for being present and countenancing so

much excess; and he vowed to God, that he would never again

keep company in that manner, nor drink a health while he lived.

His friend recovered; and from this time Mr. Hale forsook all

his gay acquaintance, and divided his whole time between the

duties of religion, and the studies of his profession."

Cromwell is supposed to have been about two years in Lincoln's Inn,

and while he was there attended to anything but the law, the future

devout Protector being, in fact, nothing more or less than a gambler

and debauchee. However, he is supposed to have run all his round of

dissipation in that time. Mansfield's residence in Lincoln's Inn, when

Mr. Murray, gave rise to a singular reference in Pope. It is in the

translation of Horace's ode, "Intermissa Venus diu," where the poet

says to the goddess--

"I am not now, alas! the man

As in the gentle reign of my Queen Anne.

To _number five_ direct your doves,

There spread round Murray all your blooming loves;

Noble and young, who strikes the heart

With every sprightly, every decent part;

Equal the injured to defend,

To charm the mistress, or to fix the friend."

This _number five_ to which Venus is to go with her doves, points out

Murray's apartments in Lincoln's Inn. Pope, as we have mentioned

elsewhere, thought that nature intended his noble acquaintance for an

Ovid; a notion partly suggested, perhaps, by Ovid's having been a

lawyer. It was during his residence in Lincoln's Inn, that the future

Lord Chief Justice is said to have drunk the Pretender's health on his

knees; which he very likely did. The charge was brought up twenty

years afterwards, to ruin his prospects under the Hanover succession;

but it came to nothing. One dynasty has no dislike to a strong

prejudice in favour of a preceding dynasty, when the latter has ceased

to be formidable. The propensity to adhere to royalty is looked upon

as a good symptom; and the event generally answers the expectation.

The favourite courtiers under the house of Brunswick have come of

Jacobite families.

A century ago, according to a passage in Gay, Lincoln's Inn and the

neighbourhood were dangerous places to walk through at night.

"Where Lincoln's Inn, wide space, is railed around,

Cross not with venturous step; there oft is found

The lurking thief, who while the daylight shone,

Made the wall echo with his begging tone:

That crutch, which late compassion moved, shall wound

Thy bleeding head, and fell thee to the ground.

Though thou art tempted by the linkman's call,

Yet trust him not along the lonely wall;

In the midway he'll quench the flaming brand,

And share the booty with the pilfering band.

Still keep the public streets, where oily rays,

Shot from the crystal lamp, o'erspread the ways."

The wall here mentioned is probably that which was not long since

displaced by the new one, and the elegant structure that now adorns

the east side of Lincoln's Inn Fields.

Lincoln's Inn Fields, now a handsome square, set more agreeably than

most others, with grass plat and underwood, were first disposed into

their present regular appearance by Inigo Jones, under the auspices of

a committee of gentry and nobility, one of whom was Bacon. Inigo built

some of the houses, and gave to the ground-plot of the square the

exact dimensions of the base of one of the pyramids of Egypt. He could

not have hit upon a better mode of conveying to the imagination a

sense of those enormous structures. If the passenger stops and

pictures to himself one of the huge slanting sides of the pyramid, as

wide as the whole length of the square, leaning away up into the

atmosphere, with an apex we know not how high, it will indeed seem to

him a kind of stone mountain.

The houses in Lincoln's Inn Fields built by Inigo Jones are in Arch

Row (the western side), and may still be distinguished. Pennant speaks

of one of them as being "Lindesey House, once the seat of the Earls of

Lindesey, and of their descendants, the Dukes of Ancaster." They are

probably still a great deal more handsome inside, and more convenient,

than any of the flimsy modern houses preferred to them; but London has

grown so large, that everybody who can afford it lives at the

fashionable outskirts for the fresh air. It is probable that Inigo's

houses created an ambition of good building in this quarter. Pepys

speaks of a Mr. Povey's house in Lincoln's Inn Fields as a miracle of

elegance and comfort. His description of it is characteristic of the

snug and wondering Pepys.

"Thence (that is to say, from chapel and the ladies) with Mr.

Povey home to dinner; where extraordinary cheer. And after

dinner up and down to see his house. And in a word, methinks,

for his perspective in the little closet; his room floored

above with woods of several colours, like, but above the best

cabinet-work I ever saw; his grotto and vault, with his bottles

of wine, and a well therein to keep them cool; his furniture of

all sorts; his bath at the top of the house, good pictures, and

his manners of eating and drinking; do surpass all that ever I

did see of one man in all my life."[199]

The Country and City Mouse, in Pope's imitation of Horace, go

To a tall house near Lincoln's Inn,

which had

Palladian walls, Venetian doors,

Grotesco roofs, and stucco floors.

The house of a late architect (Sir John Soane) is observable in

Holborn Row (the north side of the square), and has a singular but

pleasing effect, though not quite desirable perhaps in this northern

climate, where light and sun are in request. It presents a case of

stone, added to the original front, and comprising a balcony and

arcade. Shrubs and plate-glass complete the taste of its appearance.

On the opposite side of the way (called Portugal Row, most likely from

our connection with Portugal in Charles the Second's time), the

inhabitant of the above house had the pleasure, we believe, of

contemplating his own work in the handsome front and portico of

Surgeon's College. This mode of giving a new front to a house, and

fetching it out into a portico, is an ingenious way of getting up an

ornament to the metropolis at little expense. Surgeons' College,

instead of being two or three old houses with a new face, looks like a

separate building. In Portugal Row sometime lived Sir Richard

Fanshawe, in whose quaint translation of the Camoens there is

occasionally more genuine poetry, than in the less unequal version of

Mickle. This accomplished person was recalled from an embassy in

Spain, on the ground that he had signed a treaty without authority;

which was fact; but the suspicious necessity of finding some

honourable way of removing Lord Sandwich from his command in the navy,

induced Lady Fanshawe and others to conclude that he was sacrificed to

that convenience. He died on the intended day of his return, of a

violent fever, aggravated, not improbably, perhaps caused, by this

awkward close of his mission: for such things have been, with men of

sensitive imaginations. His wife, a very frank and cordial woman, has

left interesting memoirs of him, in which she countenances a clamour

of that day, that Lord Sandwich was a coward. She adds, "He neither

understood the custom of the (Spanish) court, nor the language, nor

indeed anything but a vicious life; and thus (addressing her children)

was he shuffled into your father's employment, to reap the benefit of

his five years' negotiation."[200] We quote this passage here, because

Lord Sandwich was himself an inhabitant of Lincoln's Inn Fields. His

want of courage (a charge shamefully bandied to and fro between

officers at that time) is surely not to be taken for granted upon the

word of his enemies, considering the testimonies borne in his favour

by the Duke of York and others, and his numerous successes against the

enemy. It is possible, however, that the pleasures of Charles's court

might have done him no good. Sandwich had been one of Cromwell's

council. He appears afterwards to have been a gallant of Lady

Castlemaine's; was a great courtier; and probably had as little

principle as most public men of that age. Pepys, who was his relation,

describes him as being a lute-player.

On Lady Fanshawe's return to England, she took a house for twenty-one

years in Holborn Row (the north side of the Fields), where the

contemplation of the houses opposite must have been very sad. Her

account of the circumstances under which she returned is of a

melancholy interest.

