[1] _Hist. MSS. Comm.: MSS of Earl of Egmont_, i. 223.
CLANVOWE, SIR THOMAS, the name of an English poet first mentioned in the
history of English literature by F.S. Ellis in 1896, when, in editing
the text of _The Book of Cupid, God of Love, or The Cuckoo and the
Nightingale_, for the Kelmscott Press, he stated that Professor Skeat
had discovered that at the end of the best of the MSS. the author was
called Clanvowe. In 1897 this information was confirmed and expanded by
Professor Skeat in the supplementary volume of his Clarendon Press
_Chaucer_ (1894-1897). The beautiful romance of _The Cuckoo and the
Nightingale_ was published by Thynne in 1532, and was attributed by him,
and by successive editors down to the days of Henry Bradshaw, to
Chaucer. It was due to this error that for three centuries Chaucer was
supposed to be identified with the manor of Woodstock, and even painted,
in fanciful pictures, as lying
"Under a maple that is fair and green,
Before the chamber-window of the Queen
At Wodestock, upon the greene lea."
But this queen could only be Joan of Navarre, who arrived in 1403, three
years after Chaucer's death, and it is to the spring of that year that
Professor Skeat attributes the composition of the poem. Sir Thomas
Clanvowe was of a Herefordshire family, settled near Wigmore. He was a
prominent figure in the courts of Richard II. and Henry IV., and is said
to have been a friend of Prince Hal. He was one of those who "had begun
to mell of Lollardy, and drink the gall of heresy." He was one of the
twenty-five knights who accompanied John Beaufort (son of John of Gaunt)
to Barbary in 1390.
The date of his birth is unknown, and his name is last mentioned in
1404. The historic and literary importance of _The Cuckoo and the
Nightingale_ is great. It is the work of a poet who had studied the
prosody of Chaucer with more intelligent care than either Occleve or
Lydgate, and who therefore forms an important link between the 14th and
15th centuries in English poetry. Clanvowe writes with a surprising
delicacy and sweetness, in a five-line measure almost peculiar to
himself. Professor Skeat points out a unique characteristic of
Clanvowe's versification, namely, the unprecedented freedom with which
he employs the suffix of the final _-e_, and rather avoids than seeks
elision. _The Cuckoo and the Nightingale_ was imitated by Milton in his
sonnet to the Nightingale, and was rewritten in modern English by
Wordsworth. It is a poem of so much individual beauty, that we must
regret the apparent loss of everything else written by a poet of such
unusual talent.
See also a critical edition of the _Boke of Cupide_ by Dr Erich
Vollmer (Berlin, 1898). (E. G.)
CLAPAREDE, JEAN LOUIS RENE ANTOINE EDOUARD (1832-1870), Swiss
naturalist, was born at Geneva on the 24th of April 1832. He belonged to
a French family, some members of which had taken refuge in that city
after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes. In 1852 he began to study
medicine and natural science at Berlin, where he was greatly influenced
by J. Mueller and C.G. Ehrenberg, the former being at that period engaged
in his important researches on the Echinoderms. In 1855 he accompanied
Mueller to Norway, and there spent two months on a desolate reef that he
might obtain satisfactory observations. The latter part of his stay at
Berlin he devoted, along with J. Lachmann, to the study of the Infusoria
and Rhizopods. In 1857 he obtained the degree of doctor, and in 1862 he
was chosen professor of comparative anatomy at Geneva. In 1859 he
visited England, and in company with W.B. Carpenter made a voyage to the
Hebrides; and in 1863 he spent some months in the Bay of Biscay. On the
appearance of Darwin's work on the _Origin of Species_, he adopted his
theories and published a valuable series of articles on the subject in
the _Revue Germanique_ (1861). During 1865 and 1866 ill-health rendered
him incapable of work, and he determined to pass the winter of 1866-1867
in Naples. The change of climate produced some amelioration, and his
energy was attested by two elaborate volumes on the Annelidae of the
gulf. He again visited Naples with advantage in 1868; but in 1870,
instead of recovering as before, he grew worse, and on the 31st of May
he died at Siena on his way home. His _Recherches sur la structure des
annelides sedentaires_ were published posthumously in 1873.
CLAPPERTON, HUGH (1788-1827), Scottish traveller in West-Central Africa,
was born in 1788 at Annan, Dumfriesshire, where his father was a
surgeon. He gained some knowledge of practical mathematics and
navigation, and at thirteen was apprenticed on board a vessel which
traded between Liverpool and North America. After having made several
voyages across the Atlantic he was impressed for the navy, in which he
soon rose to the rank of midshipman. During the Napoleonic wars he saw a
good deal of active service, and at the storming of Port Louis,
Mauritius, in November 1810, he was first in the breach and hauled down
the French flag. In 1814 he went to Canada, was promoted to the rank of
lieutenant, and to the command of a schooner on the Canadian lakes. In
1817, when the flotilla on the lakes was dismantled, he returned home on
half-pay.
In 1820 Clapperton removed to Edinburgh, where he made the acquaintance
of Walter Oudney, M.D., who aroused in him an interest in African
travel. Lieut. G.F. Lyon, R.N., having returned from an unsuccessful
attempt to reach Bornu from Tripoli, the British government determined
on a second expedition to that country. Dr Oudney was appointed by Lord
Bathurst, then colonial secretary, to proceed to Bornu as consul with
the object of promoting trade, and Clapperton and Major Dixon Denham
(q.v.) were added to the party. From Tripoli, early in 1822, they set
out southward to Murzuk, and from this point Clapperton and Oudney
visited the Ghat oasis. Kuka, the capital of Bornu, was reached in
February 1823, and Lake Chad seen for the first time by Europeans. At
Bornu the travellers were well received by the sultan; and after
remaining in the country till the 14th of December they again set out
for the purpose of exploring the course of the Niger. At Murmur, on the
road to Kano, Oudney died (January 1824). Clapperton continued his
journey alone through Kano to Sokoto, the capital of the Fula empire,
where by order of Sultan Bello he was obliged to stop, though the Niger
was only five days' journey to the west. Worn out with his travel he
returned by way of Zaria and Katsena to Kuka, where he again met Denham.
The two travellers then set out for Tripoli, reached on the 26th of
January 1825. An account of the travels was published in 1826 under the
title of _Narrative of Travels and Discoveries in Northern and Central
Africa in the years 1822-1824_.
Immediately after his return Clapperton was raised to the rank of
commander, and sent out with another expedition to Africa, the sultan
Bello of Sokoto having professed his eagerness to open up trade with the
west coast. Clapperton landed at Badagry in the Bight of Benin, and
started overland for the Niger on the 7th of December 1825, having with
him his servant Richard Lander (q.v.), Captain Pearce, R.N., and Dr
Morrison, navy surgeon and naturalist. Before the month was out Pearce
and Morrison were dead of fever. Clapperton continued his journey, and,
passing through the Yoruba country, in January 1826 he crossed the Niger
at Bussa, the spot where Mungo Park had died twenty years before. In
July he arrived at Kano. Thence he went to Sokoto, intending afterwards
to go to Bornu. The sultan, however, detained him, and being seized with
dysentery he died near Sokoto on the 13th of April 1827.
Clapperton was the first European to make known from personal
observation the semi-civilized Hausa countries, which he visited soon
after the establishment of the Sokoto empire by the Fula. In 1829
appeared the _Journal of a Second Expedition into the Interior of
Africa_, &c, by the late Commander Clapperton, to which was prefaced a
biographical sketch of the explorer by his uncle, Lieut.-colonel S.
Clapperton. Lander, who had brought back the journal of his master, also
published _Records of Captain Clapperton's Last Expedition to Africa ...
with the subsequent Adventures of the Author_ (2 vols., London, 1830).
CLAQUE (Fr. _claquer_, to clap the hands), an organized body of
professional applauders in the French theatres. The hiring of persons to
applaud dramatic performances was common in classical times, and the
emperor Nero, when he acted, had his performance greeted by an encomium
chanted by five thousand of his soldiers, who were called Angustals. The
recollection of this gave the 16th-century French poet, Jean Daurat, an
idea which has developed into the modern claque. Buying up a number of
tickets for a performance of one of his plays, he distributed them
gratuitously to those who promised publicly to express their
approbation. It was not, however, till 1820 that a M. Sauton seriously
undertook the systematization of the claque, and opened an office in
Paris for the supply of _claqueurs_. By 1830 the claque had become a
regular institution. The manager of a theatre sends an order for any
number of _claqueurs_. These people are usually under a _chef de
claque_, whose duty it is to judge where their efforts are needed and to
start the demonstration of approval. This takes several forms. Thus
there are _commissaires_, those who learn the piece by heart, and call
the attention of their neighbours to its good points between the acts.
The _rieurs_ are those who laugh loudly at the jokes. The _pleureurs_,
generally women, feign tears, by holding their handkerchiefs to their
eyes. The _chatouilleurs_ keep the audience in a good humour, while the
_bisseurs_ simply clap their hands and cry _bis! bis!_ to secure
encores.
CLARA, SAINT (1194-1253), foundress of the Franciscan nuns, was born of
a knightly family in Assisi in 1194. At eighteen she was so impressed by
a sermon of St Francis that she was filled with the desire to devote
herself to the kind of life he was leading. She obtained an interview
with him, and to test her resolution he told her to dress in penitential
sackcloth and beg alms for the poor in the streets of Assisi. Clara
readily did this, and Francis, satisfied as to her vocation, told her to
come to the Portiuncula arrayed as a bride. The friars met her with
lighted candles, and at the foot of the altar Francis shore off her
hair, received her vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, and invested
her with the Franciscan habit, 1212. He placed her for a couple of years
in a Benedictine convent in Assisi, until the convent at St Damian's,
close to the town, was ready. Her two younger sisters, and, after her
father's death, her mother and many others joined her, and the
Franciscan nuns spread widely and rapidly (see CLARES, POOR). The
relations of friendship and sympathy between St Clara and St Francis
were very close, and there can be no doubt that she was one of the
truest heirs of Francis's inmost spirit. After his death Clara threw
herself wholly on the side of those who opposed mitigations in the rule
and manner of life, and she was one of the chief upholders of St
Francis's primitive idea of poverty (see FRANCISCANS). She was the close
friend of Brother Leo and the other "Companions of St Francis," and they
assisted at her death. For forty years she was abbess at St Damian's,
and the great endeavour of her life was that the rule of the nuns should
be purged of the foreign elements that had been introduced, and should
become wholly conformable to St Francis's spirit. She lived just long
enough to witness the fulfilment of her great wish, a rule such as she
desired being approved by the pope two days before her death on the 11th
of August 1253.
The sources for her life are to be found in the Bollandist _Acta
Sanctorum_ on the 11th of August, and sketches in such _Lives of the
Saints_ as Alban Butler's. See also Wetzer und Welte,
_Kirchen-lexicon_ (2nd ed.), art. "Clara." (E. C. B.)
