<43>It was not only by the slow progress of his wooing that Charles was made to feel how little he was in favour at Madrid. May.Dismissal of the Prince’s attendants.Scarcely had he heard of the impending arrival of the retinue with which he had thought of keeping up his princely state, than he was given to understand that the presence of so many Englishmen would not be well taken by the Spanish Court. He accordingly despatched a messenger to meet them on their arrival at Santander, with directions to the greater part of them to return at once to England. Some few, including the two chaplains, got as far as Burgos, and made their homeward journey through France, carrying with them many strange stories of the rough fare with which they had met in Spain. A few who, more lucky than the rest, were allowed to make their way to the capital, soon found that their services were not needed. The rooms assigned to the Prince in the royal palace were few and small, and it had been arranged that his attendants should sleep at the other end of the town, with the evident intention of making their stay as inconvenient as possible. For six or seven days they were to be seen strolling about Madrid. They passed the greater part of their time in playing cards, and in grumbling at their enforced idleness. At last, Charles came to the conclusion that it was useless to detain them longer, and ordered them, with one or two exceptions, to hasten home as soon as possible.
It was afterwards stated, with great glee, in England, that one <44>of these attendants, James Eliot by name, being admitted to Story of James Eliot.take leave of the Prince, expressed a hope that his Highness would not remain much longer in Spain. “It is a dangerous place,” he said, “to alter a man and turn him. I myself in a short time have perceived my own weakness, and am almost turned.” To the Prince’s demand, what he meant by being turned, he replied, that he was turned in his religion. “What motive,” said Charles, “had you; or what hast thou seen which should turn thee?” “Marry,” replied Eliot, “when I was in England I turned the whole Bible over to find Purgatory, and because I could not find it there, I believed there was none. But now I have come to Spain, I have found it here, and that your Highness is in it; whence that you may be released, we, your Highness’s servants, who are going to Paradise, will offer unto God our utmost devotions.” So little, however, did Charles understand in what a net his feet were entangled, that he actually laid a wager with another of his followers that he would be in England before July 10.[75]
The blunder which Charles had committed in coming to Spain at all was now plainly visible. If he had never left England, either the dispensation would have been refused, or the conditions with which it was accompanied would have been quietly referred by Bristol to his master, to be discussed in England upon their own merits. If it were not hazardous to affirm that James would have come to a settled resolution upon anything, there can be little doubt as to the result of that discussion. Weak as his conduct had been, he was not prepared for so barefaced an attempt to ride roughshod over the prerogatives of his crown, as well as over the laws of his kingdom. The leading idea with which he had entered into the treaty had been a readiness to offer, in return for political support, and for the large portion which was to be brought by the Infanta, a full guarantee for the free exercise of her own religion, and a <45>considerable alleviation of the condition of the English Catholics. That he had been led step by step to offer more than this is certain; but it is no less certain that he had never intended to bargain for the opening of a public church, and still less to enter into any discussion about the abolition of the penal laws, a question which, as he well knew, it was useless to moot in the presence of the House of Commons, and which he would himself have been indisposed to consider, regarding, as he did, the retention of the power of putting those laws in force as a safeguard against possible disloyalty.