"I had not," she says, "God is my witness, above twenty-five

doubloons by me at my husband's death, to bring home a family

of three score servants, but was forced to sell one thousand

pounds' worth of our own plate, and to spend the Queen's

present of two thousand doubloons in my journey to England, not

owing nor leaving one shilling debt in Spain, I thank God; nor

did my husband leave any debt at home, which every ambassador

cannot say. Neither did these circumstances following prevail

to mend my condition, much less found I that compassion I

expected upon the view of myself, that had lost at once my

husband, and fortune in him, with my son, but twelve months

old, in my arms, four daughters, the eldest but thirteen years

of age, with the body of my dear husband daily in my sight for

near six months together, and a distressed family, all to be by

me in honour and honesty provided for; and, to add to my

afflictions, neither persons sent to conduct me, nor pass, nor

ship, nor money to carry me one thousand miles, but some few

letters of compliment from the chief ministers, bidding 'God

help me!' as they do to beggars, and they might have added,

'they had nothing for me,' with great truth. But God did hear,

and see, and help me, and brought my soul out of trouble; and,

by his blessed providence, I and you live, move, and have our

being, and I humbly pray God that that blessed providence may

ever relieve our wants, Amen."[201]

Lady Fanshawe was no coward, whatever her foes may have been. During a

former voyage with her husband to Spain, when she had been married

about six years, the vessel was attacked by a Turkish galley, on which

occasion she has left the following touching account of her

behaviour:--

"When we had just passed the straits, we saw coming towards us,

with full sails, a Turkish galley well manned, and we believed

we should be all carried away slaves, for this man had so laden

his ship with goods from Spain, that his guns were useless,

though the ship carried sixty guns; he called for brandy, and

after he had well drunken, and all his men, which were near two

hundred, he called for arms, and cleared the deck as well as he

could, resolving to fight rather than lose his ship, which was

worth thirty thousand pounds; this was sad for us passengers,

but my husband bid us be sure to keep in the cabin, and not

appear--the women--which would make the Turks think we were a

man-of-war, but if they saw women they would take us for

merchants and board us. He went upon the deck, and took a gun

and bandoliers, and sword, and, with the rest of the ship's

company, stood upon deck, expecting the arrival of the Turkish

man-of-war. This beast, the captain, had locked me up in the

cabin; I knocked and called long to no purpose, until at length

the cabin-boy came and opened the door; I, all in tears,

desired him to be so good as to give me his blue thrum cap he

wore, and his tarred coat, which he did, and I gave him

half-a-crown, and putting them on, and flinging away my

night-clothes, I crept up softly, and stood upon the deck by my

husband's side, as free from sickness and fear, as, I confess,

from discretion; but it was the effect of that passion which I

could never master.

"By this time the two vessels were engaged in parley, and so

well satisfied with speech and sight of each other's forces,

that the Turks' man-of-war tacked about, and we continued our

course. But when your father saw it convenient to retreat,

looking upon me, he blessed himself, and snatched me up in his

arms, saying, 'Good God, that love can make this change!' and

though he seemingly chid me, he would laugh at it as often as

he remembered that voyage."

We now come to an event, uniting the most touching circumstances of

private life with the loftiest utility of public, and the benefits of

which we are this day enjoying, perhaps in every one of our comforts.

In this square, now possessed by inhabitants who can think and write

as they please on all subjects, and the centre of which is adorned

with roses and lilacs, was executed the celebrated patriot, Lord

Russell. We should ill perform any part of the object of this work, if

we did not dwell at some length upon a scene so interesting, and upon

the circumstances that led to it.

Lord Russell (sometimes improperly called Lord William Russell, for he

had succeeded to the courtesy-title by the decease of his elder

brothers,) was son of William, Earl of Bedford, by Lady Ann Carr,

daughter of Carr, Earl of Somerset; and he was beheaded in the year

1683, the last year but two of the reign of King Charles II., for an

alleged conspiracy to seize the King's guards and put him to death.

The conspiracy was called the Rye House Plot, but incorrectly as far

as Lord Russell was concerned; for it is not proved that he ever heard

of the house which occasioned the name; and he was condemned upon

allegations which would have destroyed him, had no such place existed.

The Rye House was a farm near Hoddesdon, in Hertfordshire, belonging

to one of the alleged conspirators, and it had a bye-road near it

through which Charles was accustomed to pass in returning from the

races at Newmarket. It was said that the King was to have been

assassinated in this road, but that a fire at Newmarket, which put the

town into confusion, hastened his return to London before the

conspirators had time to assemble.

Charles II., and his brother, the Duke of York, afterwards James II.,

in the prosecution of those designs against the liberty and religion

of the state, which are now acknowledged by all historians, had lately

succeeded in producing a strong re-action against the party opposed to

them. This party, the Whigs, in their dread of arbitrary power and

popery, had attempted with great pertinacity to exclude the Duke of

York, an avowed papist, from the succession. They had indicted him as

a popish recusant: they had listened, with too great credulity, to the

story of a Popish Plot, for which several persons were executed: and

while these strong measures were going forward, to which the general

dread of popery encouraged them, they were inquiring into the King's

illegal connections with France, and putting the last sting to his

vexation by refusing him money. Charles's gambling and debaucheries

kept him in a perpetual state of poverty. He was always endeavouring

to raise money upon every shift he could devise, and misappropriating

all he obtained, which completed the ingloriousness of his reign by

rendering him a pensioner of France. He had a strong party of

corruptionists in the House of Commons; but the public feeling against

the Duke gave the elections a balance the other way; and the poor King

was compelled, from time to time, to purchase what money he wanted, by

the surrender of a popular right.

Driven thus from loss to loss, and not knowing where the diminution of

his resources would end, Charles at length expressed himself willing

to limit the powers of a Popish successor, though he would not consent

to exclude him. The Whigs, strong in their vantage-ground, and backed

by the voice of the country, rejected what they would formerly have

agreed to, and insisted on the exclusion. And here the reaction

commenced in Charles's favour. The Whigs had allied themselves to the

dissenters, whose toleration they advocated in proportion as they

opposed that of the Catholics. It was a contradiction natural enough

at that time, when the remembrance of Protestant martyrdom was still

lively, and the growth of philosophy had not neutralised the papal

spirit, or, at least, was not yet understood to have done so; but by

means of this alliance between the Whigs and Presbyterians Charles

succeeded in awakening the fears of the orthodox. A secret treaty with

the French King enabled him to reckon for a time on being able to

dispense with the contributions of Parliament; and when the latter

again pressed the exclusion bill, he dissolved them, with high

complaints of their inveteracy against government, and artful

insinuations of the favour they showed the dissenters. This

declaration was read in all the churches and chapels, and produced the

reaction he looked for. The Whig leaders, withdrawing into retirement,

seemed to give up the contest for the present; but this was no signal

to power to abstain from pursuing them. Charles, to secure himself a

Parliament that should give him money without inquiry, and to indulge

his brother in his love of revenge (not omitting a portion on his own

account), set himself heartily about influencing the elections for a

new House of Commons. The dissenters were persecuted all over the

country; the Whig newspapers put down; one man, for his noisy zeal

against Popery, put to death by means of the most infamous witnesses,

who had sworn on the other side; and Shaftesbury's life was aimed at,

but saved by the contrivances of the city authorities. The liberties

of the city were then assailed, with but too great success, by means

of judges placed on the bench for that purpose. Other corrupt law

officers were brought into action; a servile lord-mayor was induced to

force two sheriffs upon the city, in open defiance of law and a

majority; in short, every obstacle was removed which accompanied the

existence of properly constituted authorities, and of that late

anti-popery spirit of the nation, which was now comparatively silent,

for fear of being confounded with disaffection to the church.

For an account of what took place upon this corruption of church and

bench, and neutralisation of the popular spirit, we shall now have

recourse to the pages of the latest writer on the subject; who, though

a descendant of Lord Russell, has stated it with a truth and

moderation worthy of the best spirit of his ancestor. The narrative of

the execution we shall take from an eye-witness, and intersperse such

remarks as a diligent inquiry into the conduct and character of Lord

Russell has suggested to our own love of truth.

"The election of the sheriffs," says our author, "seemed to

complete the victory of the throne over the people. It was

evident, from the past conduct of the court, that they would

now select whom they pleased for condemnation.

"Lord Russell received the news with the regret which, in a

person of his temper, it was most likely to produce. Lord

Shaftesbury, on other hand, who was provoked at the apathy of

his party, received with joy the news of the appointment of the

sheriffs, thinking that his London friends, seeing their necks

in danger, would join with him in raising an insurrection. He

hoped at first to make use of the names of the Duke of Monmouth

and Lord Russell, to catch the idle and unwary by the respect

paid to their characters; but when he found them too cautious

to compromise themselves, he endeavoured to ruin their credit

with the citizens. He said that the Duke of Monmouth was a tool

of the court; that Lord Essex had also made his bargain, and

was to go to Ireland; and that, between them, Lord Russell was

deceived. It is a strong testimony to the real worth of Lord

Russell, that, when he made himself obnoxious, either to the

court or to the more violent of his own party, the only charge

they ever brought against him was, that of being deceived,

either by a vain air of popularity or too great a confidence in

his friends.

"Lord Shaftesbury, finding himself deserted, then attempted to

raise an insurrection, by means of his own partisans in the

city. The Duke of Monmouth, at various times, discouraged these

attempts. On one of these occasions, he prevailed on Lord

Russell, who had come to town on private affairs, to go with

him to a meeting, at the house of Sheppard, a wine-merchant.

"Lord Shaftesbury, being concealed in the city at this time,

did not dare to appear himself at this meeting, but sent two of

his creatures, Rumsey and Ferguson. Lord Grey and Sir Thomas

Armstrong were also there; but nothing was determined at this

meeting.