CLARE, the name of a famous English family. The ancestor of this
historic house, "which played," in Freeman's words, "so great a part
alike in England, Wales and Ireland," was Count Godfrey, eldest of the
illegitimate sons of Richard the Fearless, duke of Normandy. His son,
Count Gilbert of Brionne, had two sons, Richard, lord of Bienfaite and
Orbec, and Baldwin, lord of Le Sap and Meulles, both of whom accompanied
the Conqueror to England. Baldwin, known as "De Meulles" or "of Exeter,"
received the hereditary shrievalty of Devon with great estates in the
West Country, and left three sons, William, Robert and Richard, of whom
the first and last were in turn sheriffs of Devon. Richard, known as
"de Bienfaite," or "of Tunbridge," or "of Clare," was the founder of the
house of Clare.
Richard derived his English appellation from his strongholds at
Tunbridge and at Clare, at both of which his castle-mounds still remain.
The latter, on the borders of Essex and Suffolk, was the head of his
great "honour" which lay chiefly in the eastern counties. Appointed
joint justiciar in the king's absence abroad, he took a leading part in
suppressing the revolt of 1075. By his wife, Rohese, daughter of Walter
Giffard, through whom great Giffard estates afterwards came to his
house, he left five sons and two daughters. Roger was his heir in
Normandy, Walter founded Tintern Abbey, Richard was a monk, and Robert,
receiving the forfeited fief of the Baynards in the eastern counties,
founded, through his son Walter, the house of FitzWalter (extinct 1432),
of whom the most famous was Robert FitzWalter, the leader of the barons
against King John. Of this house, spoken of by Jordan Fantosme as
"Clarreaus," the Daventrys of Daventry (extinct 1380) and Fawsleys of
Fawsley (extinct 1392) were cadets. One of Richard's two daughters
married the famous Walter Tirel.
Gilbert, Richard's heir in England, held his castle of Tunbridge against
William Rufus, but was wounded and captured. Under Henry I., who
favoured the Clares, he obtained a grant of Cardigan, and carried his
arms into Wales. Dying about 1115, he left four sons, of whom Gilbert,
the second, inherited Chepstow, with Nether-Gwent, from his uncle,
Walter, the founder of Tintern, and was created earl of Pembroke by
Stephen about 1138; he was father of Richard Strongbow, earl of Pembroke
(q.v.). The youngest son Baldwin fought for Stephen at the battle of
Lincoln (1141) and founded the priories of Bourne and Deeping on lands
acquired with his wife. The eldest son Richard, who was slain by the
Welsh on his way to Cardigan in 1135 or 1136, left two sons Gilbert and
Roger, of whom Gilbert was created earl of Hertfordshire by Stephen.
It was probably because he and the Clares had no interests in
Hertfordshire that they were loosely and usually styled the earls of
(de) Clare. Dying in 1152, Gilbert was succeeded by his brother Roger,
of whom Fitz-Stephen observes that "nearly all the nobles of England
were related to the earl of Clare, whose sister, the most beautiful
woman in England, had long been desired by the king" (Henry II.). He was
constantly fighting the Welsh for his family possessions in Wales and
quarrelled with Becket over Tunbridge Castle. In 1173 or 1174 he was
succeeded by his son Richard as third earl, whose marriage with Amicia,
daughter and co-heir of William, earl of Gloucester, was destined to
raise the fortunes of his house to their highest point. He and his son
Gilbert were among the "barons of the Charter," Gilbert, who became
fourth earl in 1217, obtained also, early in 1218, the earldom of
Gloucester, with its great territorial "Honour," and the lordship of
Glamorgan, in right of his mother; "from this time the house of Clare
became the acknowledged head of the baronage." Gilbert had also
inherited through his father his grandmother's "Honour of St Hilary" and
a moiety of the Giffard fief; but the vast possessions of his house were
still further swollen by his marriage with a daughter of William
(Marshal), earl of Pembroke, through whom his son Richard succeeded in
1245 to a fifth of the Marshall lands including the Kilkenny estates in
Ireland. Richard's successor, Gilbert, the "Red" earl, died in 1295, the
most powerful subject in the kingdom.
On his death his earldoms seem to have been somewhat mysteriously deemed
to have passed to his widow Joan, daughter of Edward I.; for her second
husband, Ralph de Monthermer, was summoned to parliament in right of
them from 1299 to 1306. After her death, however, in 1307, Earl
Gilbert's son and namesake was summoned in 1308 as earl of Gloucester
and Hertford, though only sixteen. A nephew of Edward II. and
brother-in-law of Gaveston, he played a somewhat wavering part in the
struggle between the king and the barons. Guardian of the realm in 1311
and regent in 1313, he fell gloriously at Bannockburn (June 24th, 1314),
when only twenty-three, rushing on the enemy "like a wild boar, making
his sword drunk with their blood."
The earl was the last of his mighty line, and his vast possessions in
England (in over twenty counties), Wales and Ireland fell to his three
sisters, of whom Elizabeth, the youngest, wife of John de Burgh,
obtained the "Honour of Clare" and transmitted it to her son William de
Burgh, 3rd earl of Ulster, whose daughter brought it to Lionel, son of
King Edward III., who was thereupon created duke of Clarence, a title
associated ever since with the royal house. The "Honour of Clare,"
vested in the crown, still preserves a separate existence, with a court
and steward of its own.
Clare College, Cambridge, derived its name from the above Elizabeth,
"Lady of Clare," who founded it as Clare Hall in 1347.
Clare County in Ireland derives its name from the family, though whether
from Richard Strongbow, or from Thomas de Clare, a younger son, who had
a grant of Thomond in 1276, has been deemed doubtful.
Clarenceux King of Arms, an officer of the Heralds' College, derives his
style, through Clarence, from Clare.
See J.H. Round's _Geoffrey de Mandeville, Feudal England, Commune of
London_, and _Peerage Studies_; also his "Family of Clare" in _Arch.
Journ._ lvi., and "Origin of Armorial Bearings" in Ib. li.;
Parkinson's "Clarence, the origin and bearers of the title," in _The
Antiquary_, v.; Clark's "Lords of Glamorgan" in _Arch. Journ._ xxxv.;
Planche's "Earls of Gloucester" in _Journ. Arch. Assoc._ xxvi.;
Dugdale's _Baronage_, vol. i., and _Monasticon Anglicanum_; G.E.
C[okayne]'s _Complete Peerage_. (J. H. R.)
CLARE, JOHN (1793-1864), English poet, commonly known as "the
Northamptonshire Peasant Poet," the son of a farm labourer, was born at
Helpstone near Peterborough, on the 13th of July 1793. At the age of
seven he was taken from school to tend sheep and geese; four years later
he began to work on a farm, attending in the winter evenings a school
where he is said to have learnt some algebra. He then became a pot-boy
in a public-house and fell in love with Mary Joyce, but her father, a
prosperous farmer, forbade her to meet him. Subsequently he was gardener
at Burghley Park. He enlisted in the militia, tried camp life with
gipsies, and worked as a lime burner in 1817, but in the following year
he was obliged to accept parish relief. Clare had bought a copy of
Thomson's _Seasons_ out of his scanty earnings and had begun to write
poems. In 1819 a bookseller at Stamford, named Drury, lighted on one of
Clare's poems, _The Setting Sun_, written on a scrap of paper enclosing
a note to his predecessor in the business. He befriended the author and
introduced his poems to the notice of John Taylor, of the publishing
firm of Taylor & Hussey, who issued the _Poems Descriptive of Rural Life
and Scenery_ in 1820. This book was highly praised, and in the next year
his _Village Minstrel and other Poems_ were published. He was greatly
patronized; fame, in the shape of curious visitors, broke the tenor of
his life, and the convivial habits that he had formed were indulged more
freely. He had married in 1820, and an annuity of 15 guineas from Lord
Exeter, in whose service he had been, was supplemented by subscription,
and he became possessed of L45 annually, a sum far beyond what he had
ever earned, but new wants made his income insufficient, and in 1823 he
was nearly penniless. The _Shepherd's Calendar_ (1827) met with little
success, which was not increased by his hawking it himself. As he worked
again on the fields his health temporarily improved; but he soon became
seriously ill. Lord Fitzwilliam presented him with a new cottage and a
piece of ground, but Clare could not settle in his new home. Gradually
his mind gave way. His last and best work, the _Rural Muse_ (1835), was
noticed by "Christopher North" alone. He had for some time shown
symptoms of insanity; and in July 1837 he was removed to a private
asylum, and afterwards to the Northampton general lunatic asylum, where
he died on the 20th of May 1864. Clare's descriptions of rural scenes
show a keen and loving appreciation of nature, and his love-songs and
ballads charm by their genuine feeling; but his vogue was no doubt
largely due to the interest aroused by his humble position in life.
See the _Life of John Clare_, by Frederick Martin (1865); and _Life
and Remains of John Clare_, by J.L. Cherry (1873), which, though not
so complete, contains some of the poet's asylum verses and prose
fragments.
CLARE, JOHN FITZGIBBON, 1ST EARL OF (1749-1802), lord chancellor of
Ireland, was the second son of John Fitzgibbon, who had abandoned the
Roman Catholic faith in order to pursue a legal career. He was educated
at Trinity College, Dublin, where he was highly distinguished as a
classical scholar, and at Christ Church, Oxford, where he graduated in
1770. In 1772 he was called to the Irish bar, and quickly acquired a
very lucrative practice; he also inherited his father's large fortune on
the death of his elder brother. In 1778 he entered the Irish House of
Commons as member for Dublin University, and at first gave a general
support to the popular party led by Henry Grattan (q.v.). He was,
however, from the first hostile to that part of Grattan's policy which
aimed at removing the disabilities of the Roman Catholics; he
endeavoured to impede the Relief Bill of 1778 by raising difficulties
about its effect on the Act of Settlement. He especially distrusted the
priests, and many years later explained that his life-long resistance to
all concession to the Catholics was based on his "unalterable opinion"
that "a conscientious Popish ecclesiastic never will become a
well-attached subject to a Protestant state, and that the Popish clergy
must always have a commanding influence on every member of that
communion." As early as 1780 Fitzgibbon began to separate himself from
the popular or national party, by opposing Grattan's declaration of the
Irish parliament's right to independence. There is no reason to suppose
that in this change of view he was influenced by corrupt or personal
motives. His cast of mind naturally inclined to authority rather than to
democratic liberty; his hostility to the Catholic claims, and his
distrust of parliamentary reform as likely to endanger the connexion of
Ireland with Great Britain, made him a sincere opponent of the aims
which Grattan had in view. In reply, however, to a remonstrance from his
constituents Fitzgibbon promised to support Grattan's policy in the
future, and described the claim of Great Britain to make laws for
Ireland as "a daring usurpation of the rights of a free people."
For some time longer there was no actual breach between him and Grattan.