“Do you think,” said James to Williams, “that this knight-errant pilgrimage will be lucky to win the Spanish lady and to Conversation between James and Williams.convey her shortly into England?” “Sir,” replied the Lord Keeper, “if my Lord Marquis will give honour to the Count Duke Olivares; or if Olivares will show honourable civility to my Lord Marquis, remembering he is a favourite of England, the wooing may be prosperous; but if my Lord Marquis should forget where he is, and not stoop to Olivares; or if Olivares, forgetting what guest he hath received with the Prince, bear himself haughtily and like a Castilian grandee to my Lord Marquis, the provocation may be dangerous to cross your Majesty’s good intentions.”[76] The observation, shrewd as, like most of Williams’s recorded sayings, it undoubtedly was, was only superficial. Buckingham’s temper, however exasperating to those who had to deal with him, was very far from being the cause of the ultimate failure of the negotiation. What the Spaniards wanted was to accomplish by intrigue what Philip II. had failed to accomplish by force, namely, to make England once more a Roman Catholic country. Gondomar and Olivares might differ as to the means to be used, but there was no difference as to the end. And yet, with the evidence of this before his eyes, Charles could see nothing but the lovely vision of his hoped-for bride. For months he lingered at Madrid, sacrificing his country to his love — making promises, into the full meaning of which he did not care to inquire, and satisfying himself with the prospect of being able to explain them away, if at any time they should <46>prove inconvenient. By this course, he only succeeded in confirming the Spanish ministers in their belief that he was of so malleable a nature that, with careful manipulation, he might be led to promise anything; whilst at the same time he failed to impress them with the slightest confidence in the probability of his ever keeping his promises without compulsion.[77]
If it had been in his power, Buckingham would have broken off the treaty at once.[78] It was enough for him that the additional articles were a personal insult to himself, and to the Prince who had taken the trouble to come to Madrid on the understanding that May 11.Charles announces his intention to leave.the old ones were to form the basis of the treaty. But great as his influence was with Charles, it was not enough to tear him away from the neighbourhood of the Infanta. The answer given by the Prince to the last resolution of the Spanish Government was indeed sufficiently decisive in appearance. He was quite willing, he said, that a courier should be despatched to Rome, in order to induce the Pope to give way. He was also willing to communicate with his father, but he considered that he was himself the only fit person to carry the communication. He, therefore, requested permission to return at once to England.
The next day Buckingham sent a message to Olivares, informing him that the Prince intended to leave Madrid immediately. It soon appeared that all this meant nothing. May 12.Buckingham’s message to Olivares.The messenger was delayed for some hours, and before he met with Olivares, Gondomar made the discovery that Charles only needed a little pressure to induce him to remain.
The pressure which Charles required was extremely slight. A few friendly words from the King, begging him to stop, at least Charles promises to stop.till the Junta of Theologians had delivered its report, was sufficient to make him alter his determination. Nor was it only from the irresolution of the Prince that the Spaniards derived encouragement. Buckingham <47>was the least reticent of men, and he allowed Francisco de Jesus to discover, in the course of conversation, two important facts — the one that he was chiefly moved by pique in his dislike of the additional articles; the second, that the Prince was not likely to make any difficulty in surrendering all other objections, if he could only escape from an obligation to procure the repeal of the penal laws.[79] Even on this last point the Spanish ministers had no reason to expect to find him obstinate, as within the last few days Buckingham had offered to engage that the King would see that the laws were repealed, though he had added that it would require some time before he could obtain the assent of Parliament to the change. Question of the repeal of the penal laws,“Will he do it,” said the Nuncio, “within a year?” Buckingham answered that it was impossible to fix a time, as the longer the appeal to Parliament was delayed, the more chance there would be of obtaining the consent of the Houses.[80]
The extreme readiness of Charles and Buckingham to make concessions was probably caused by the care which Olivares had taken and of the Infanta remaining in Spain.to allow the news of the proposed retention of the Infanta to reach their ears. He himself, he declared, was quite satisfied that the King of England’s bare engagement was enough to enable his own sovereign to take the required oath, but the Nuncio was of a different opinion. It is probable that the course which had been adopted by Olivares in the Council had been suggested by De Massimi. At all events, he now came forward to defend it.[81] The marriage, he said, might take place, but it must be a mere ceremony. The Prince must go back at once to England, to obtain from his father the execution of the <48>promises made. As might have been expected, both Charles and Buckingham were enraged at the very notion of delay, and the Nuncio, fearing that if he said anything more on the subject, the Prince would really return to England, consented, in appearance at least, to give way.
Yet the threat, though abandoned for the present, had done its work. Rather than go home without the Infanta, Charles was Charles gives way on every point.ready to agree to anything. His wife, he now said, might have the care of her children till they were twelve: the oath of allegiance should be altered so as to please the Pope. The Infanta’s church should be open to the public. He and his father would bind themselves to the immediate suspension of the penal laws, and the King would engage to persuade Parliament to repeal them in three years.