"Soon after this, Lord Shaftesbury, finding he could not bring

his friends to rise with the speed he wished, and being in fear

of being discovered if he remained in London any longer, went

over to Holland. He died in January, 1683.

* * * * *

"After Shaftesbury was gone, there were held meetings of his

former creatures in the chambers of one West, an active,

talking man, who had got the name of being an atheist. Colonel

Rumsey, who had served under Cromwell, and afterwards in

Portugal; Ferguson, who had a general propensity for plots;

Goodenough, who had been under-sheriff; and one Holloway, of

Bristol, were the chief persons at these meetings. Lord Howard

was, at one time, among them. Their discourse seems to have

extended itself to the worst species of treason and murder; but

whether they had any concerted plan for assassinating the King

is still a mystery. Amongst those who were sounded in this

business was one Keeling, a vintner, sinking in business, to

whom Goodenough often spoke of their designs. This man went to

Legge, then made Lord Dartmouth, and discovered all he knew.

Lord Dartmouth took him to Secretary Jenkins, who told him he

could not proceed without more witnesses. It would also seem

that some promises were made to him, for he said in a tavern,

in the hearing of many persons, that 'he had considerable

proffers made him of money, and a place worth 100_l._ or 80_l._

per annum, to do something for them;' and he afterwards

obtained a place in the Victualling office, by means of Lord

Halifax. The method he took of procuring another witness was,

by taking his brother into the company of Goodenough, and

afterwards persuading him to go and tell what he had heard at

Whitehall.

"The substance of the information given by Josiah Keeling, in

his first examination, was, that a plot had been formed for

enlisting forty men, to intercept the King and Duke on their

return from Newmarket, at a farm-house called Rye, belonging to

one Rumbold, a maltster; that this plan being defeated by a

fire at Newmarket, which caused the King's return sooner than

was expected, the design of an insurrection was laid; and, as

the means of carrying this project into effect, they said that

Goodenough had spoken of 4,000 men and 20,000_l._ to be raised

by the Duke of Monmouth and other great men. The following day,

the two brothers made oath, that Goodenough had told them, that

Lord Russell had promised to engage in the design, and to use

all his interest to accomplish the killing of the King and the

Duke. When the Council found that the Duke of Monmouth and Lord

Russell were named, they wrote to the King to come to London,

for they would not venture to go farther without his presence

and leave. In the meantime, warrants were issued for the

apprehension of several of the conspirators. Hearing of this,

and having had private information from the brother of Keeling,

they had a meeting, on the 18th of June, at Captain Walcot's

lodging. At this meeting were present Walcot, Wade, Rumsey,

Norton, the two Goodenoughs, Nelthrop, West, and Ferguson.

Finding they had no means either of opposing the King or flying

into Holland, they agreed to separate, and shift each man for

himself.

"A proclamation was now issued for seizing on some who could

not be found; and amongst these, Rumsey and West were named.

The next day West delivered himself, and Rumsey came in a day

after him. Their confessions, especially concerning the

assassinations at the Rye-house, were very ample. Burnet says,

they had concerted a story to be brought out on such an

emergency.

"In this critical situation, Lord Russell, though perfectly

sensible of his danger, acted with the greatest composure. He

had long before told Mr. Johnson, that 'he was very sensible he

should fall a sacrifice; arbitrary government could not be set

up in England without wading through his blood.' The day before

the King arrived, a messenger of the Council was sent to wait

at his gate, to stop him if he had offered to go out; yet his

back-gate was not watched, so that he might have gone away, if

he had chosen it. He had heard that he was named by Rumsey; but

forgetting the meeting at Sheppard's, he feared no danger from

a man he had always disliked, and never trusted. Yet he thought

proper to send his wife amongst his friends for advice. They

were at first of different minds; but as he said he apprehended

nothing from Rumsey, they agreed that his flight would look too

like a confession of guilt. This advice coinciding with his own

opinion, he determined to stay where he was. As soon as the

King arrived, a messenger was sent to bring him before the

Council. When he appeared there, the King told him, that nobody

suspected him of any design against his person; but that he had

good evidence of his being in designs against his government.

He was examined upon the information of Rumsey, concerning the

meeting at Sheppard's, to which Rumsey pretended to have

carried a message, requiring a speedy resolution, and to have

received for answer that Mr. Trenchard had failed them at

Taunton. Lord Russell totally denied all knowledge of this

message. When the examination was finished, Lord Russell was

sent a close prisoner to the Tower. Upon his going in, he told

his servant Taunton that he was sworn against, and they would

have his life. Taunton said, he hoped it would not be in the

power of his enemies to take it. Lord Russell answered, 'Yes;

the devil is loose!'

"From this moment he looked upon himself as a dying man, and

turned his thoughts wholly upon another world. He read much in

the Scriptures, particularly in the Psalms; but whilst he

behaved with the serenity of a man prepared for death, his

friends exhibited an honourable anxiety to preserve his life.

Lord Essex would not leave his house, lest his absconding might

incline a jury to give more credit to the evidence against Lord

Russell. The Duke of Monmouth sent to let him know he would

come in and run fortunes with him, if he thought it could do

him any service. He answered, it would be of no advantage to

him to have his friends die with him.

"A committee of the Privy Council came to examine him. Their

inquiries related to the meeting at Sheppard's, the rising at

Taunton, the seizing of the guards, and a design for a rising

in Scotland. In answer to the questions put to him, he

acknowledged he had been at Sheppard's house divers times, and

that he went there with the Duke of Monmouth; but he denied all

knowledge of any consultation tending to an insurrection, or to

surprise the guards. He remembered no discourse concerning any

rising in Taunton; and knew of no design for a rising in

Scotland. He answered his examiners in a civil manner, but

declined making any defence till his trial, when he had no

doubt of being able to prove his innocence. The charge of

treating with the Scots, as a thing the council were positively

assured of, alarmed his friends; and Lady Russell desired Dr.

Burnet to examine who it could be that had charged him; but

upon inquiry, it appeared to be only an artifice to draw

confession from him; and notwithstanding the power which the

court possessed to obtain the condemnation of their enemies, by

the perversion of law, the servility of judges, and the

submission of juries, Lord Russell might still have contested

his life with some prospect of success, had not a new

circumstance occurred to cloud his declining prospects. This

was the apprehension and confession of Lord Howard. At first,

he had talked of the whole matter with scorn and contempt; and

solemnly professed that he knew nothing which could hurt Lord

Russell. The King himself said, he found Lord Howard was not

amongst them, and he supposed it was for the same reason which

some of themselves had given for not admitting Oates into their

secrets, namely, that he was such a rogue they could not trust

him. But when the news was brought to Lord Howard that West had

delivered himself, Lord Russell, who was with him, observed him

change colour, and asked him if he apprehended any thing from

him? He replied that he had been as free with him as any man.

Hampden saw him afterwards under great fears, and desired him

to go out of the way, if he thought there was matter against

him, and he had not strength of mind to meet the occasion. A

warrant was now issued against him on the evidence of West, and

he was taken, after a long search, concealed in a chimney of

his own house. He immediately confessed all he knew and more.

* * * * *

"Hampden and Lord Russell were imprisoned upon Lord Howard's

information; and, four days afterwards, Lord Russell was

brought to trial: but, in order to possess the public mind with

a sense of the blackness of the plot, Walcot, Hone, and Rouse

were first brought to trial, and condemned upon the evidence of

Keeling, Lee, and West, of a design to assassinate the

King."[202]

It is not necessary to enter at large into the trial. We shall give

the main points of it, on which sentence was founded; but when it is

considered that the bench had lately had an accession of accommodating

judges; that Jeffries was one of the counsel for the prosecution; that

the jury, illegally returned, were not allowed to be challenged; that

the witnesses were perjured, contradicted themselves, and swore to

save their lives; that one of them (Lord Howard) was a man of such

infamous character, that the King said, "he would not hang the worst

dog he had, upon his evidence;" that nevertheless the testimonies of

the most honourable men against him were not held to injure his

evidence, and that a crowd of them in Lord Russell's favour were of as

little avail in giving the prisoner the benefit of a totally different

reputation, it will be allowed, that our pages need not be occupied

with details, which in fact had nothing to do with his condemnation.