Grattan supported the appointment of Fitzgibbon as attorney-general in
1783, and in 1785 the latter highly eulogized Grattan's character and
services to the country in a speech in which he condemned Flood's
volunteer movement. He also opposed Flood's Reform Bill of 1784; and
from this time forward he was in fact the leading spirit in the Irish
government, and the stiffest opponent of all concession to popular
demands. In 1784 the permanent committee of revolutionary reformers in
Dublin, of whom Napper Tandy was the most conspicuous, invited the
sheriffs of counties to call meetings for the election of delegates to
attend a convention for the discussion of reform; and when the sheriff
of the county of Dublin summoned a meeting for this purpose Fitzgibbon
procured his imprisonment for contempt of court, and justified this
procedure in parliament, though Lord Erskine declared it grossly
illegal. In the course of the debates on Pitt's commercial propositions
in 1785, which Fitzgibbon supported in masterly speeches, he referred to
Curran in terms which led to a duel between the two lawyers, when
Fitzgibbon was accused of a deliberation in aiming at his opponent that
was contrary to etiquette. His antagonism to Curran was life-long and
bitter, and after he became chancellor his hostility to the famous
advocate was said to have driven the latter out of practice. In January
1787 Fitzgibbon introduced a stringent bill for repressing the Whiteboy
outrages. It was supported by Grattan, who, however, procured the
omission of a clause enacting that any Roman Catholic chapel near which
an illegal oath had been tendered should be immediately demolished. His
influence with the majority in the Irish parliament defeated Pitt's
proposed reform of the tithe system in Ireland, Fitzgibbon refusing even
to grant a committee to investigate the subject. On the regency question
in 1789 Fitzgibbon, in opposition to Grattan, supported the doctrine of
Pitt in a series of powerful speeches which proved him a great
constitutional lawyer; he intimated that the choice for Ireland might in
certain eventualities rest between complete separation from England and
legislative union; and, while he exclaimed as to the latter alternative,
"God forbid that I should ever see that day!" he admitted that
separation would be the worse evil of the two.
In the same year Lord Lifford resigned the chancellorship, and
Fitzgibbon was appointed in his place, being raised to the peerage as
Baron Fitzgibbon. His removal to the House of Lords greatly increased
his power. In the Commons, though he had exercised great influence as
attorney-general, his position had been secondary; in the House of Lords
and in the privy council he was little less than despotic. "He was,"
says Lecky, "by far the ablest Irishman who had adopted without
restriction the doctrine that the Irish legislature must be maintained
in a condition of permanent and unvarying subjection to the English
executive." But the English ministry were now embarking on a policy of
conciliation in Ireland. The Catholic Relief Bill of 1793 was forced on
the Irish executive by the cabinet in London, but it passed rapidly and
easily through the Irish parliament. Lord Fitzgibbon, while accepting
the bill as inevitable under the circumstances that had arisen, made a
most violent though exceedingly able speech against the principle of
concession, which did much to destroy the conciliatory effect of the
measure; and as a consequence of this act he began persistently to urge
the necessity for a legislative union. From this date until the union
was carried, the career of Fitzgibbon is practically the history of
Ireland. True to his inveterate hostility to the popular claims, he was
opposed to the appointment of Lord Fitzwilliam (q.v.) as viceroy in
1795, and was probably the chief influence in procuring his recall; and
it was Fitzgibbon who first put it into the head of George III. that the
king would violate his coronation oath if he consented to the admission
of Catholics to parliament. When Lord Camden, Fitzwilliam's successor in
the viceroyalty, arrived in Dublin on the 31st of March 1795,
Fitzgibbon's carriage was violently assaulted by the mob, and he himself
was wounded; and in the riots that ensued his house was also attacked.
But as if to impress upon the Catholics the hopelessness of their case,
the government who had made Fitzgibbon a viscount immediately after his
attack on the Catholics in 1793 now bestowed on him a further mark of
honour. In June 1795 he was created earl of Clare. On the eve of the
rebellion he warned the government that while emancipation and reform
might be the objects aimed at by the better classes, the mass of the
disaffected had in view "the separation of the country from her
connexion with Great Britain, and a fraternal alliance with the French
Republic." Clare advocated stringent measures to prevent an outbreak;
but he was neither cruel nor immoderate, and was inclined to mercy in
dealing with individuals. He attempted to save Lord Edward Fitzgerald
(q.v.) from his fate by giving a friendly warning to his friends, and
promising to facilitate his escape from the country; and Lord Edward's
aunt, Lady Louisa Conolly, who was conducted to his death-bed in prison
by the chancellor in person, declared that "nothing could exceed Lord
Clare's kindness." His moderation and humanity after the rebellion was
extolled by Cornwallis. He threw his great influence on the side of
clemency, and it was through his intervention that Oliver Bond, when
sentenced to death, was reprieved; and that an arrangement was made by
which Arthur O'Connor, Thomas Emmet and other state prisoners were
allowed to leave the country.
In October 1798 Lord Clare, who since 1793 had been convinced of the
necessity for a legislative union if the connexion between Great Britain
and Ireland was to be maintained, and who was equally determined that
the union must be unaccompanied by Catholic emancipation, crossed to
England and successfully pressed his views on Pitt. In 1799 he induced
the Irish House of Lords to throw out a bill for providing a permanent
endowment of Maynooth. On the 10th of February 1800 Clare in the House
of Lords moved the resolution approving the union in a long and powerful
speech, in which he reviewed the history of Ireland since the
Revolution, attributing the evils of recent years to the independent
constitution of 1782, and speaking of Grattan in language of deep
personal hatred. He was not aware of the assurance which Cornwallis had
been authorized to convey to the Catholics that the union was to pave
the way for emancipation, and when he heard of it after the passing of
the act he bitterly complained that Pitt and Castlereagh had deceived
him. After the union Clare became more violent than ever in his
opposition to any policy of concession in Ireland. He died on the 28th
of January 1802; his funeral in Dublin was the occasion of a riot
organized "by a gang of about fourteen persons under orders of a
leader." His wife, in compliance with his death-bed request, destroyed
all his papers. His two sons, John (1792-1851) and Richard Hobart
(1793-1864), succeeded in turn to the earldom, which became extinct on
the death of the latter, whose only son, John Charles Henry, Viscount
Fitzgibbon (1829-1854), was killed in the charge of the Light Brigade at
Balaklava.
Lord Clare was in private life an estimable and even an amiable man;
many acts of generosity are related of him; the determination of his
character swayed other wills to his purpose, and his courage was such as
no danger, no obloquy, no public hatred or violence could disturb.
Though not a great orator like Flood or Grattan, he was a skilful and
ready debater, and he was by far the ablest Irish supporter of the
union. He was, however, arrogant, overbearing and intolerant to the last
degree. He was the first Irishman since the Revolution to hold the
office of lord chancellor of Ireland. "Except where his furious personal
antipathies and his ungovernable arrogance were called into action, he
appears to have been," says Lecky, "an able, upright and energetic
judge"; but as a politician there can be little question that Lord
Clare's bitter and unceasing resistance to reasonable measures of reform
did infinite mischief in the history of Ireland, by inflaming the
passions of his countrymen, driving them into rebellion, and
perpetuating their political and religious divisions.
See W.E.H. Lecky, _History of Ireland in the Eighteenth Century_ (5
vols., London, 1892); J.R. O'Flanagan, _The Lives of the Lord
Chancellors and Keepers of the Great Seal in Ireland_ (2 vols.,
London, 1870); _Cornwallis Correspondence_, ed. by C. Ross (3 vols.,
London, 1859); Charles Phillips, _Recollections of Curran and some of
his Contemporaries_ (London, 1822); Henry Grattan, _Memoirs of the
Life and Times of the Right Honble. Henry Grattan_ (5 vols., London,
1839-1846); Lord Auckland, _Journal and Correspondence_ (4 vols.,
London, 1861); Charles Coote, _History of the Union of Great Britain
and Ireland_ (London, 1802). (R. J. M.)
CLARE, a county in the province of Munster, Ireland, bounded N. by
Galway Bay and Co. Galway, E. by Lough Derg, the river Shannon, and
counties Tipperary and Limerick, S. by the estuary of the Shannon, and
W. by the Atlantic Ocean. The area is 852,389 acres, or nearly 1332 sq.
m. Although the surface of the county is hilly, and in some parts even
mountainous, it nowhere rises to a great elevation. Much of the western
baronies of Moyarta and Ibrickan is composed of bog land. Bogs are
frequent also in the mountainous districts elsewhere, except in the
limestone barony of Burren, the inhabitants of some parts of which
supply themselves with turf from the opposite shores of Connemara.
Generally speaking, the eastern parts of the county are mountainous,
with tracts of rich pasture-land interspersed; the west abounds with
bog; and the north is rocky and best adapted for grazing sheep. In the
southern part, along the banks of the Fergus and Shannon, are the bands
of rich low grounds called corcasses, of various breadth, indenting the
land in a great variety of shapes. They are composed of deep rich loam,
and are distinguished as the black corcasses, adapted for tillage, and
the blue, used more advantageously as meadow land. The coast is in
general rocky, and occasionally bold and precipitous in the extreme, as
may be observed at the picturesque cliffs of Moher within a few miles of
Ennistimon and Lisdoonvarna, which rise perpendicularly at O'Brien's
Tower to an elevation of 580 ft. The coast of Clare is indented with
several bays, the chief of which are Ballyvaghan, Liscannor and Malbay;
but from Black Head to Loop Head, that is, along the entire western
boundary of the county formed by the Atlantic, there is no safe harbour
except Liscannor Bay. Malbay takes its name from its dangers to
navigators, and the whole coast has been the scene of many fatal
disasters. The county possesses only one large river, the Fergus; but
nearly 100 m. of its boundary-line are washed by the river Shannon,
which enters the Atlantic Ocean between this county and Kerry. The
numerous bays and creeks on both sides of this great river render its
navigation safe in every wind; but the passage to and from Limerick is
often tedious, and the port of Kilrush has from that cause gained in
importance. The river Fergus is navigable from the Shannon to the town
of Clare, which is the terminating point of its natural navigation, and
the port of all the central districts of the county.
There are a great number of lakes and tarns in the county, of which the
largest are Loughs Muckanagh, Graney, Atedaun and Dromore; but they are
more remarkable for beauty than for size or utility, with the exception
of the extensive and navigable Lough Derg, formed by the river Shannon
between this county and Tipperary. The salmon fishery of the Shannon,
both as a sport and as an industry, is famous; the Fergus also holds
salmon, and there is much good trout-fishing in the lakes for which
Ennis is a centre, and in the streams of the Atlantic seaboard. Clare is
a county which, like all the western counties of Ireland, repays
visitors in search of the pleasures of seaside resorts, sport, scenery
or antiquarian interest. Yet, again like other western counties, it was
long before it was rendered accessible. Communications, however, are now
satisfactory.