With these concessions Philip professed himself satisfied. If James confirmed his son’s engagements, he would himself be Pedrosa’s sermon.ready to take the oath, and would allow his sister to accompany the Prince to England. But just as Cottington was about to start with the news, a fresh obstacle arose. A certain Father Pedrosa, a great opponent of the match, had been appointed to preach in the royal chapel. He did not throw away his opportunity. Turning to the King, he warned him to decide from the interests of religion rather than from considerations of state policy. Jehu, who had slaughtered Ahab and the priests of Baal, had met with disasters because, however good in itself the action was, he had not served God with his whole heart. In the present case, it could not even be said that the action was good. To marry the Infanta Unpopularity of the marriage.to a heretic was doubtful, and to take an oath that this heretic would keep his word was more doubtful still. Philip, whose conscience was always sensitive to considerations of this kind, was the more ready to take alarm as he knew that the marriage was generally unpopular amongst his subjects, now that it was known that Charles had not come to be converted. People were every day talking about the prophecy of Daniel, who had predicted ruin to fall upon the King of the South, that is to say upon the <49>King of Spain of the House of Austria — Rex Austri, as it stood in the Vulgate — for giving his daughter in marriage to the King of the North. Under these circumstances, Philip hesitated and drew back, waiting to see what relief the Junta of Theologians would bring.
Even this rebuff could not cure Charles of his incorrigible habit of holding out hopes which he had no intention of gratifying. When A letter from the Pope presented to Charles.the Nuncio presented him with a letter from the Pope, in which he was exhorted to return to the true Church, he not only spoke respectfully of the writer, but he added that, although he could not listen to any theological discussion now, he would be willing to hear anything as soon as the marriage was over.[82] In the written answer which he returned to the Pope, he expressed himself in more guarded terms. Yet even this contrasts most unfavourably with the letter which had been written a few months previously by his father. James had The Prince’s answer.urged the Pope not to allow difference of religion to stand in the way of a common understanding for the re-establishment of the peace of Christendom. Charles talked of those differences as the seed sown by the inveterate malice of Satan, and promised to employ all his energies in effecting a reconciliation in the Church. So far, he said, was he from feeling any abhorrence for the Roman Catholic religion, that he would take every opportunity, with the help of time, to remove all sinister suspicions, ‘so that as we all publicly confess one undivided Trinity, and one Christ crucified, we may unite with one mind in one only faith, and in one Church.’[83] If Charles only meant that he looked forward to the <50>establishment of a re-united Church, such as that which De Dominis had lately advocated to unwelcome ears, why did he not say so, except because, though he objected to a downright falsehood, he had no objection to an equivocation? Of all men who have expressed an opinion on Charles’s actions, surely no one was so likely to form a favourable judgment of them as Clarendon, and yet it was from that statesman, at a time when he was in exile for his devotion to his sovereign, that the bitterest condemnation of this letter proceeded. “The letter to the Pope,” he wrote to Sir Edward Nicholas, “is, by your favour, more than compliment, and may be a warning that nothing is to be done and said in that nice argument but what will bear the light.”
At last, on May 23, the Junta of Theologians pronounced its sentence. They held that if Philip was to take the oath May 23.Decision of the Theologians to keep the Infanta for a year.with a good conscience, the Infanta must remain in Spain for at least a year after the marriage ceremony had been performed; within which time the suspension of the penal laws, and the concession to the Catholics of the free exercise of their religion in private houses, must be publicly proclaimed in England. The King, the Prince, and the Privy Council must swear that the favours thus accorded would never be withdrawn; and, finally, they must manage either to obtain the assent of Parliament within the year to what they had done, or at least they must have proceeded so far that there could no longer be any doubt that it would not be refused.
Olivares had his way, without violence or menace. In the face of the opposition of the Council he had summoned to his aid the Junta of Theologians.
In the hands of the Spanish minister, these learned canonists and divines now occupied the place which had been previously assigned to the Pope. From them came the demands to which it might well be thought even Charles would find it impossible to agree. It was now the turn of Olivares to express his regret for the decision taken, at the same time that he announced the necessity of conforming to whatever it might be. In the presence of a bold and decided politician, with <51>a definite scheme of action before him, and who shrank from no deception, however gross, in the attainment of the objects he had in view, a poor lovesick youth like Charles, with his petty reticences and dissimulations, had no chance whatever.