The ground on which Lord Russell was sentenced to death was, that he

had violated the law in conspiring the death of the King. He argued,

that granting the charge to be true (which he denied), it was not that

of conspiring the death of the King, but "a conspiracy to levy war;"

that this was not treason within the statute (which it was not); and

that if it had been, a statute of Charles II. made the accusation null

and void, because the time had expired to which the operation of it

was limited. The lawyers, who in fact had been compelled by their

imperfect enactment to lay the charge on the ground of conspiring the

King's death, had so worded the statute of Charles, that, like the

oracles of old, it was capable of a double construction. But not to

observe that the prisoner ought to have had the benefit of the doubt

(and it has been generally thought that the statute was clearly the

other way), they could never get rid of the necessity of assuming that

the King's death was intended; whereas, nothing can be more plain, not

only from their own enactments, but from all history, that an

insurrection, though against a King himself, may have no such object;

so that here was a man to be sacrificed to the _spirit_ of the law

(which by its very nature should have saved him,) while the court, in

this and a thousand other instances, was violating the letter of it.

"Of the Rye House Plot," says Mr. Fox, "it may be said, much

more truly than of the Popish, that there was in it some truth,

mixed with much falsehood. It seems probable, that there was

among some of the accused a notion of assassinating the King;

but whether this notion was ever ripened into what may be

called a design, and much more, whether it were ever evinced by

such an overt act as the law requires for conviction, is very

doubtful. In regard to the conspirators of higher ranks, from

whom all suspicion of participation in the intended

assassination has been long since done away, there is

unquestionable reason to believe that they had often met and

consulted, as well for the purpose of ascertaining the means

they actually possessed, as for that of devising others, for

delivering their country from the dreadful servitude into which

it had fallen; and thus far their conduct appears clearly to

have been laudable. If they went further, and did anything

which could be really construed into an actual conspiracy to

levy war against the King, they acted, considering the

disposition of the nation at that time, very indiscreetly. But

whether their proceedings had ever gone this length, is far

from certain. Monmouth's communications with the King, when we

reflect on all the circumstances of those communications,

deserve not the smallest attention; nor, indeed, if they did,

does the letter which he afterwards withdrew prove anything

upon this point. And it is an outrage to common-sense to call

Lord Grey's narrative, written as he himself states in his

letter to James II., while the question of his pardon was

pending, an authentic account. That which is most certain in

this affair is, that they had committed no overt act,

indicating the imagining the King's death, even according to

the most strained construction of the statute of Edward III.;

much less was any such act legally proved against them. And the

conspiracy to levy war was not treason, except by a recent

statute of Charles II., the prosecutions upon which were

expressly limited to a certain time, which in these cases had

elapsed; so that it is impossible not to assent to the opinion

of those who have ever stigmatised the condemnation and

execution of Russell as a most flagrant violation of law and

justice."[203]

The truth respecting Lord Russell seems to be, that he was a man of

the highest character and the best intentions, who suffered himself,

not very discreetly, to listen to projects which he disapproved, in

the hope of seeing better ones substituted. There can be no doubt that

he wished to make changes in an illegal government, short of

interfering with the King's possession of the throne. He had a right,

by law, to endeavour it. He had openly shown himself anxious to do so;

and the doubt can be as little, that the Duke of York, from that

moment marked him out for his revenge. Russell implied as much in the

paper he gave the sheriff; showing, indeed, such a strong sense of it,

as (considering the truly Christian style of the paper in general) is

very affecting. It has been justly said of him, that he was a man

rather eminent for his virtues than his talents. We cannot help

thinking that the paucity of words, to which he repeatedly alludes

himself, and which was very evident during his trial, did him serious

injury, both then and before. We mean, that if he had had a greater

confidence, he might have advocated his cause to very solid advantage,

perhaps to his entire acquittal. It is touching to observe, in the

account of his behaviour after sentence, how the excitement of the

occasion loosened his tongue, and inspired him with some turns of

thought, more lively, perhaps, than he had been accustomed to. His

character has been respectfully treated by all parties since the

Revolution, and his death lamented. A startling charge, however, was

brought against him and Sidney, in consequence of the discovery of a

set of papers belonging to Barillon, the French Ambassador of that

time, in which Sidney's name appears set down for five hundred pounds

of secret service money from the French Government, and Russell is

described as having interviews with Barillon's agent, Rouvigny,

tending to prevent a war disagreeable both to Louis and the English

patriots. The vague allusions of some modern writers, together with an

unsupported assertion of Ralph Montague, the intriguing English

Ambassador in France, that money was to be distributed in Parliament

"by means of William Russell, and other discontented people," have

tended to lump together in the public mind the two charges occasioned

by these documents. But they are quite distinct. Lord Russell had

nothing to do with the money-list, in which the name of Sidney

appears. The amount of the matter is this. Charles II. was always

pretending to go to war with France, chiefly to get money for his

debaucheries, and partly to raise an army which he might turn against

the constitution. The nation, in their hatred of Louis's

anti-protestant bigotry, and their old and less warrantable propensity

to fight with those whom they publicly considered as their natural

enemies (a delusion, we trust, now going by), were always in a state

to be deceived by Charles on this point; and the patriots were as

regularly perplexed how to agree to the wishes of the King and people,

knowing as they did, the former's insincerity, loth to give him more

money to squander, and yet anxious to show their dislike of an

arbitrary neighbour, and afraid of his being in collision with their

prince. Their greatest fear, however, was upon this last point: it was

very strong at the juncture in question; and therefore, when Louis

gave them to understand, through his agent, that he himself was

desirous of avoiding a war, Russell certainly does appear to have

allowed the agent to talk with him on the subject, and to have

expressed a willingness to influence the votes of Parliament

accordingly. There was a further understanding that Louis was to

complete the mutual favour, by assisting to obtain a dissolution of

Parliament, in case the peace should continue; for the patriots

expected very different things from a dissolution at that time (1678),

than what it produced afterwards. Russell's noble biographer justly

observes, that for the truth of these statements we are to trust

Rouvigny's report, coming through the hands of Barillon: but granting

them to be true, he thinks there was nothing criminal in the

intercourse. He observes, that, in the first place, Russell was

Rouvigny's kinsman by marriage, being first cousin to his wife, which

accounts for the commencement of the intercourse; and, secondly,

"The imminent danger," he says, "which threatened us from the

conduct of France abetting the designs of Charles, cannot, at

this day, be properly estimated. At the very time when

Parliament was giving money for a war, Lord Danby was writing,

by his master's order, to beg for money as the price of peace.

We shall presently see, that five days after the House of

Commons had passed the act for a supply, Lord Danby wrote to

Paris, that Charles expected six millions yearly from France.

Had Louis been sincere in the project of making Charles

absolute, there can be no doubt that it might have been easily

accomplished. Was not this sufficient to justify the popular

party in attempting to turn the battery the other way? The

question was not, whether to admit foreign interference, but

whether to direct foreign interference, already admitted, to a

good object. The conduct of Lord Russell, therefore, was not

criminal; but it would be difficult to acquit him of the charge

of imprudence. The object of Louis must have been, by giving

hopes to each party in turn, to obtain the command of both.

Charles, on the other hand, was ready to debase himself to the

lowest point, to maintain his alliance with France; any

suspicion, therefore, of a connection between Louis and the

popular party would have rendered him more and more dependent;

till the liberties of England might at last have been set up to

auction at Versailles."[204]

This is impartial. But surely an imprudence so extremely dangerous,

and an intercourse on any terms with an envoy's agent, the nature of

which it must have been necessary to conceal, partook of a

disingenuousness and selfwill that cannot be held innocent. That Lord

Russell had the best intentions is granted; but his principles were

specially opposed by the doctrine of "doing evil, that good might

come;" and if it be argued that good men are sometimes defeated in

their intentions by not imitating the less scrupulous conduct of evil

ones, it is to be replied, that there is no end of the re-actions

consequent on such imitations, nor any bounds, on the other hand, to

be put to the good consequences of a perfect example, even should its

very perfection retard them. Good causes are not lost for want of

passion and energy, but for that defect of faith and openness, which

is the worst destroyer of both, and the loss of which is the worst

hazard produced by a defect of example. We should be surprised that

the patriots, while they were about it, did not denounce Charles's

anti-constitutional behaviour more than they did, and openly demand

their rights as a matter of course; but it is easy to account for it

upon the supposition that they were hampered with court connections,

and not sure of one another.