_Geology._--Upper Carboniferous strata cover the county west of Ennis,
the coast-sections in them being particularly fine. Shales and
sandstones alternate, now horizontal, as in the Cliffs of Moher, now
thrown into striking folds. The Carboniferous Limestone forms a barren
terraced country, often devoid of soil, through the Burren in the
north, and extends to the estuary of the Fergus and the Shannon. On
the east, the folding has brought up two bold masses of Old Red
Sandstone, with Silurian cores. Slieve Bernagh, the more southerly of
these, rises to 1746 ft. above Killaloe, and the hilly country here
traversed by the Shannon is in marked contrast with the upper course
of the river through the great limestone plain.
_Minerals._--Although metals and minerals have been found in many places
throughout the county, they do not often show themselves in sufficient
abundance to induce the application of capital for their extraction. The
principal metals are lead, iron and manganese. The Milltown lead mine in
the barony of Tulla is probably one of the oldest mines in Ireland, and
formerly, if the extent of the ancient excavations may be taken as a
guide, there must have been a very rich deposit. Copper pyrites occurs
in several parts of Burren, but in small quantity. Coal exists at
Labasheeda on the right bank of the Shannon, but the few and thin seams
are not productive. The nodules of clay-ironstone in the strata that
overlie the limestone were mined and smelted down to 1750. Within half a
mile of the Milltown lead mine are immense natural vaulted passages of
limestone, through which the river Ardsullas winds a singular course.
The lower limestone of the eastern portion of the county has been found
to contain several very large deposits of argentiferous galena. Flags,
easily quarried, are procured near Kilrush, and thinner flags near
Ennistimon. Slates are quarried in several places, the best being those
of Broadford and Killaloe, which are nearly equal to the finest procured
in Wales. A species of very fine black marble is obtained near Ennis; it
takes a high polish, and is free from the white spots with which the
black Kilkenny marble is marked.
The mineral springs, which are found in many places, are chiefly
chalybeate. That of Lisdoonvarna, a sulphur spa, about 8 m. from
Ennistimon, has been celebrated since the 18th century for its medicinal
qualities, and now attracts a large number of visitors annually. It lies
9 m. by road N. of Ennistimon. There are chalybeate springs of less note
at Kilkishen, Burren, Broadfoot, Lehinch, Kilkee, Kilrush, Killadysart,
and near Milltown Malbay. Springs called by the people "holy" or
"blessed" wells, generally mineral waters, are common; but the belief in
their power of performing cures in inveterate maladies is nearly
extinct.
_Watering-places._--The Atlantic Ocean and the estuary of the Shannon
afford many situations admirably adapted for summer bathing-places.
Among the most frequented of these localities are Milltown Malbay; with
one of the best beaches on the western coast; and the neighbouring
Spanish Point (named from the scene of the wreck of two ships of the
Armada); Lehinch, about 2 m. from Ennistimon on Liscannor Bay, and near
the interesting cliffs of Moher, has a magnificent beach. Kilkee is the
most fashionable watering-place on the western coast of Ireland; and
Kilrush on the Shannon estuary is also favoured.
_Industries._--The soil and surface of the county are in general better
adapted for grazing than for tillage, and the acreage devoted to the
former consequently exceeds three times that of the latter. Agriculture
is in a backward state, and not a fifth of the total area is under
cultivation, while the acreage shows a decrease even in the principal
crops of oats and potatoes. Cattle, sheep, poultry and pigs, however,
all receive considerable attention. Owing to the mountainous nature of
the county nearly one-seventh of the total area is quite barren.
There are no extensive manufactures, although flannels and friezes are
made for home use, and hosiery of various kinds, chiefly coarse and
strong, is made around Ennistimon and other places. There are several
fishing stations on the coast, and cod, haddock, ling, sole, turbot,
ray, mackerel and other fish abound, but the rugged nature of the coast
and the tempestuous sea greatly hinder the operations of the fishermen.
Near Pooldoody is the great Burren oyster bed called the Red Bank, where
a large establishment is maintained, from which a constant supply of the
excellent Red Bank oysters is furnished to the Dublin and other large
markets. Crabs and lobsters are caught on the shores of the Bay of
Galway in every creek from Black Head to Ardfry. In addition to the
Shannon salmon fishery mentioned above, eels abound in every rivulet,
and form an important article of consumption.
The Great Southern & Western railway line from Limerick to Sligo
intersects the centre of the county from north to south. From Ennis on
this line the West Clare railway runs to Ennistimon on the coast, where
it turns south and follows the coast by Milltown Malbay to Kilkee and
Kilrush. Killaloe in the east of the county is the terminus of a branch
of the Great Southern & Western railway.
_Population and Administration._--The population (126,244 in 1891;
112,334 in 1901; almost wholly Roman Catholic and rural) shows a
decrease among the most serious of the Irish counties, and the
emigration returns are proportionately heavy. The principal towns, all
of insignificant size, are Ennis (pop. 5093, the county town), Kilrush
(4179), Kilkee (1661) and Killaloe (885); but several of the smaller
settlements, as resorts, are of more than local importance. The county,
which is divided into 11 baronies, contains 79 parishes, and includes
the Protestant diocese of Kilfenora, the greater part of Killaloe, and a
very small portion of the diocese of Limerick. It is within the Roman
Catholic dioceses of Killaloe and Limerick. The assizes are held at
Ennis, and quarter sessions here and at Ennistimon, Killaloe, Kilrush
and Tulla. The county is divided into the East and West parliamentary
divisions, each returning one member.
_History._--This county, together with part of the neighbouring
district, was anciently called Thomond, that is, North Munster, and
formed part of the monarchy of the celebrated Brian Boroihme, who held
his court at Kincora near Killaloe, where his palace was situated on the
banks of the Shannon. The site is still distinguished by extensive
earthen ramparts. Settlements were effected by the Danes, and in the
13th century by the Anglo-Normans, but without permanently affecting the
possession of the district by its native proprietors. In 1543 Murrogh
O'Brien, after dispossessing his nephew and vainly attempting a
rebellion against the English rule, proceeded to England and submitted
to Henry VIII., resigning his name and possessions. He soon received
them back by an English tenure, together with the title of earl of
Thomond, on condition of adopting the English dress, manners and
customs. In 1565 this part of Thomond (sometimes called O'Brien's
country) was added to Connaught, and made one of the six new counties
into which that province was divided by Sir Henry Sidney. It was named
Clare, the name being traceable either to Richard de Clare (Strongbow),
earl of Pembroke, or to his younger brother, Thomas de Clare, who
obtained a grant of Thomond from Edward I. in 1276, and whose family
for some time maintained a precarious position in the district. Towards
the close of the reign of Elizabeth, Clare was detached from the
government of Connaught and given a separate administration; but at the
Restoration it was reunited to Munster.
_Antiquities._--The county abounds with remains of antiquities, both
military and ecclesiastical, especially in the north-western part. There
still exist above a hundred fortified castles, several of which are
inhabited. They are mostly of small extent, a large portion being
fortified dwellings. The chief of them is Bunratty Castle, built in
1277, once inhabited by the earls of Thomond, 10 m. W. of Limerick, on
the Shannon. Those of Ballykinvarga, Ballynalackan and Lemaneagh, all in
the north-west, should also be mentioned. Raths or encampments are to be
found in every part. They are generally circular, composed either of
large stones without mortar or of earth thrown up and surrounded by one
or more ditches. The list of abbeys and other religious houses formerly
flourishing here (some now only known by name, but many of them
surviving in ruins) comprehends upwards of twenty. The most remarkable
are--Quin, considered one of the finest and most perfect specimens of
ancient monastic architecture in Ireland; Corcomroe; Ennis, in which is
a very fine window of uncommonly elegant workmanship; and those on
Inniscattery or Scattery Island, in the Shannon, said to have been
founded by St Senan (see KILRUSH). Kilfenora, 5 m. N.E. of Ennistimon,
was until 1752 a separate diocese, and its small cathedral is of
interest, with several neighbouring crosses and a holy well. The ruined
churches of Kilnaboy, Nouhaval and Teampul Cronan are the most
noteworthy of many in the north-west. Five round towers are to be found
in various stages of preservation--at Scattery Island, Drumcliffe,
Dysert O'Dea, Kilnaboy and Inniscaltra (Lough Derg). The cathedral of
the diocese of Killaloe is at the town of that name. Cromlechs are
found, chiefly in the rocky limestone district of Burren in the N.W.,
though there are some in other baronies. That at Ballygannor is formed
of a stone 40 ft. long and 10 broad.
See papers by T.J. Westropp in _Proceedings of the Royal Irish
Academy_--"Distribution of Cromlechs in County Clare" (1897); and
"Churches of County Clare, and Origin of Ecclesiastical Divisions"
(1900).
CLAREMONT, a city of Sullivan county, New Hampshire, U.S.A., situated in
the W. part of the state, bordering on the Connecticut river. Pop.
(1890) 5565; (1900) 6498 (1442 foreign-born); (1910) 7529. Area, 6 sq.
m. It is served by two branches of the Boston & Maine railway. In
Claremont is the Fiske free library (1873), housed in a Carnegie
building (1904). The Stevens high school is richly endowed by the gift
of Paran Stevens, a native of Claremont. The city contains several
villages, the principal being Claremont, Claremont Junction and West
Claremont. Sugar river, flowing through the city into the Connecticut
and falling 223 ft. within the city limits, furnishes good water-power.
Among the manufactures are woollen and cotton goods, paper, mining and
quarrying machinery, rubber goods, linens, shoes, wood trim and pearl
buttons. The first settlement here was made in 1762, and a township was
organized in 1764; in 1908 Claremont was chartered as a city. It was
named from Claremont, Lord Clive's country place.
CLARENCE, DUKES OF. The early history of this English title is identical
with that of the family of Clare (q.v.), earls of Gloucester, who are
sometimes called earls of Clare, of which word Clarence is a later form.
The first duke of Clarence was Lionel of Antwerp (see below), third son
of Edward III., who was created duke in 1362, and whose wife Elizabeth
was a direct descendant of the Clares, the "Honour of Clare" being among
the lands which she brought to her husband. When Lionel died without
sons in 1368 the title became extinct; but in 1412 it was revived in
favour of Thomas (see below), the second son of Henry IV. The third
creation of a duke of Clarence took place in 1461, and was in favour of
George (see below), brother of the King Edward IV. When this duke,
accused by the king, was attainted and killed in 1478, his titles and
estates were forfeited. There appears to have been no other creation of
a duke of Clarence until 1789, when William, third son of George III.,
was made a peer under this title. Having merged in the crown when
William became king of Great Britain and Ireland in 1830, the title of
duke of Clarence was again revived in 1890 in favour of Albert Victor
(1864-1892), the elder son of King Edward VII., then prince of Wales,
only to become extinct for the fifth time on his death in 1892.