The very evening on which the Theologians had delivered their sentence, Olivares presented himself before the Prince with The Prince informed.a smiling face, to inform him of their decision.[84] Furious at the news, Buckingham lost his temper, and poured forth a torrent of abuse. There was nothing but trickery and deceit, he said, in the whole business. “It would have been better,” replied Olivares, coldly, “if you had never meddled with it, but had left it in Bristol’s hands.” The next day Cottington was sent once more to ask leave for the Prince to return to England. The request was politely received, but Charles was entreated not to forget his promise to remain at least till he had time to communicate with his father. As usual, Charles gave way, and Cottington was ordered to make every preparation to start for England as soon as the Spanish ministers could find time to furnish him with copies of the documents in which the late proceedings were recounted.
It was apparently about this time, that in defending the right of the King of Spain to make fresh demands, Olivares resorted to Olivares urges the Prince to concessions.the perilous course of referring to the words which had been spoken by Philip III. upon his deathbed, and proceeded to argue that as the match was not really intended by the late King, his son was perfectly at liberty to propose new conditions.[85] As soon as this outrageous inference was reported to Bristol, he at once <52>appealed to Sir Walter Aston, who repeated the strong language in which the present King had, within eight days after his father’s death, declared his intention of going on seriously with the marriage treaty. Olivares then changed his tone, and began talking of the Infanta’s aversion to marry anyone who was not a Catholic. Upon this, Bristol produced the paper containing the opinion delivered by Olivares on November 28, in which he had recommended that the Prince of Wales should be married to an Archduchess, and showed that the opinion thus given was rejected by the Council of State, and that the articles which Olivares now wished to set aside, had been officially agreed to four days afterwards. As to the Infanta’s alleged dislike of the marriage, he attributed it entirely to the influence of her confessor, who was now dead.[86]
Bristol’s inference from all this was that Charles should withstand the temptations of Olivares, and summon the Spanish ministry to abide by the articles as they originally stood. If, indeed, he had been allowed to take the matter into his own hands, it is almost certain that nothing more would have been heard of the marriage treaty. Charles, however, was not so to be dealt with. Deaf to all questions of policy, he could neither think nor speak of anything but the Infanta. It was but a day or two since that Charles attempts to speak to the Infanta.he had startled the rigid propriety of the Spanish Court, by leaping into a garden in which the lady of his affections was walking. The poor girl shrieked and fled, and it was with some difficulty that the Prince was persuaded, by the supplications of her guardian, to leave the place.[87]
Under these circumstances, Charles had recourse to Bristol, in the vain hope that he might be able to obtain what had been <53>refused to Buckingham. The Ambassador, ever ready to carry out his orders, went to the Nuncio, and painted in glowing colours Charles may stay in Spain if he likes.the great things that would be done for the Catholics as soon as the Infanta was safely in London. If they had any doubt, he said, on this point, they might at once send the bishop who was to preside over the clergy of her household, whose admission to the country would be a sure proof of the King’s sincerity. Finding no signs of yielding in De Massimi, Bristol next asked to plead his master’s cause before the Junta of Theologians. It was all in vain. The Infanta, he was told, would certainly not be allowed to leave Spain for a year; though a hint was dropped that the Prince might be married at once, if he would be content to remain with his wife in Spain.[88] Finding that nothing was to be done, Charles desisted from his efforts for the time, and Cottington and Inojosa sent to England.on May 31 Cottington at last started for England. The Marquis of Inojosa left a day or two later on his special mission.[89] Cottington had been hastened away before the Spaniards had furnished the promised documents. When they at last came they were forwarded by a special messenger, accompanied by a letter which bears in every line the impress alike of the vain hopes with which Charles was accustomed to solace himself, and of the petty trickery by which he fancied that he could deceive such a bold dissembler as Olivares. “We make no doubt,” wrote the young man, “but to have the opinions of these busy divines reversed, so your Majesty will be pleased to begin to put in execution the favour towards your Roman Catholic subjects that ye will be bound to do by your oath, as soon as the Infanta comes over; which we hope you will do for the hastening of us home with this protestation, to reverse all, if there be any delay of the marriage. We send you here the articles as they are to go, the oaths private and public, that you and your Baby are to take, with the Council’s, wherein, if you scare at the least clause of your private oath, where you promise that the Parliament shall revoke all the penal laws against the Papists within three years, we <54>sought good to tell your Majesty our opinions, which is, that if you think you may do it in that time,— which we think you may,— if you do your best, although it take not effect, you have not broken your word, for this promise is only as a security that you will do your best.”[90]