The worst thing to be said of Lord Russell (for as to the letters he

wrote for pardon, they must be considered as obtained from him by his

friends and a tender wife) is, that when Lord Stafford, the victim of

a plot charged on the papists, was sentenced to death, Russell opposed

the King's privilege of dispensing with a barbarous part of the

execution; so unworthy the rest of their character can men be rendered

by party feeling, and so little do they foresee what they may

themselves require in a day of adversity. When Charles II. was applied

to on the same point in behalf of Lord Russell, he is reported to have

said, "Lord Russell shall find I am possessed of that prerogative,

which in the case of Lord Stafford he thought fit to deny me." The

sarcasm (if made--for there is no real authority for it) was cruel;

but it is not to be denied, that Lord Stafford, a man old and feeble,

whose protestations of innocence called forth tears from the

spectators when he was on the scaffold, might have thought Russell's

conduct equally so. Let us congratulate ourselves, that the fiery

trials which men of all parties have gone through, have enabled us to

benefit by their experience, to be grateful for what was noble in

them, and to learn (with modesty) how to avoid what was infirm.

Lord Russell, besides the general regard of posterity, has left two

glorious testimonies to his honour--his behaviour in his last days,

and the inextinguishable grief of one of the best of women. The

latter, the celebrated Lady Rachael Russell, the daughter of Charles's

best servant, Southampton, threw herself at the King's feet, "and

pleaded," says Hume, "with many tears, the merit and loyalty of her

father, as an atonement for those errors into which honest, however

mistaken, principles had seduced her husband. These supplications were

the last instance of female weakness (if they deserve the name) which

she betrayed. Finding all applications vain, she collected courage,

and not only fortified herself against the fatal blow, but endeavoured

by her example to strengthen the resolution of her unfortunate

lord."[205]

Echard says, that Charles refused her a reprieve of six weeks. If so,

he probably feared some desperate attempt in Russell's favour; which,

in fact, was proposed, as we shall see; and it is possible, that

remembering what had happened to Charles I., and conscious of his own

deserts, he might really have thought that Lord Russell would

willingly have seen him put to death; for Rapin tells us that he said,

in answer to Lady Rachael, "How can I grant that man six weeks, who,

if it had been in his power, would not have granted me six

hours?"[206] And Lord Dartmouth in his notes upon Burnet, tells us

that when his (Dartmouth's) father represented to the King the

obligations which a pardon would lay upon a great family, and the

regard that was due to Southampton's daughter and her children, the

King answered, "All that is true; but it is as true, that if I do not

take his life, he will soon have mine;" "which," says Dartmouth,

"would admit of no reply."[207] Some, however, have said, that the

King would have granted Russell his life, if he had not been afraid of

his brother, the Duke of York; and as an instance of what was thought

of the characters of these two princes, whether the story is true or

not, it was added, that Charles did not like to hear any discourses

about the pardon, because he could not grant it; whereas James would

hear anything, though he resolved to grant nothing.

Every other effort was made to save the life of Russell.

"Money," says Burnet, "was offered to the Lady Portsmouth, and

to all that had credit, and that without measure. He was

pressed to send petitions and submissions to the King and to

the Duke; but he left it to his friends to consider how far

these might go, and how they were to be worded. All that he was

brought to was, to offer to live beyond sea, in any place that

the King should name; and never to meddle any more in English

affairs. But all was in vain. Both King and Duke were fixed in

their resolutions; but with this difference, as Lord Rochester

afterwards told me, that the Duke suffered some, among whom he

was one, to argue the point with him, but the King could not

bear the discourse. Some said, that the Duke moved that he

might be executed in Southampton Square before his own house,

but that the King rejected that as indecent. So Lincoln's Inn

Fields was appointed for the place of his execution."[208]

As a last resource Lord Cavendish offered to attack the coach on

either side with a troop of horse, and take his friend out of it; but

Russell would not consent to bring any one into jeopardy on his

behalf.

It has been said that Lincoln's Inn Fields was chosen, in order that

the people might witness the triumph of the Court, in seeing him led

through the city; but others have reasonably observed upon this, that

as he was to be taken from Newgate, the desire of making him a

spectacle to the citizens would have been better gratified by his

being carried to the old place of execution, the Tower. It is most

probable, that Lincoln's Inn Fields was selected, as being the nearest

feasible spot to the great town property of the Bedford family;

Bloomsbury lying opposite, and Covent garden on one side.

The following is the letter addressed to the King by Russell's father,

followed by that of Russell himself, which Burnet has mentioned as

being drawn from him by his friends.

"To the King's most Excellent Majesty.

"The humble petition of William, Earl of Bedford:

"Humbly sheweth;

"That could your petitioner have been admitted into your

presence, he would have laid himself at your royal feet, in

behalf of his unfortunate son, himself, and his distressed and

disconsolate family, to implore your royal mercy, which he

never had the presumption to think could be obtained by any

indirect means. But shall think himself, wife, and children,

much happier to be left but with bread and water, than to lose

his dear son for so foul a crime as treason against the best of

princes; for whose life he ever did, and ever shall pray, more

than for his own.

"May God incline your Majesty's heart to the prayers of an

afflicted old father, and not bring grey hairs with sorrow to

my grave.

"BEDFORD."

"To the King's most Excellent Majesty.

"The humble petition of William Russell:

"Most humbly sheweth;

"That your petitioner does once more cast himself at your

Majesty's feet, and implores, with all humility, your mercy and

pardon, still avowing that he never had the least thought

against your Majesty's life, nor any design to change the

government; but humbly and sorrowfully confesses his having

been present at those meetings, which he is convinced were

unlawful, and justly provoking to your Majesty; but being

betrayed by ignorance and inadvertence, he did not decline them

as he ought to have done, for which he is truly and heartily

sorry; and, therefore, humbly offers himself to your Majesty,

to be determined to live in any part of the world which you

shall appoint, and never to meddle any more in the affairs of

England, but as your Majesty shall be pleased to command me.

"May it therefore please your Majesty to extend your royal

favour and mercy to your petitioner, by which he will be for

ever engaged to pray for your Majesty, and to devote his life

to your service.

"WILLIAM RUSSELL."

The third is to the Duke of York. It is certainly to be regretted,

that these letters were drawn from a patriot, willing, there is no

doubt, to have endured all extremities without compromising the

dignity of conscious right: but the reader will bear in mind what has

been said of them; and we shall see presently what the writer said of

the present one.

"May it please your Highness;

"The opposition I have appeared in to your Highness's interest

has been such, as I have scarce the confidence to be a

petitioner to you, though in order to the saving of my life.

Sir, God knows what I did did not proceed from any personal

ill-will, or animosity to your royal Highness, but merely

because I was of opinion, that it was the best way for

observing the religion established by law, in which, if I was

mistaken, yet I acted sincerely, without any ill end in it. And

as for any base design against your person, I hope your Royal

Highness will be so just to me as not to think me capable of so

vile a thought. But I am now resolved, and do faithfully engage

myself, that if it shall please the King to pardon me, and if

your Royal Highness will interpose in it, I will in no sort

meddle any more, but will be readily determined to live in any

part of the world which his Majesty shall prescribe, and will

never fail in my daily prayers, both for his Majesty's

preservation and honour, and your Royal Highness's happiness,

and will wholly withdraw myself from the affairs of England,

unless called by his Majesty's orders to serve him, which I

shall never be wanting to do, to the uttermost of my power. And

if your Royal Highness will be so gracious to me, as to move on

my account, as it will be an engagement upon me, beyond what I

can in reason expect, so it will make the deepest impressions

on me possible; for no fear of death can work so much with me,

as so great an obligation will for ever do upon me. May it

please your Royal Highness, your Royal Highness's most humble

and most obedient servant,

"W. RUSSELL."

"Newgate, July 16th, 1683."

Burnet says of this last letter, which he tells us was written at the

"earnest solicitations" of Lady Rachael, that as Russell was folding

it up, he said to him, "This will be printed, and will be selling

about the streets as my submission, when I am led out to be hanged."