LIONEL OF ANTWERP, duke of Clarence (1338-1368), third son of Edward
III., was born at Antwerp on the 29th of November 1338. Betrothed when a
child to Elizabeth (d. 1363), daughter and heiress of William de Burgh,
3rd earl of Ulster (d. 1332), he was married to her in 1352; but before
this date he had entered nominally into possession of her great Irish
inheritance. Having been named as his father's representative in England
in 1345 and again in 1346, Lionel was created earl of Ulster, and joined
an expedition into France in 1355, but his chief energies were reserved
for the affairs of Ireland. Appointed governor of that country, he
landed at Dublin in 1361, and in November of the following year was
created duke of Clarence, while his father made an abortive attempt to
secure for him the crown of Scotland. His efforts to secure an effective
authority over his Irish lands were only moderately successful; and
after holding a parliament at Kilkenny, which passed the celebrated
statute of Kilkenny in 1367, he threw up his task in disgust and
returned to England. About this time a marriage was arranged between
Clarence and Violante, daughter of Galeazzo Visconti, lord of Pavia (d.
1378); the enormous dowry which Galeazzo promised with his daughter
being exaggerated by the rumour of the time. Journeying to fetch his
bride, the duke was received in great state both in France and Italy,
and was married to Violante at Milan in June 1368. Some months were then
spent in festivities, during which Lionel was taken ill at Alba, where
he died on the 7th of October 1368. His only child Philippa, a daughter
by his first wife, married in 1368 Edmund Mortimer, 3rd earl of March
(1351-1381), and through this union Clarence became the ancestor of
Edward IV. The poet Chaucer was at one time a page in Lionel's
household.
THOMAS, duke of Clarence (c. 1388-1421), who was nominally lieutenant of
Ireland from 1401 to 1413, and was in command of the English fleet in
1405, acted in opposition to his elder brother, afterwards King Henry
V., and the Beauforts during the later part of the reign of Henry IV.;
and was for a short time at the head of the government, leading an
unsuccessful expedition into France in 1412. When Henry V., however,
became king in 1413 no serious dissensions took place between the
brothers, and as a member of the royal council Clarence took part in the
preparations for the French war. He was with the English king at
Harfleur, but not at Agincourt, and shared in the expedition of 1417
into Normandy, during which he led the assault on Caen, and
distinguished himself as a soldier in other similar undertakings. When
Henry V. returned to England in 1421, the duke remained in France as his
lieutenant, and was killed at Beauge whilst rashly attacking the French
and their Scottish allies on the 22nd of March 1421. He left no
legitimate issue, and the title again became extinct.
GEORGE, duke of Clarence (1449-1478), younger son of Richard, duke of
York, by his wife Cicely, daughter of Ralph Neville, 1st earl of
Westmorland, was born in Dublin on the 21st of October 1449. Soon after
his elder brother became king as Edward IV. in March 1461, he was
created duke of Clarence, and his youth was no bar to his appointment as
lord-lieutenant of Ireland in the following year. Having been mentioned
as a possible husband for Mary, daughter of Charles the Bold, afterwards
duke of Burgundy, Clarence came under the influence of Richard Neville,
earl of Warwick, and in July 1469 was married at Calais to the earl's
elder daughter Isabella. With his father-in-law he then acted in a
disloyal manner towards the king. Both supported the rebels in the north
of England, and when their treachery was discovered Clarence was
deprived of his office as lord-lieutenant and fled to France. Returning
to England with Warwick in September 1470, he witnessed the restoration
of Henry VI., when the crown was settled upon himself in case the male
line of Henry's family became extinct. The good understanding, however,
between Warwick and his son-in-law was not lasting, and Clarence was
soon secretly reconciled with Edward. The public reconciliation between
the brothers took place when the king was besieging Warwick in Coventry,
and Clarence then fought for the Yorkists at Barnet and Tewkesbury.
After Warwick's death in April 1471 Clarence appears to have seized the
whole of the vast estates of the earl, and in March 1472 was created by
right of his wife earl of Warwick and Salisbury. He was consequently
greatly disturbed when he heard that his younger brother Richard, duke
of Gloucester, was seeking to marry Warwick's younger daughter Anne, and
was claiming some part of Warwick's lands. A violent quarrel between the
brothers ensued, but Clarence was unable to prevent Gloucester from
marrying, and in 1474 the king interfered to settle the dispute,
dividing the estates between his brothers. In 1477 Clarence was again a
suitor for the hand of Mary, who had just become duchess of Burgundy.
Edward objected to the match, and Clarence, jealous of Gloucester's
influence, left the court. At length Edward was convinced that Clarence
was aiming at his throne. The duke was thrown into prison, and in
January 1478 the king unfolded the charges against his brother to the
parliament. He had slandered the king; had received oaths of allegiance
to himself and his heirs; had prepared for a new rebellion; and was in
short incorrigible. Both Houses of Parliament passed the bill of
attainder, and the sentence of death which followed was carried out on
the 17th or 18th of February 1478. It is uncertain what share Gloucester
had in his brother's death; but soon after the event the rumour gained
ground that Clarence had been drowned in a butt of malmsey wine. Two of
the duke's children survived their father: Margaret, countess of
Salisbury (1473-1541), and Edward, earl of Warwick (1475-1499), who
passed the greater part of his life in prison and was beheaded in
November 1499.
On the last-named see W. Stubbs, _Constitutional History_, vol. iii.
(Oxford, 1895); Sir J.H. Ramsay, _Lancaster and York_ (Oxford, 1892);
C.W.C. Oman, _Warwick the Kingmaker_ (London, 1891). On the title
generally see G.E. C(okayne), _Complete Peerage_ (1887-1898).
CLARENDON, EDWARD HYDE, 1ST EARL OF (1609-1674), English historian and
statesman, son of Henry Hyde of Dinton, Wiltshire, a member of a family
for some time established at Norbury, Cheshire, was born on the 18th of
February 1609. He entered Magdalen Hall, Oxford, in 1622 (having been
refused a demyship at Magdalen College), and graduated B.A. in 1626.
Intended originally for holy orders, the death of two elder brothers
made him his father's heir, and in 1625 he entered the Middle Temple. At
the university his abilities were more conspicuous than his industry,
and at the bar his time was devoted more to general reading and to the
society of eminent scholars and writers than to the study of law
treatises. This wandering from the beaten track, however, was not
without its advantages. In later years Clarendon declared "next the
immediate blessing and providence of God Almighty" that he "owed all the
little he knew and the little good that was in him to the friendships
and conversation ... of the most excellent men in their several kinds
that lived in that age."[1] These included Ben Jonson, Selden, Waller,
Hales, and especially Lord Falkland; and from their influence and the
wide reading in which he indulged, he doubtless drew the solid learning
and literary talent which afterwards distinguished him.
In 1629 he married his first wife, Anne, daughter of Sir George Ayliffe,
who died six months afterwards; and secondly, in 1634, Frances, daughter
of Sir Thomas Aylesbury, Master of Requests. In 1633 he was called to
the bar, and obtained quickly a good position and practice. His
marriages had gained for him influential friends, and in December 1634
he was made keeper of the writs and rolls of the common pleas; while his
able conduct of the petition of the London merchants against Portland
earned Laud's approval. He was returned to the Short Parliament in 1640
as member for Wootton Bassett. Respect and veneration for the law and
constitution of England were already fundamental principles with Hyde,
and the flagrant violations and perversions of the law which
characterized the twelve preceding years of absolute rule drove him into
the ranks of the popular party. He served on numerous and important
committees, and his parliamentary action was directed chiefly towards
the support and restoration of the law. He assailed the jurisdiction of
the earl marshal's court, and in the Long Parliament, in which he sat
for Saltash, renewed his attacks and practically effected its
suppression. In 1641 he served on the committees for inquiring into the
status of the councils of Wales and of the North, distinguished himself
by a speech against the latter, and took an important part in the
proceedings against the judges. He supported Stafford's impeachment, and
did not vote against the attainder, subsequently making an unsuccessful
attempt through Essex to avert the capital penalty.[2] Hyde's
allegiance, however, to the church of England was as staunch as his
support of the law, and was soon to separate him from the popular
faction. In February 1641 he opposed the reception of the London
petition against episcopacy, and in May the project for unity of
religion with the Scots, and the bill for the exclusion of the clergy
from secular office. He showed special energy in his opposition to the
Root and Branch Bill, and, though made chairman of the committee on the
bill on the 11th of July in order to silence his opposition, he caused
by his successful obstruction the failure of the measure. In consequence
he was summoned to the king's presence, and encouraged in his attitude,
and at the beginning of the second session was regarded as one of the
king's ablest supporters in the Commons. He considered the claims put
forward at this time by parliament as a violation and not as a guarantee
of the law and constitution. He opposed the demand by the parliament to
choose the king's ministers, and also the Grand Remonstrance, to which
he wrote a reply published by the king.
He now definitely though not openly joined the royal cause, and refused
office in January 1642 with Colepeper and Falkland in order to serve the
king's interests more effectually. Charles undertook to do nothing in
the Commons without their advice. Nevertheless a few days afterwards,
without their knowledge and by the advice of Lord Digby, he attempted
the arrest of the five members, a resort to force which reduced Hyde to
despair, and which indeed seemed to show that things had gone too far
for an appeal to the law. He persevered, nevertheless, in his legal
policy, to which Charles after the failure of his project again
returned, joined the king openly in June, and continued to compose the
king's answers and declarations in which he appealed to the "known Laws
of the land" against the arbitrary and illegal acts of a seditious
majority in the parliament, his advice to the king being "to shelter
himself wholly under the law, ... presuming that the king and the law
together would have been strong enough for any encounter." Hyde's appeal
had great influence, and gained for the king's cause half the nation. It
by no means, however, met with universal support among the royalists,
Hobbes jeering at Hyde's love for "mixed monarchy," and the courtiers
expressing their disapproval of the "spirit of accommodation" which
"wounded the regality." It was destined to failure owing principally to
the invincible distrust of Charles created in the parliament leaders,
and to the fact that Charles was simultaneously carrying on another and
an inconsistent policy, listening to very different advisers, such as
the queen and Digby, and resolving on measures (such as the attempt on
Hull) without Hyde's knowledge or approval.
War, accordingly, in spite of his efforts, broke out. He was expelled
the House of Commons on the 11th of August 1642, and was one of those
excepted later from pardon. He showed great activity in collecting
loans, was present at Edgehill, though not as a combatant, and followed
the king to Oxford, residing at All Souls College from October 1642 till
March 1645. On the 22nd of February he was made a privy councillor and
knighted, and on the 3rd of March appointed chancellor of the exchequer.