James was beginning at last to open his eyes to the difficulties with which his darling scheme was surrounded. When the March.Bonfires in London.news of his son’s arrival at Madrid first reached him he ordered bells to be rung and bonfires to be lighted. For some time, no one who wished to be in favour at Court spoke otherwise than hopefully of the marriage. None but the envious, wrote Conway, or vile almanack-makers, who argue from the conjunction of the planets, talk of delay any longer.[91] James’s chief occupation April.Rutland to command the fleet.during the month of April consisted in hastening on the equipment of the fleet which was to sail in May, under the command of the Earl of Rutland, who, as Buckingham’s father-in-law, was preferred before all other competitors. To the complaints which were everywhere to be heard against his favourite, he resolutely turned a deaf ear. He amused himself with writing gossiping letters to Lady Buckingham, and in playing with her child.[92] He raised Christopher Villiers to the earldom of Anglesea. To Buckingham himself May 18.Buckingham created a duke.he gave the proudest title which was in the gift of an English sovereign. Since Norfolk’s execution, there had been no dukes in England. The high dignity was now revived in the person of the Duke of Buckingham. In order to save the feelings of Lennox, who had for some years borne the title of Earl of Richmond in <55>the English Peerage, and whose connection with the Royal family made him unwilling to yield precedence to a subject, the Scottish nobleman was first created Duke of Richmond.
Preparations for the Infanta’s reception were now hurried on with speed. Denmark House and Saint James’s were ordered to be Preparations for the Infanta’s reception.made ready for her reception by the skilful hand of Inigo Jones. The Prince’s ship, men said, was as richly furnished as if it was intended to receive a goddess.[93]
In the midst of the bustle of preparation, James first heard of the conditions with which the dispensation was clogged; but Full powers granted to Charles.his son had treated them lightly, and he was not inclined to attach much more importance to them himself.[94] The intimation had been followed in a few days by a strange letter from Charles. “Sir,” he had written almost immediately after the terms of the dispensation were known to him, “I do find that if I have not somewhat under your Majesty’s hand to show whereby that ye engage yourself to do whatsoever I shall promise in your name, that it will retard the business a great while; wherefore I humbly beseech your Majesty to send me a warrant to this effect:— ‘We do hereby promise by the word of a King, that whatsoever you our son shall promise in our name, we shall punctually perform.’ Sir, I confess this is an ample trust that I desire, and if it were not mere necessity I should not be so bold.”[95] To this exorbitant request the fond father had at once acceded. “It were a strange trust,” he answered, “that I would refuse to put upon my only son and upon my best servant. I know such two as ye are will never promise in my name but what may stand with my conscience, honour, and safety, and all these I do fully trust to any one of you two.”[96]
<56>On May 11, the powers thus demanded were sent to Madrid. Though the secret was closely kept, sharp-sighted Preparations for the Infanta’s arrival.observers detected that the King was growing anxious. He seemed like a man who was doing things against his will, and was continually showing signs of ill-humour. Coloma reported that he was not be trusted to carry out any promises that he might make. In speaking of the chapel which he was to build for the Infanta, not only he could not avoid crying out, “We are building a temple to the devil!” but also expressed a hope that before many years went over the building might be used as a pheasant-house.[97] It would seem therefore, added the Spanish ambassador, that the marriage treaty was more likely to produce war than peace.
In spite, however, of the King’s occasional despondency, the preparations went gaily on. He visited the building at St. James’s of which he had spoken so harshly, and gave money to the workmen to encourage them to haste. Richmond, Middlesex, Pembroke, and Hamilton were sent down to Southampton to see that everything was in readiness to greet the Infanta on her landing.[98] On May 26, instructions were issued to Rutland, ordering him to proceed at once to Corunna, and but for the contrary winds which detained him for a whole fortnight in the Downs, he would soon have dropped down the Channel on his way to the coast of Spain.