All efforts failed, and the patriot and husband composed himself to

die. The touching particulars of his last days we shall extract from

the account of his friend Bishop Burnet. It is one that, as it

contains no disputed points, may be safely relied on; and indeed, if

we had not wished to show how interested we are in the case of this

advancer of public right, and how anxious to spare no proper trouble

for our readers, we might safely have copied the whole case from the

lively pages of that historian, whose writings, whatever may have been

his faults of partizanship and complexion, have risen in value, in

proportion as documents come to light. A great modern statesman,

equally qualified to judge of it, both as a politician and a man,

alludes with interesting emotion to Burnet's account of his last

hours. Speaking of the dying behaviour of Russell and Sidney, he says,

"In courage they are equal, but the fortitude of Russell, who was

connected with the world by private and domestic ties, which Sidney

was not, was put to the severer trial; and the story of the last days

of this excellent man's life fills the mind with such a mixture of

tenderness and admiration, that I know not any scene in history that

more powerfully excites our sympathy, or goes more directly to the

heart."[209]

"The last week of his life," says Burnet, "he was shut up all

the morning as he himself desired. And about noon I came to

him, and staid with him till night. All the while he expressed

a very Christian temper, without sharpness or resentment,

vanity or affectation. His whole behaviour looked like a

triumph over death. Upon some occasions, as at table, or when

his friends came to see him, he was decently cheerful. I was by

him when the sheriffs came to show him the warrant for his

execution. He read it with indifference; and when they were

gone he told me it was not decent to be merry with such a

matter, otherwise he was near telling Rich (who, though he was

now on the other side, yet had been a member of the House of

Commons, and had voted for the exclusion), that they should

never sit together in that house any more to vote for the bill

of exclusion. The day before his death he fell a bleeding at

the nose; upon that he said to me pleasantly, I shall not now

let blood to divert this: that will be done to-morrow. At night

it rained hard, and he said, such a rain to-morrow will spoil a

great show, which was a dull thing in a rainy day. He said, the

sins of his youth lay heavy upon his mind; but he hoped God had

forgiven them, for he was sure he had forsaken them, and for

many years he had walked before God with a sincere heart. If in

his public actings he had committed errors, they were only the

errors of his understanding; for he had no private ends, nor

ill designs of his own in them; he was still of opinion that

the King was limited by law, and that when he broke through

those limits, his subjects might defend themselves and restrain

him. He thought a violent death was a very desirable way of

ending one's life; it was only the being exposed to be a little

gazed at, and to suffer the pain of one minute, which, he was

confident, was not equal to the pain of drawing a tooth. He

said he felt none of those transports that some good people

felt; but he had a full calm in his mind, no palpitation at

heart, nor trembling at the thoughts of death. He was much

concerned at the cloud that seemed to be now over his country;

but he hoped his death would do more service than his life

could have done.

"This was the substance of the discourse between him and me.

Tillotson was oft with him that last week. We thought the party

had gone too quick in their consultations, and too far; and

that resistance in the condition we were then in was not

lawful. He said he had leisure to enter into discourses of

politics; but he thought a government limited by law was only a

name, if the subjects might not maintain those limitations by

force; otherwise all was at the discretion of the Prince: that

was contrary to all the notions he had lived in of our

government.[210] But, he said, there was nothing among them but

the embryos of things that were never like to have any effect,

and they were now quite dissolved. He thought it was necessary

for him to leave a paper behind him at his death: and, because

he had not been accustomed to draw such papers, he desired me

to give him a scheme of the heads fit to be spoken to, and of

the order in which they should be laid; which I did. And he was

three days employed for some time in the morning to write out

his speech. He ordered four copies to be made of it, all which

he signed; and gave the original with three of the copies to

his lady, and kept the other to give to the sheriffs on the

scaffold. He writ it with great ease, and the passages that

were tender he writ in papers apart, and showed them to his

lady and to myself, before he writ them out fair. He was very

easy when this was ended. He also writ a letter to the King, in

which he asked pardon for every thing he had said or done

contrary to his duty, protesting he was innocent as to all

designs against his person or government, and that his heart

was ever devoted to that which he thought was his Majesty's

true interest. He added that, though he thought he had met with

hard measures, yet he forgave all concerned in it, from the

highest to the lowest; and ended, hoping that his Majesty's

displeasure at him would cease with his own life, and that no

part of it should fall on his wife and children. The day before

his death he received the sacrament from Tillotson with much

devotion: and I preached two short sermons to him, which he

heard with great affection; and we were shut up till towards

the evening. Then he suffered his children that were very

young, and some few of his friends, to take leave of him; in

which he maintained his constancy of temper, though he was a

very fond father. He also parted from his lady with a composed

silence; and as soon as she was gone, he said to me, 'The

bitterness of death is passed;' for he loved and esteemed her

beyond expression, as she well deserved it in all respects. She

had the command of herself so much that at parting she gave him

no disturbance. He went into his chamber about midnight, and I

stayed all night in the outward room. He went not to bed till

about two in the morning, and was fast asleep at four, when,

according to his order, we called him. He was quickly dressed,

but would lose no time in shaving, for, he said, he was not

concerned in his good looks that day."

* * * * *

"Lord Russell," continues Burnet, "seemed to have some

satisfaction to find that there was no truth in the whole

contrivance of the Rye Plot; so that he hoped that infamy,

which now blasted their party, would soon go off. He went into

his chamber six or seven times in the morning, and prayed by

himself, and then came out to Tillotson and me; he drank a

little tea and some sherry. He wound up his watch, and said,

now he had done with time, and was going to eternity. He asked

what he should give the executioner: I told him ten guineas: he

said, with a smile, it was a pretty thing to give a fee to have

his head cut off. When the sheriffs called him about ten

o'clock, Lord Cavendish was waiting below to take leave of him.

They embraced very tenderly. Lord Russell, after he had left

him, upon a sudden thought came back to him, and pressed him

earnestly to apply himself more to religion, and told him what

great comfort and support he felt from it now in his extremity.

Lord Cavendish had very generously offered to manage his

escape, and to stay in prison for him while he should go away

in his clothes; but he would not hearken to the motion. The

Duke of Monmouth had also sent me word to let him know, that if

he thought it could do him any service, he would come in and

run fortunes with him. He answered, it would be of no advantage

to him to have his friends die with him. Tillotson and I went

in the coach with him to the place of execution. Some of the

crowd that filled the streets wept, while others insulted; he

was touched by the tenderness that the one gave him, but did

not seem at all provoked by the other. He was singing psalms a

great part of the way, and said, he hoped to sing better very

soon.[211] As he observed the great crowds of people all the

way, he said to us, 'I hope I shall quickly see a much better

assembly.' When he came to the scaffold, he walked about it

four or five times. Then he turned to the sheriffs, and

delivered his paper. He protested that he had always been far

from any designs against the King's life or government. He

prayed God would preserve both, and the Protestant religion. He

wished all Protestants might love one another, and not make way

for Popery by their animosities."

Of the paper given by Russell to the sheriffs, Burnet has given the

following honest abridgment. This testament to patriotism made a great

sensation. To posterity, who have so benefited by its spirit, it is

surely still of great interest.

"The substance of the paper he gave them," says Burnet, "was,

first, a profession of his religion, and of his sincerity in

it; that he was of the Church of England, but wished all would

unite together against the common enemy; that churchmen would

be less severe, and dissenters less scrupulous. He owned he had

a great zeal against Popery, which he looked on as an

idolatrous and bloody religion; but that, though he was at all

times ready to venture his life for his religion or his

country, yet that would never have carried him to a black or

wicked design. No man ever had the impudence to move to him

anything with relation to the King's life: he prayed heartily

for him, that in his person and government he might be happy,

both in this world and the next. He protested that in the

prosecution of the Popish Plot he had gone on in the sincerity

of his heart, and that he never knew of any practice with the

witnesses. He owned he had been earnest in the matter of the

exclusion, as the best way, in his opinion, to secure both the

King's life and the Protestant religion, and to that he imputed

his present sufferings; but he forgave all concerned in them,

and charged his friends to think of no revenges. He thought his

sentence was hard, upon which he gave an account of all that

had passed at Shepherd's. From the heats that were in choosing

the sheriffs, he concluded that matter would end as it now did,

and he was not much surprised to find it fall upon himself; he

wished it might end in him; killing by forms of law was the

worst sort of murder. He concluded with some very devout

ejaculations.

"After he had delivered this paper, he prayed by himself; then

Tillotson prayed with him. After that he prayed again by

himself, and then undressed himself and laid his head on the

block, without the least change of countenance; and it was cut

off at two strokes."

The following additional particulars are from Burnet's "Journal:"--

"When my lady went, he said he wished she would give over

beating every bush, and running so about for his preservation.

But when he considered that it would be some mitigation of her

sorrow afterwards, that she left nothing undone that could have

given any probable hopes, he acquiesced: and, indeed, I never

saw his heart so near failing him, as when he spake of her.

Sometimes I saw a tear in his eye, and he would turn about and

presently change the discourse.