He was an influential member of the "Junto" which met every week to
discuss business before it was laid before the council. His aim was to
gain over some of the leading Parliamentarians by personal influence and
personal considerations, and at the Uxbridge negotiations in January
1645, where he acted as principal manager on the king's side, while
remaining firm on the great political questions such as the church and
the militia, he tried to win individuals by promises of places and
honours. He promoted the assembly of the Oxford parliament in December
1643 as a counterpoise to the influence and status of the Long
Parliament. Hyde's policy and measures, however, all failed. They had
been weakly and irregularly supported by the king, and were fiercely
opposed by the military party, who were jealous of the civil influence,
and were urging Charles to trust to force and arms alone and eschew all
compromise and concessions. Charles fell now under the influence of
persons devoid of all legal and constitutional scruples, sending to
Glamorgan in Ireland "those strange powers and instructions inexcusable
to justice, piety and prudence."[3]
Hyde's influence was much diminished, and on the 4th of March 1645 he
left the king for Bristol as one of the guardians of the prince of Wales
and governors of the west. Here the disputes between the council and the
army paralysed the proceedings, and lost, according to Hyde, the finest
opportunity since the outbreak of the war of raising a strong force and
gaining substantial victories in that part of the country. After
Hopton's defeat on the 16th of February 1646, at Torrington, Hyde
accompanied the prince, on the 4th of March, to Scilly, and on the 17th
of April, for greater security, to Jersey. He strongly disapproved of
the prince's removal to France by the queen's order and of the schemes
of assistance from abroad, refused to accompany him, and signed a bond
to prevent the sale of Jersey to the French supported by Jermyn. He
opposed the projected sacrifice of the church to the Scots and the grant
by the king of any but personal or temporary concessions, declaring that
peace was only possible "upon the old foundations of government in
church and state." He was especially averse to Charles's tampering with
the Irish Romanists. "Oh, Mr Secretary," he wrote to Nicholas, "those
stratagems have given me more sad hours than all the misfortunes in war
which have befallen the king and look like the effects of God's anger
towards us."[4] He refused to compound for his own estate. While in
Jersey he resided first at St Helier and afterwards at Elizabeth Castle
with Sir George Carteret. He composed the first portion of his _History_
and kept in touch with events by means of an enormous correspondence. In
1648 he published _A Full answer to an infamous and traiterous
Pamphlet..._, a reply to the resolution of the parliament to present no
more addresses to the king and a vindication of Charles.
On the outbreak of the second Civil War Hyde left Jersey (26th of June
1648) to join the queen and prince at Paris. He landed at Dieppe, sailed
from that port to Dunkirk, and thence followed the prince to the Thames,
where Charles had met the fleet, but was captured and robbed by a
privateer, and only joined the prince in September after the latter's
return to the Hague. He strongly disapproved of the king's concessions
at Newport. When the army broke off the treaty and brought Charles to
trial he endeavoured to save his life, and after the execution drew up a
letter to the several European sovereigns invoking their assistance to
avenge it. Hyde strongly opposed Charles II.'s ignominious surrender to
the Covenanters, the alliance with the Scots, and the Scottish
expedition, desiring to accomplish whatever was possible there through
Montrose and the royalists, and inclined rather to an attempt in
Ireland. His advice was not followed, and he gladly accepted a mission
with Cottington to Spain to obtain money from the Roman Catholic powers,
and to arrange an alliance between Owen O'Neill and Ormonde for the
recovery of Ireland, arriving at Madrid on the 26th of November 1649.
The defeat, however, of Charles at Dunbar, and the confirmation of
Cromwell's ascendancy, influenced the Spanish government against them,
and they were ordered to leave in December 1650. Hyde arrived at Antwerp
in January 1651, and in December rejoined Charles at Paris after the
latter's escape from Worcester. He now became one of his chief advisers,
accompanying him in his change of residence to Cologne in October 1654
and to Bruges in 1658, and was appointed lord chancellor on the 13th of
January 1658. His influence was henceforth maintained in spite of the
intrigues of both Romanists and Presbyterians, as well as the violent
and openly displayed hostility of the queen, and was employed
unremittingly in the endeavour to keep Charles faithful to the church
and constitution, and in the prevention of unwise concessions and
promises which might estrange the general body of the royalists. His
advice to Charles was to wait upon the turn of events, "that all his
activity was to consist in carefully avoiding to do anything that might
do him hurt and to expect some blessed conjuncture."[5] In 1656, during
the war between England and Spain, Charles received offers of help from
the latter power provided he could gain a port in England, but Hyde
discouraged small isolated attempts. He expected much from Cromwell's
death. The same year he made an alliance with the Levellers, and was
informed of their plots to assassinate the protector, without apparently
expressing any disapproval.[6] He was well supplied with information
from England,[7] and guided the action of the royalists with great
ability and wisdom during the interval between Cromwell's death and the
Restoration, urged patience, and advocated the obstruction of a
settlement between the factions contending for power and the fomentation
of their jealousies, rather than premature risings.
The Restoration was a complete triumph for Hyde's policy. He lays no
stress on his own great part in it, but it was owing to him that the
Restoration was a national one, by the consent and invitation of
parliament representing the whole people and not through the medium of
one powerful faction enforcing its will upon a minority, and that it was
not only a restoration of Charles but a restoration of the monarchy. By
Hyde's advice concessions to the inconvenient demands of special
factions had been avoided by referring the decision to a "free
parliament," and the declaration of Breda reserved for parliament the
settlement of the questions of amnesty, religious toleration and the
proprietorship of forfeited lands.
Hyde entered London with the king, all attempts at effecting his fall
having failed, and immediately obtained the chief place in the
government, retaining the chancellorship of the exchequer till the 13th
of May 1661, when he surrendered it to Lord Ashley. He took his seat as
speaker of the House of Lords and in the court of chancery on the 1st of
June 1660. On the 3rd of November 1660 he was made Baron Hyde of Hindon,
and on the 20th of April 1661 Viscount Cornbury and earl of Clarendon,
receiving a grant from the king of L20,000 and at different times of
various small estates and Irish rents. The marriage of his daughter Anne
to James, duke of York, celebrated in secret in September 1660, at first
alarmed Clarendon on account of the public hostility he expected thereby
to incur, but finding his fears unconfirmed he acquiesced in its public
recognition in December, and thus became related in a special manner to
the royal family and the grandfather of two English sovereigns.[8]
Clarendon's position was one of great difficulties, but at the same time
of splendid opportunities. In particular a rare occasion now offered
itself of settling the religious question on a broad principle of
comprehension or toleration; for the monarchy had been restored not by
the supporters of the church alone but largely by the influence and aid
of the nonconformists and also of the Roman Catholics, who were all
united at that happy moment by a common loyalty to the throne.
Clarendon appears to have approved of comprehension but not of
toleration. He had already in April 1660 sent to discuss terms with the
leading Presbyterians in England, and after the Restoration offered
bishoprics to several, including Richard Baxter. He drew up the royal
declaration of October, promising limited episcopacy and a revised
prayer-book and ritual, which was subsequently thrown out by parliament,
and he appears to have anticipated some kind of settlement from the
Savoy Conference which sat in April 1661. The failure of the latter
proved perhaps that the differences were too great for compromise, and
widened the breach. The parliament immediately proceeded to pass the
series of narrow and tyrannical measures against the dissenters known as
the Clarendon Code. The Corporations Act, obliging members of
corporations to denounce the Covenant and take the sacrament according
to the Anglican usage, became law on the 20th of December 1661, the Act
of Uniformity enforcing the use of the prayer-book on ministers, as well
as a declaration that it was unlawful to bear arms against the
sovereign, on the 19th of May 1662, and these were followed by the
Conventicle Act in 1664 suppressing conventicles and by the Five-Mile
Act in 1665 forbidding ministers who had refused subscription to the Act
of Uniformity to teach or reside within 5 m. of a borough. Clarendon
appears to have reluctantly acquiesced in these civil measures rather
than to have originated them, and to have endeavoured to mitigate their
injustice and severity. He supported the continuance of the tenure by
presbyterian ministers of livings not held by Anglicans and an amendment
in the Lords allowing a pension to those deprived, earning the gratitude
of Baxter and the nonconformists. On the 17th of March 1662 he
introduced into parliament a declaration enabling the king to dispense
with the Act of Uniformity in the case of ministers of merit.[9] But
once committed to the narrow policy of intolerance, Clarendon was
inevitably involved in all its consequences. His characteristic respect
for the law and constitution rendered him hostile to the general policy
of indulgence, which, though the favourite project of the king, he
strongly opposed in the Lords, and in the end caused its withdrawal. He
declared that he could have wished the law otherwise, "but when it was
passed, he thought it absolutely necessary to see obedience paid to it
without any connivance."[10] Charles was greatly angered. It was
believed in May 1663 that the intrigues of Bennet and Buckingham, who
seized the opportunity of ingratiating themselves with the king by
zealously supporting the indulgence, had secured Clarendon's dismissal,
and in July Bristol ventured to accuse him of high treason in the
parliament; but the attack, which did not receive the king's support,
failed entirely and only ended in the banishment from court of its
promoter. Clarendon's opposition to the court policy in this way
acquired a personal character, and he was compelled to identify himself
more completely with the intolerant measures of the House of Commons.
Though not the originator of the Conventicle Act or of the Five-Mile
Act, he has recorded his approval,[11] and he ended by taking alarm at
plots and rumours and by regarding the great party of nonconformists,
through whose co-operation the monarchy had been restored, as a danger
to the state whose "faction was their religion."[12]
Meanwhile Clarendon's influence and direction had been predominant in
nearly all departments of state. He supported the exception of the
actual regicides from the Indemnity, but only ten out of the twenty-six
condemned were executed, and Clarendon, with the king's support,
prevented the passing of a bill in 1661 for the execution of thirteen
more. He upheld the Act of Indemnity against all the attempts of the
royalists to upset it. The conflicting claims to estates were left to be
decided by the law. The confiscations of the usurping government
accordingly were cancelled, while the properly executed transactions
between individuals were necessarily upheld. There can be little doubt
that the principle followed was the only safe one in the prevailing
confusion. Great injustice was indeed suffered by individuals, but the
proper remedy of such injustice was the benevolence of the king, which
there is too much reason to believe proved inadequate and partial. The
settlement of the church lands which was directed by Clarendon presented
equal difficulties and involved equal hardships. In settling Scotland
Clarendon's aim was to make that kingdom dependent upon England and to
uphold the Cromwellian union. He proposed to establish a council at
Whitehall to govern Scottish affairs, and showed great zeal in
endeavouring to restore episcopacy through the medium of Archbishop
Sharp. His influence, however, ended with the ascendancy of Lauderdale
in 1663. He was, to some extent at least, responsible for the settlement
in Ireland, but, while anxious for an establishment upon a solid
Protestant basis, urged "temper and moderation and justice" in securing
it. He supported Ormonde's wise and enlightened Irish administration,
and in particular opposed persistently the prohibition of the import of
Irish cattle into England, incurring thereby great unpopularity. He
showed great activity in the advancement of the colonies, to whom he
allowed full freedom of religion. He was a member of the council for
foreign plantations, and one of the eight lords proprietors of Carolina
in 1663; and in 1664 sent a commission to settle disputes in New
England. In the department of foreign affairs he had less influence. His
policy was limited to the maintenance of peace "necessary for the
reducing [the king's] own dominions into that temper of subjection and
obedience as they ought to be in."[13] In 1664 he demanded, on behalf of
Charles, French support, and a loan of L50,000 against disturbance at
home, and thus initiated that ignominious system of pensions and
dependence upon France which proved so injurious to English interests
later. But he was the promoter neither of the sale of Dunkirk on the
27th of October 1662, the author of which seems to have been the earl of
Sandwich,[14] nor of the Dutch War. He attached considerable value to
the possession of the former, but when its sale was decided he conducted
the negotiations and effected the bargain. He had zealously laboured for
peace with Holland, and had concluded a treaty for the settlement of
disputes on the 4th of September 1662. Commercial and naval jealousies,
however, soon involved the two states in hostilities. Cape Corso and
other Dutch possessions on the coast of Africa, and New Amsterdam in
America, were seized by squadrons from the royal navy in 1664, and
hostilities were declared on the 22nd of February 1665. Clarendon now
gave his support to the war, asserted the extreme claims of the English
crown over the British seas, and contemplated fresh cessions from the
Dutch and an alliance with Sweden and Spain. According to his own
account he initiated the policy of the Triple Alliance,[15] but it seems
clear that his inclination towards France continued in spite of the
intervention of the latter state in favour of Holland; and he took part
in the negotiations for ending the war by an undertaking with Louis XIV.
implying a neutrality, while the latter seized Flanders. The crisis in
this feeble foreign policy and in the general official mismanagement was
reached in June 1667, when the Dutch burnt several ships at Chatham and
when "the roar of foreign guns were heard for the first and last time by
the citizens of London."[16]
The whole responsibility for the national calamity and disgrace, and for
the ignominious peace which followed it, was unjustly thrown on the
shoulders of Clarendon, though it must be admitted that the disjointed
state of the administration and want of control over foreign policy were
largely the causes of the disaster, and for these Clarendon's influence
and obstruction of official reforms were to some extent answerable.