"At ten o'clock my lady left him. He kissed her four or five

times; and she kept her sorrows so within herself, that she

gave him no disturbance by their parting. After she was gone,

he said, 'Now the bitterness of death is passed,' and ran out a

long discourse concerning her--how great a blessing she had

been to him; and said what a misery it would have been to him,

if she had not had that magnanimity of spirit, joined to her

tenderness, as never to have desired him to do a base thing for

the saving of his life; whereas, otherwise, what a week should

I have passed, if she had been crying on me to turn informer,

and be a Lord Howard; though he then repeated what he often

before said, that he knew of nothing whereby the peace of the

nation was in danger; and that all that ever was, was either

loose discourse, or at most embryos that never came to

anything, so that there was nothing on foot to his knowledge.

"As we came to turn into Little Queen Street, he said, 'I have

often turned to the other hand with great comfort, but now I

turn to this with greater,' and looked towards his own house;

and then, as the Dean of Canterbury, who sat over against him,

told me, he saw a tear or two fall from him.

"When he had lain down, I looked once at him and saw no change

in his looks; and though he was still lifting up his hands,

there was no trembling, though, in the moment in which I

looked, the executioner happened to be laying the axe to his

neck to direct him to take aim. I thought it touched him, but

I am sure he seemed not to mind it."

The widow of Lord Russell, daughter of the Lord Southampton above

mentioned, the most honest man ever known to have been in the service

of Charles the Second, was grand-daughter of Shakspeare's Southampton,

and appears to have united in her person the qualities of both. She

was at once a pattern of good sense, and of romantic affection. Nor

are the two things incompatible, when either of them exist in the

highest degree, as she proved during the remainder of her life; for

though she continued a widow all the rest of it, and it was a very

long one, and though she never ceased regretting her lord's death, and

had great troubles besides, yet the high sense she had of the duties

of a human being enabled her to enjoy consolations that ordinary

pleasure might have envied; first, in the education of her children,

and secondly, in the tranquillity which health and temperance _forced_

upon her. Her letters, with which the public are well acquainted, are

not more remarkable for the fidelity they evince to her husband's

memory, than for the fine sense they display in all matters upon which

the prejudices of education had left her a free judgment, and

especially for their delightful candour. It has been thought that the

blindness into which she fell in her old age was owing to weeping; but

Mr. Howell, the judicious editor of the "State Trials," informs us,

upon the authority of "a very learned, skilful, and experienced

physiologist," "that a cataract, which seems," he says, "to have been

the malady of Lady Rachael's eyes, is by no means likely to be

produced by weeping."[212]

We will here insert a few of the most touching passages from the

"Letters of Lady Russell" (seventh edition, 1819). On the 30th of

September, she writes thus to her friend. Dr Fitzwilliam:--

"I endeavour to make the best use I can of both (a letter and

prayer which the Doctor sent her); but I am so evil and

unworthy a creature, that though I have desires, yet I have no

disposition, or worthiness, towards receiving comfort." And

again:--"I know I have deserved my punishment, and will be

silent under it; but yet secretly my heart mourns, and cannot

be comforted, because I have not the dear companion and sharer

of all my joys and sorrows. I want him to talk with, to walk

with, to eat and sleep with; all these things are irksome to me

now; all company and meals I could avoid, if it might be. Yet

all this is, that I enjoy not the world in my own way, and this

same hinders my comfort. When I see my children before me, I

remember the pleasure he took in them; this makes my heart

shrink."

On the 21st July, 1685, the anniversary of her husband's death, two

years after it, she writes thus:--

"My languishing weary spirit rises up slowly to all good; yet I

hope by God's abundant grace, in time, your labours will work

the same effect in my spirits: they will, indeed, in less time

on others better disposed and prepared than I am, who in the

day of affliction seem to have no remembrance with due

thankfulness of prosperity."

In a letter written the 4th October, 1686, she says, speaking of a

recovery of one of her children from sickness,--

"I hope this has been a sorrow I shall profit by; I shall, if

God will strengthen my faith, resolve to return him a constant

praise, and make this the season to chase all secret murmurs

from grieving my soul for what is past, letting it rejoice in

what it should rejoice, his favour to me, in the blessings I

have left, which many of my betters want, and yet have lost

their chiefest friend also. But, oh, Doctor! the manner of my

deprivation is yet astonishing."

The following is dated five years after her loss. She is speaking of a

letter she wrote once a week to Dr. Fitzwilliam. Her grief had now

begun to taste the sweets of patience and temperance; but we see still

how real it is:--

"I can't but own there is a sort of secret delight in the

privacy of one of those mournful days; I think, besides a

better reason, one is, that I do not tie myself up as I do on

other days; for, God knows, my eyes are ever ready to pour out

marks of a sorrowful heart, which I shall carry to the grave,

that quiet bed of rest."

In 1692, Lady Russell writes less patiently, but shortly afterwards

appears to have regained her composure; and in Letter 134, there is a

remark on the blessings of health, and on the comfort of being able to

do one's duty, if we aim at it. In 1711, she lost her only son, the

Duke of Bedford, in his 31st year; and six months afterwards was

deprived of one of her daughters, who died in childbed. It was on this

occasion that an affecting anecdote is told. She had another daughter

who happened to be in childbed also; and as it was necessary to

conceal from her the death of her sister, this admirable woman assumed

a cheerful air, and in answer to her daughter's anxious inquiries,

said, with an extraordinary colouring of the fact, for which a martyr

to truth could have loved her, "I have seen your sister out of bed

to-day."

We intended not to omit the following charming passage from her

letters, and therefore add it here. It is in the letter last quoted:--

"My friendships have made all the joys and troubles of my life;

and yet who would live and not love? Those who have tried the

insipidness of it would, I believe, never choose it. Mr. Waller

says, 'tis (with singing) all we know they do above! And 'tis

enough; for if there is so charming a delight in the love, and

suitableness in humours, to creatures, what must it be to the

clarified spirits to love in the presence of God!"

The passage from Waller is,--

"What know we of the blest above,

But that they sing and that they love?"

Certainly, if ever there was an angel upon earth this woman was one.

Compare the above extracts with a letter from her to her husband,

written in the year 1681, and published in the work of Lord John

Russell, vol. ii., p. 2. It is a true, loving, happy wife's letter,

and renders the contrast inexpressibly affecting.

The present ducal family of Bedford have the honour to be lineally

descended from these two excellent persons, and to derive their very

dukedom from public virtue--a rare patent. And they have shown that

they estimate the honour. What must not Lady Russell have felt when

James II., within six years after the destruction of her husband, was

forced to give up his throne? And what, above all, must she not have

felt, when she heard of the answer given by her aged father-in-law to

the same prince, who had the meanness, or want of imagination, to

apply to him in his distress? "My Lord," said James to the Earl of

Bedford, "you are an honest man, have great credit, and can do me

signal service." "Ah, sir," replied the Earl, "I am old and feeble,

but I once had a son." The King is said to have been so struck with

this reply, that he was silent for some minutes. With this anecdote we

may well terminate our account of the patriot Russell.[213]

One remark, however, we must make. It has been asserted, that the

great reason why the Whigs of those days wished to keep the Catholics

out of power was the dread of losing their estates as well as

political influence, and of being obliged to give up the Abbey lands.

There may have been a good deal of truth in this, and yet the rest of

their feelings have been very sincere. Men may be educated in undue

notions of the value of wealth and property, and yet prove their

possession of nobler thoughts, when brought to heroical issues of life

and death.

The house in this square (Lincoln's Inn,) at the corner of Great Queen

Street, with a passage under its side, was once called Newcastle

House, and was occupied by the well-known fantastical duke of that

name, Minister of George II. Pennant says it was built about the year

1686, "by the Marquis of Powis, and called Powis House, and afterwards

sold to the late noble owner." The architect was Captain William

Winde. "It is said," he adds, "that government had it once in

contemplation to have bought and settled it officially on the great

seal. At that time it was inhabited by the lord keeper, Sir Nathan

Wright." It is at present occupied by the Society for the diffusion of

the Bible.

[Illustration: NEWCASTLE HOUSE.]

The Marquis of Powis, here mentioned, had scarcely built his house in

the square where Lord Russell was beheaded, when he saw his lordship's

destroyer forced to leave his throne. The Marquis followed his

fortunes, and was created by him Duke of Powis.

A laughable, and, we believe, true story, connected with the Duke of

Newcastle's residence in this house, is told in a curious miscellany

intitled the "Lounger's Common-Place Book."

"This nobleman," says the writer, "with many good points, and

described by a popular contemporary poet as almost eaten up by

his zeal for the house of Hanover, was remarkable for being

profuse of his promises on all occasions, and valued himself

particularly on being able to anticipate the words or the wants

of the various persons who attended his levees before they

uttered a word. This sometimes led him into ridiculous

embarrassments; but it was his tendency to lavish promises,

which gave occasion for the anecdote I am going to relate.

"At the election of a certain borough of Cornwall, where the

opposite interests were almost equally poised, a single vote

was of the highest importance; this object, the Duke, by

_well-applied arguments_, and personal application, at length

attained, and the gentleman _he_ recommended gained his

election.

"In the warmth of gratitude, his Grace poured forth

acknowledgments and promises without ceasing, on the fortunate

possessor of the casting vote; called him his best and dearest

friend; protested that he should consider himself as for ever

indebted; that he would serve him by night or by day.

"The Cornish voter, an honest fellow, as things go, and who

would have thought himself sufficiently paid, but for such a

torrent of acknowledgments, thanked the Duke for his kindness,

and told him, 'The supervisor of excise was old and infirm, and

if he would have the goodness to recommend his son-in-law to

the commissioners in case of the old man's death, he should

think himself and his family bound to render Government every

assistance in his power, on any future occasion.'

"'My dear friend, why do you ask for such a trifling

employment?' exclaimed his Grace, 'your relation shall have it

at a word's speaking, the moment it is vacant.'--'But how shall

I get admitted to you my Lord? for, in London, I understand, it

is a very difficult business to get a sight of you great folks,

though you are so kind and complaisant to us in the

country.'--'The instant the man dies,' replied the premier,

used to and prepared for the freedom of a contested

election,--'the moment he dies, set out post-haste for London;

drive directly to my house, by night or by day, sleeping or

waking, dead or alive, thunder at the door; I will leave word

with my porter to show you up-stairs directly, and the

employment shall be disposed of according to your wishes.'

"The parties separated; the Duke drove to a friend's house in

the neighbourhood, where he was visiting, without a wish or a

design of seeing his new acquaintance till that day seven

years; but the memory of a Cornish elector, not being loaded

with such a variety of subjects, was more retentive. The

supervisor died a few months after, and the ministerial

partisan relying on the word of a peer, was conveyed to London

post-haste, and ascended with alacrity the steps of a large

house, now divided into three, in Lincoln's Inn Fields, at the

corner of Great Queen Street.

"The reader should be informed that precisely at the moment

when the expectations of a considerable party of a borough in

Cornwall were roused by the death of a supervisor, no less a

person than the King of Spain was expected hourly to depart; an

event in which the Minister of Great Britain was particularly

concerned.

"The Duke of Newcastle, on the very night that the proprietor

of the decisive vote was at his door, had sat up anxiously

expecting despatches from Madrid: wearied by official business

and agitated spirits, he retired to rest, having previously

given particular instructions to his porter not to go to bed,

as he expected every minute a messenger with advices of the

greatest importance, and desired he might be shown up-stairs

the moment of his arrival.

"His Grace was sound asleep; for, with a thousand

singularities, of which the rascals about him did not forget to

take advantage, his worst enemies could not deny him the merit

of good design, that best solace in a solitary hour. The

porter, settled for the night in his chair, had already

commenced a sonorous nap, when the vigorous arm of the Cornish

voter roused him from his slumbers.

"To his first question, 'Is the Duke at home?' the porter

replied, 'Yes; and in bed, but has left particular orders that

come when you will, you are to go up to him directly.'--'God

for ever bless him, a worthy and honest gentleman,' cried our

applier for the vacant post, smiling and nodding with

approbation at a Prime Minister's so accurately keeping his

promise; 'how punctual his Grace is! I knew he would not

deceive me. Let me hear no more of lords and dukes not keeping

their words. I believe, verily, they are as honest and mean as

well as other folks, but I can't always say the same of those

who are about them.' Repeating these words as he ascended the

stairs, the burgess of ---- was ushered into the Duke's

bedchamber.

"'Is he dead?' exclaimed his Grace, rubbing his eyes, and

scarcely awaked from dreaming of the King of Spain, 'Is he

dead?' 'Yes, my lord,' replied the eager expectant, delighted

to find that the election promise, with all its circumstances,

was so fresh in the Minister's memory. 'When did he die?' 'The

day before yesterday, exactly at half-past one o'clock, after

being confined three weeks to his bed, and taking a _power of

doctor's stuff_; and I hope your Grace will be as good as your

word, and let my son-in-law succeed him.'

"The duke, by this time perfectly awake, was staggered at the

impossibility of receiving intelligence from Madrid in so short

a space of time, and perplexed at the absurdity of a king's

messenger applying for his son-in-law to succeed the King of

Spain: 'Is the man drunk or mad; where are your despatches?'

exclaimed his Grace, hastily drawing back his curtain; when,

instead of a royal courier, his eager eye recognised at the

bedside the well-known countenance of his friend in Cornwall,

making low bows, with hat in hand, and 'hoping my lord would

not forget the gracious promise he was so good as to make in

favour of his son-in-law at the last election at ----.'

"Vexed at so untimely a disturbance, and disappointed of news

from Spain, he frowned for a few seconds, but chagrin soon gave

way to mirth at so singular and ridiculous a combination of

opposite circumstances. Yielding to the irritation, he sank on

the bed in a violent fit of laughter, which, like the

electrical fluid, was communicated in a moment to his

attendants."[214]

[Illustration: OLD PALACE OF WHITEHALL, FROM THE RIVER.]

FOOTNOTES:

[194] Tatler, No. 100.

[195] "Lives and Letters," _ut supra_.

[196] "Worthies of England," _ut supra_.

[197] Gifford's "Works of Ben Jonson," vol. i., p. ix.

[198] Pennant, _ut supra_, p. 176

[199] Diary, _ut supra_, vol. ii., p. 185.

[200] "Memoires of Lady Fanshawe, &c., written by herself." 1729, p.

267.

[201] "Memoires of Lady Fanshawe, &c., written by herself." 1729, p.

298.

[202] "Life of William Lord Russell, with some Account of the Times in

which he lived." By Lord John Russell, 3rd edition, 1820, vol. ii., p.

18, &c.

[203] "History of the Reign of James the Second." Introductory

Chapter. It is worth while, as a puzzle for the reader, to give here

the contested point in the statute, which Lord Russell's enemies

thought so clear against him, and his friends so much in his favour.

13 Car. II. "Provided always, that no person be prosecuted for any of

the offences in this act mentioned, other than such as are made and

declared to be high treason, unless it be by order of the King's

Majesty, his heirs or successors, under his or their sign manual, or

by order of the Council Table of his Majesty, his heirs or successors,

directed unto the attorney-general for the time being: or some other

counsel learned to his Majesty, his heirs or successors, for the time

being: nor shall any person or persons, by virtue of this present act,

incur any of the penalties herein before-mentioned, unless he or they

be prosecuted within six months next after the offence committed, and

indicted thereupon within three months after such prosecution;

anything herein contained to the contrary notwithstanding."

[204] Life, as above, vol. i., p. 121.

[205] Hume's History of England, vol. x. chap. 69.

[206] Rapin's History of England, 1731, vol. xiv., p. 333.

[207] Burnet's History of his Own Times.

[208] Burnet's History of his Own Times, 12mo., 1725, vol. ii., p.

260.

[209] Mr. Fox, in his history above-mentioned.

[210] Burnet and Tillotson thought so too, when James II. afterwards

forced the church to declare one way or other.

[211] In his Journal, Burnet says that he often sung "within himself,"

but that the words were not audible. When his companion asked him what

he was singing, he said the beginning of the 119th Psalm. It is stated

in the Life by his descendant (who has added some original passages

from papers at Woburn), that "just as they were entering Lincoln's Inn

Fields, he said, 'This has been to me a place of sinning, and God now

makes it the place of my punishment.'" He had lived freely in his

youth, though he is not the Russell spoken of in the Memoirs of

Grammont, as many are led to believe by the engravings of him inserted

in that work. The person there mentioned was a cousin.

[212] For complete reports of all the trials connected with the Rye

House Plot, and for several pamphlets written _pro_ and _con_ upon

Lord Russell's case, see the "State Trials," vol. ix., beginning at p.

357.

[213] We quote the Earl of Bedford's reply from Granger's Biographical

History of England, not being able to refer to Orrery, who we believe

is the authority for it. Burnet's Journal is to be found at the end of

Lord Russell's Life, by his descendants.

[214] Lounger's Common-Place Book, 1805. 8vo. vol. i., p. 301.