According to Sir William Coventry, whose opinion has weight and who
acknowledges the chancellor's fidelity to the king, while Clarendon "was
so great at the council board and in the administration of matters, there
was no room for anybody to propose any remedy to what was remiss ... he
managing all things with that greatness which will now be removed."[17] He
disapproved of the system of boards and committees instituted during the
Commonwealth, as giving too much power to the parliament, and regarded the
administration by the great officers of state, to the exclusion of pure
men of business, as the only method compatible with the dignity and
security of the monarchy. The lowering of the prestige of the privy
council, and its subordination first to the parliament and afterwards to
the military faction, he considered as one of the chief causes of the fall
of Charles I. He aroused a strong feeling of hostility in the Commons by
his opposition to the appropriation of supplies in 1665, and to the audit
of the war accounts in 1666, as "an introduction to a commonwealth" and as
"a new encroachment," and by his high tone of prerogative and authority,
while by his advice to Charles to prorogue parliament he incurred their
resentment and gave colour to the accusation that he had advised the king
to govern without parliaments. He was unpopular among all classes, among
the royalists on account of the Act of Indemnity, among the Presbyterians
because of the Act of Uniformity. It was said that he had invented the
maxim "that the king should buy and reward his enemies and do little for
his friends, because they are his already."[18] Every kind of
maladministration was currently ascribed to him, of designs to govern by a
standing army, and of corruption. He was credited with having married
Charles purposely to a barren queen in order to raise his own
grandchildren to the throne, with having sold Dunkirk to France, and his
magnificent house in St James's was nicknamed "Dunkirk House," while on
the day of the Dutch attack on Chatham the mob set up a gibbet at his gate
and broke his windows. He had always been exceedingly unpopular at court,
and kept severely aloof from the revels and licence which reigned there.
Evelyn names "the buffoons and the misses to whom he was an eyesore."[19]
He was intensely disliked by the royal mistresses, whose favour he did not
condescend to seek, and whose presence and influence were often the
subject of his reproaches.[20] A party of younger men of the king's own
age, more congenial to his temperament, and eager to drive the old
chancellor from power and to succeed him in office, had for some time been
endeavouring to undermine his influence by ridicule and intrigue.
Surrounded by such general and violent animosity, Clarendon's only hope
could be in the support of the king. But the chancellor had early and
accurately gauged the nature and extent of the king's attachment to him,
which proceeded neither from affection nor gratitude but "from his
aversion to be troubled with the intricacies of his affairs," and in 1661
he had resisted the importunities of Ormonde to resign the great seal for
the lord treasurership with the rank of "first minister," "a title newly
translated out of French into English," on account of the obloquy this
position would incur and the further dependence which it entailed upon the
inconstant king.[21] Charles, long weary of the old chancellor's rebukes,
was especially incensed at this time owing to his failure in securing
Frances Stuart (la Belle Stuart) for his seraglio, a disappointment which
he attributed to Clarendon, and was now alarmed by the hostility which his
administration had excited. He did not scruple to sacrifice at once the
old adherent of his house and fortunes. "The truth is," he wrote Ormonde,
"his behaviour and humour was grown so insupportable to myself and all the
world else that I could no longer endure it, and it was impossible for me
to live with it and do these things with the Parliament that must be done,
or the government will be lost."[22] By the direction of Charles, James
advised Clarendon to resign before the meeting of parliament, but in an
interview with the king on the 26th of August Clarendon refused to deliver
up the seal unless dismissed, and urged him not to take a step ruinous to
the interests both of the chancellor himself and of the crown.[23] He
could not believe his dismissal was really intended, but on the 30th of
August he was deprived of the great seal, for which the king received the
thanks of the parliament on the 16th of October. On the 12th of November
his impeachment, consisting of various charges of arbitrary government,
corruption and maladministration, was brought up to the Lords, but the
latter refused to order his committal, on the ground that the Commons had
only accused him of treason in general without specifying any particular
charge. Clarendon wrote humbly to the king asking for pardon, and that the
prosecution might be prevented, but Charles had openly taken part against
him, and, though desiring his escape, would not order or assist his
departure for fear of the Commons. Through the bishop of Hereford,
however, on the 29th of November he pressed Clarendon to fly, promising
that he should not during his absence suffer in his honour or fortune.
Clarendon embarked the same night for Calais, where he arrived on the 2nd
of December. The Lords immediately passed an act for his banishment and
ordered the petition forwarded by him to parliament to be burnt.
The rest of Clarendon's life was passed in exile. He left Calais for
Rouen on the 25th of December, returning on the 21st of January 1668,
visiting the baths of Bourbon in April, thence to Avignon in June,
residing from July 1668 till June 1671 at Montpellier, whence he
proceeded to Moulins and to Rouen again in May 1674. His sudden
banishment entailed great personal hardships. His health at the time of
his flight was much impaired, and on arriving at Calais he fell
dangerously ill; and Louis XIV., anxious at this time to gain popularity
in England, sent him peremptory and repeated orders to quit France. He
suffered severely from gout, and during the greater part of his exile
could not walk without the aid of two men. At Evreux, on the 23rd of
April 1668, he was the victim of a murderous assault by English sailors,
who attributed to him the non-payment of their wages, and who were on
the point of despatching him when he was rescued by the guard. For some
time he was not allowed to see any of his children; even correspondence
with him was rendered treasonable by the Act of Banishment; and it was
not apparently till 1671, 1673 and 1674 that he received visits from his
sons, the younger, Lawrence Hyde, being present with him at his death.
Clarendon bore his troubles with great dignity and fortitude. He found
consolation in religious duties, and devoted a portion of every day to
the composition of his _Contemplations on the Psalms_, and of his moral
essays. Removed effectually from the public scene, and from all share in
present politics, he turned his attention once more to the past and
finished his _History_ and his _Autobiography_. Soon after reaching
Calais he had written, on the 17th of December 1667, to the university
of Oxford, desiring as his last request that the university should
believe in his innocence and remember him, though there could be no
further mention of him in their public devotions, in their private
prayers.[24] In 1668 he wrote to the duke and duchess of York to
remonstrate on the report that they had turned Roman Catholic, to the
former urging "You cannot be without zeal for the Church to which your
blessed father made himself a sacrifice," adding that such a change
would bring a great storm against the Romanists. He entertained to the
last hopes of obtaining leave to return to England. He asked for
permission in June 1671 and in August 1674. In the dedication of his
_Brief View of Mr Hobbes's Book Leviathan_ he repeats "the hope which
sustains my weak, decayed spirits that your Majesty will at some time
call to your remembrance my long and incorrupted fidelity to your person
and your service"; but his petitions were not even answered or noticed.
He died at Rouen on the 9th of December 1674. He was buried in
Westminster Abbey at the foot of the steps at the entrance to Henry
VII.'s chapel. He left two sons, Henry, 2nd earl of Clarendon, and
Lawrence, earl of Rochester, his daughter Anne, duchess of York, and a
third son, Edward, having predeceased him. His male descendants became
extinct on the death of the 4th earl of Clarendon and 2nd earl of
Rochester in 1753, the title of Clarendon being revived in 1776 in the
person of Thomas Villiers, who had married the granddaughter and heir of
the last earl.
As a statesman Clarendon had obvious limitations and failings. He
brought to the consideration of political questions an essentially legal
but also a narrow mind, conceiving the law, "that great and admirable
mystery," and the constitution as fixed, unchangeable and sufficient for
all time, in contrast to Pym, who regarded them as living organisms
capable of continual development and evolution; and he was incapable of
comprehending and governing the new conditions and forces created by the
civil wars. His character, however, and therefore to some extent his
career, bear the indelible marks of greatness. He left the popular cause
at the moment of its triumph and showed in so doing a strict
consistency. In a court degraded by licence and self-indulgence, he
maintained his self-respect and personal dignity regardless of
consequences, and in an age of almost universal corruption and
self-seeking he preserved a noble integrity and patriotism. At the
Restoration he showed great moderation in accepting rewards. He refused
a grant of 10,000 acres in the Fens from the king on the ground that it
would create an evil precedent, and amused Charles and James by his
indignation at the offer of a present of L10,000 from the French
minister Fouquet, the only present he accepted from Louis XIV. being a
set of books printed at the Louvre. His income, however, as lord
chancellor was very large, and Clarendon maintained considerable state,
considering it due to the dignity of the monarchy that the high officers
should carry the external marks of greatness. The house built by him in
St James's was one of the most magnificent ever seen in England, and was
filled with a collection of portraits, chiefly those of contemporary
statesmen and men of letters. It cost Clarendon L50,000, involved him
deeply in debt and was considered one of the chief causes of the "gust
of envy" that caused his fall.[25] He is described as "a fair, ruddy,
fat, middle-statured, handsome man," and his appearance was stately and
dignified. He expected deference from his inferiors, and one of the
chief charges which he brought against the party of the young
politicians was the want of respect with which they treated himself and
the lord treasurer. His industry and devotion to public business, of
which proofs still remain in the enormous mass of his state papers and
correspondence, were exemplary, and were rendered all the more
conspicuous by the negligence, inferiority in business, and frivolity of
his successors. As lord chancellor Clarendon made no great impression in
the court of chancery. His early legal training had long been
interrupted, and his political preoccupations probably rendered
necessary the delegation of many of his judicial duties to others.
According to Speaker Onslow his decrees were always made with the aid of
two judges. Burnet praises him, however, as "a very good chancellor,
only a little too rough but very impartial in the administration of
justice," and Pepys, who saw him presiding in his court, perceived him
to be "a most able and ready man."[26] According to Evelyn, "though no
considerable lawyer" he was "one who kept up the fame and substance of
things in the nation with ... solemnity." He made good appointments to
the bench and issued some important orders for the reform of abuses in
his court.[27] As chancellor of Oxford University, to which office he
was elected on the 27th of October 1660, Clarendon promoted the
restoration of order and various educational reforms. In 1753 his
manuscripts were left to the university by his great-grandson Lord
Cornbury, and in 1868 the money gained by publication was spent in
erecting the Clarendon Laboratory, the profits of the _History_ having
provided in 1713 a building for the university press adjoining the
Sheldonian theatre, known since the removal of the press to its present
quarters as the Clarendon Building.
Clarendon had risen to high office largely through his literary and
oratorical gifts. His eloquence was greatly admired by Evelyn and
Pepys, though Burnet criticises it as too copious. He was a great lover
of books and collected a large library, was well read in the Roman and
in the contemporary histories both foreign and English, and could
appreciate Carew, Ben Jonson and Cowley. As a writer and historian
Clarendon occupies a high place in English literature. His great work,
the _History of the Rebellion_, is composed in the grand style. A
characteristic feature is the wonderful series of well-known portraits,
drawn with great skill and liveliness and especially praised by Evelyn
and by Macaulay. The long digressions, the lengthy sentences, and the
numerous parentheses do not accord with modern taste and usage, but it
may be observed that these often follow more closely the natural
involutions of the thought, and express the argument more clearly, than
the short disconnected sentences, now generally employed, while in
rhythm and dignity Clarendon's style is immeasurably superior. The
composition, however, of the work as a whole is totally wanting in
proportion, and the book is overloaded with state papers, misplaced and
tedious in the narrative. In considering the accuracy of the history it
is important to remember the dates and circumstances of the composition
of its various portions. The published _History_ is mainly a compilation
of two separate original manuscripts, the first being the history
proper, written between 1646 and 1648, with the advantage of a fresh
memory and the help of various documents and authorities, and ending in
March 1644, and the second being the _Life_, extending from 1609 to
1660, but composed long afterwards in exile and without the aid of
papers between 1668 and 1670. The value of any statement, therefore, in
the published _History_ depends chiefly on whether it is taken from the
_History_ proper or the _Life_. In 1671 these two manuscripts were
united by Clarendon with certain alterations and modifications making
Books i.-vii. of the published _History_, while Books viii.-xv. were
written subsequently, and, being composed for the most part without
materials, are generally inaccurate, with the notable exception of Book
ix., made up from two narratives written at Jersey in 1646, and
containing very little from the _Life_. Sincerity and honest conviction
are present on every page, and the inaccuracies are due not to wilful
misrepresentation, but to failure of memory and to the disadvantages
under which the author laboured in exile. But they lessen considerably
the value of his work, and detract from his reputation as chronicler of
contemporary events, for which he was specially fitted by his practical
experience in public business, a qualification declared by himself to be
the "genius, spirit and soul of an historian." In general, Clarendon,
like many of his contemporaries, failed signally to comprehend the real
issues and principles at stake in the great struggle, laying far too
much stress on personalities and never understanding the real aims and
motives of the Presbyterian party. The work was first published in
1702-1704 from a copy of a transcript made by Clarendon's secretary,
with a few unimportant alterations, and was the object of a violent
attack by John Oldmixon for supposed changes and omissions in _Clarendon
and Whitelocke compared_ (1727) and again in a preface to his _History
of England_ (1730), repelled and refuted by John Burton in the
_Genuineness of Lord Clarendon's History Vindicated_ (1744). The history
was first published from the original in 1826; the best edition being
that of 1888 edited by W.D. Macray and issued by the Clarendon Press.
_The Lord Clarendon's History ... Compleated_, a supplement containing
portraits and illustrative papers, was published in 1717, and _An
Appendix to the History_, containing a life, speeches and various
pieces, in 1724. The _Sutherland Clarendon_ in the Bodleian library at
Oxford contains several thousand portraits and illustrations of the
_History_. _The Life of Edward, earl of Clarendon ... [and the]
Continuation of the History ..._, the first consisting of that portion
of the _Life_ not included in the _History_, and the second of the
account of Clarendon's administration and exile in France, begun in
1672, was published in 1759, the _History of the Reign of King Charles
II. from the Restoration ..._, published about 1755, being a
surreptitious edition of this work, of which the latest and best edition
is that of the Clarendon Press of 1857.
Clarendon was also the author of _The Difference and Disparity between
the Estate and Condition of George, duke of Buckingham and Robert, earl
of Essex_, a youthful production vindicating Buckingham, printed in
_Reliquiae Wottonianae_ (1672), i. 184; _Animadversions on a Book
entitled Fanaticism_ (1673); _A Brief View ... of the dangerous ...
errors in ... Mr Hobbes's book entitled "Leviathan"_ (1676); _The
History of the Rebellion and Civil War in Ireland_ (1719); _A Collection
of Several Pieces of Edward, earl of Clarendon_, containing reprints of
speeches from the journals of the House of Lords and of the History of
the Rebellion in Ireland (1727); _A Collection of Several Tracts_
containing his _Vindication_ in answer to his impeachment, _Reflections
upon several Christian Duties, Two Dialogues on Education and on the
want of Respect due to age_, and _Contemplations on the Psalms_ (1727);
_Religion and Policy_ (1811); _Essays moral and entertaining on the
various faculties and passions of the human mind_ (1815, and in _British
Prose Writers_, 1819, vol. i.); _Speeches_ in _Rushworth's Collections_
(1692), pt. iii. vol. i. 230, 333; _Declarations and Manifestos_
(Clarendon being the author of nearly all on the king's side between
March 1642 and March 1645, the first being the answer to the Grand
Remonstrance in January 1642, but not of the answer to the XIX.
Propositions or the apology for the King's attack upon Brentford) in the
published _History_, Rushworth's _Collections_, E. Husband's
_Collections of Ordinances and Declarations_ (1646), _Old Parliamentary
History_ (1751-1762), _Somers Tracts, State Tracts, Harleian Miscellany,
Thomasson Tracts_ (Brit. Mus.), E. 157 (14); and a large number of
anonymous pamphlets aimed against the parliament, including
_Transcendent and Multiplied Rebellion and Treason_ (1645), _A Letter
from a True and Lawful Member of Parliament ... to one of the Lords of
his Highness's Council_ (1656), and _Two Speeches made in the House of
Peers on Monday 19th Dec._ [1642] ... (_Somers Tracts_, Scott, vi. 576);
_Second Thoughts_ (n.d., in favour of a limited toleration) is ascribed
to him in the Catalogue in the British Museum; _A Letter ... to one of
the Chief Ministers of the Nonconforming Party_ ... (Saumur, 7th May
1674) has been attributed to him on insufficient evidence.
Clarendon's correspondence, amounting to over 100 volumes, is in the
Bodleian library at Oxford, and other letters are to be found in
_Additional MSS._ in the British Museum. Selections have been published
under the title of _State Papers Collected by Edward, earl of Clarendon_
(Clarendon State Papers) between 1767 and 1786, and the collection has
been calendared up to 1657 in 1869, 1872, 1876. Other letters of
Clarendon are to be found in Lister's _Life of Clarendon, iii.; Nicholas
Papers_ (Camden Soc., 1886); _Diary_ of J. Evelyn, _appendix_; Sir R.
Fanshaw's _Original Letters_ (1724); Warburton's _Life of Prince Rupert_
(1849): Barwick's _Life of Barwick_ (1724); _Hist. MSS. Comm._ 10th Rep.
pt. vi. pp. 193-216, and in the _Harleian Miscellany_.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Clarendon's autobiographical works and Letters
enumerated above, and the MS. Collection in the Bodleian library. The
Lives of Clarendon by T.H. Lister (1838), and by C.H. Firth in the
_Dict. of Nat. Biography_ (with authorities there collected),
completely supersede all earlier accounts including that in _Lives of
All the Lord Chancellors_ (1708), in Macdiarmid's _Lives of British
Statesmen_ (1807), and in the different Lives by Wood in _Athenae
Oxonienses_ (Bliss), iii. 1018; while those in J.H. Browne's _Lives of
the Prime Ministers of England_ (1858), in Lodge's _Portraits_, in
Lord Campbell's _Lives of the Chancellors_, iii. 110 (1845), and in
Foss's _Judges_, supply no further information. In _Historical
Inquiries respecting the Character of Edward Hyde, earl of Clarendon_,
various charges against Clarendon were collected by G.A. Ellis (1827)
and answered by Lister, vol. ii. 529, and by Lady Th. Lewis in _Lives
of the Contemporaries of Lord Clarendon_ (1852), i. preface pt. i. For
criticisms of the _History_ see Gardiner's _Civil Wars_ (1893), iii.
121; Ranke's _Hist. of England_, vi. 3-29; _Die Politik Karls des
Ersten_ ... _und Lord Clarendon's Darstellung_, by A. Buff (1868);
article in the _Dict. of Nat. Biog._ by C.H. Firth, and especially a
series of admirable articles by the same author in the _Eng. Hist.
Review_ (1904). For description of the MS., Macray's edition of the
_History_ (1888), Lady Th. Lewis's _Lives from the Clarendon Gallery_,
i. introd. pt. ii.; for list of earlier editions, _Ath. Oxon._ (Bliss)
iii. 1017. Lord Lansdowne defends Sir R. Granville against Clarendon's
strictures in the _Vindication (Genuine Works of G. Granville, Lord
Lansdowne, i. 503 [1732])_, and Lord Ashburnham defends John
Ashburnham in _A Narrative by John Ashburnham_ (1830). See also _Notes
at Meetings of the Privy Council between Charles II. and the Earl of
Clarendon_ (Roxburghe Club. 1896); _General Orders of the High Court
of Chancery_, by J. Beames (1815), 147-221; S.R. Gardiner's _Hist. of
England, of the Civil War and of the Commonwealth; Lord Clarendon_, by
A. Chassant (account of the assault at Evreux) (1891); _Annals of the
Bodleian Library_, by W.D. Macray (1868); Masson's _Life of Milton_;
_Life of Sir G. Savile_, by H.C. Foxcroft (1898); _Cal. of St. Pap.
Dom._, esp. 1667-1668, 58, 354, 370; _Hist. MSS. Comm. Series, MSS. of
J.M. Heathcote_ and _Various Collections_, vol. ii.; _Add. MSS._ in
the British Museum; _Notes and Queries_, 6 ser. v. 283, 9 ser. xi.
182, 1 ser. ix. 7; Pepys's _Diary_; J. Evelyn's _Diary and
Correspondence_; Gen. Catalogue in British Museum; _Edward Hyde, earl
of Clarendon_ (1909), a lecture delivered at Oxford during the
Clarendon centenary by C.H. Firth. (P. C. Y.)