All this time the King’s anxiety must have been daily increasing. For four whole weeks June 14.Arrival of Cottington.not a single letter reached him from Madrid. It was not till the evening of June 14 that Cottington appeared at Greenwich and told him the whole wretched story.[99]
James’s worst fears were realised. The refusal to send the <57>Infanta at once; and, above all, the suggestion that Charles might James begs his son to return;remain a year longer at Madrid, pierced him to the heart. That very night he poured out his grief. “My sweet boys,” he wrote, “your letter by Cottington hath strucken me dead. I fear it shall very much shorten my days; and I am the more perplexed that I know not how to satisfy the people’s expectation here; neither know I what to say to our Council for the fleet that stayed upon a wind this fortnight. Rutland, and all aboard, must now be stayed, and I know not what reason I shall pretend for the doing of it. But as for my advice and directions that ye crave, in case they will not alter their decree, it is, in a word, to come speedily away if ye can get leave, and give over all treaty. And this I speak without respect of any security they can offer you, except ye never look to see your old dad again, whom I fear ye shall never see, if you see him not before winter. Alas! I now repent me sore that ever I suffered you to go away. I care for match, nor nothing, so I may once have you in my arms again. God grant it! God grant it! God grant it! Amen, Amen, Amen. I protest ye shall be as heartily welcome as if ye had done all things ye went for, so that I may once have you in my arms again, and God bless you both, my only sweet son, and my only best sweet servant: and let me hear from you quickly with all speed, as ye love my life. And so God send you a happy and joyful meeting in the arms of your dear dad.”[100]
The next day James had time to look into the affair with greater deliberation. For two hours he was closeted with Cottington and Conway. But but engages to confirm the articles.it was the tenderness of a father, not the regret of a statesman, which was uppermost in his mind. Of the hard terms which the Spaniards were exacting, of the impolicy of the concessions which were wrung from him, he had not a word to say. If the Spanish ministers, he now wrote, could not ‘be moved to reverse the conclusion of their devils,’ he would confirm the articles as they came from them. Charles might then be married at once, and come away immediately upon receiving <58>security that the Infanta would follow in due time with her portion. He need not be afraid to marry her, he went on to say, lest they should afterwards ‘free her by a dispensation from the Pope.’ “For,” he explained, “I will warrant you our Church shall free you better here; and I am resolved, if God shall spare me days, to become a Master Jack Cade myself, and the great governor of the mutineers in England. For, believe me, I can turn myself in any shape but that of a knave, in case of necessity.”[101]
“His Majesty,” wrote Conway at the same time to his patron, “desires your speedy return before all other respects, and your honour’s counsel. He presseth you to admit of no delays. If his Majesty ratify the articles propounded, and the King and Council of Spain will not recede from the forced and devised delay of the Junta, you must apparel necessity like virtue, and make choice of continuing the treaty, by according to their time for the solemnising of the marriage in all the requisite parts by proxy, as is used in marriage of most kings and princes; or by his Highness espousing of her personally, and presently to come thence to give life and being to the performance and execution of the things contracted, which will not, cannot, in his Highness’s absence be executed. There is nothing can be of so evil consequence as admittance of delay. I protest my heart cannot think that the worst of men, or better sort of devils, could practise so base and monstrous falsehood and unthankfulness as to stop his Highness’ return.”[102]
Never were the evils of personal government presented in a clearer form. Neither James nor Conway appear to have No thought for the nation.bestowed one thought upon the English nation. Never, since the days of Pandulph had there been so gross a violation of its independence as these articles contained. The rights, and it might be the religion, of the country were to be sacrificed for the sake of securing the safe return of a headstrong young man who was really in no <59>danger whatever. No wonder that James tried to wrap his proceedings in profound secrecy, and that for some days even Calvert was kept in ignorance of all that had taken place.[103] The fleet, indeed, which had just left the Downs, was intercepted and ordered to return. But it was merely announced that a temporary delay had occurred in the arrangements.[104] James went about with a smiling face, hunting as usual every day; yet, when men’s eyes were not upon him, the thought that he might never again see his beloved son seemed to break him down. “The King,” said a keen-sighted observer, “is now quite stupified.”[105] “Do you think,” said James one day to a confidential attendant, bursting into tears as he spoke, “that I shall ever see the Prince again?” At another time, Holderness, presuming on his long familiar service, blamed the King to his face for his weakness in suffering himself to be tricked by the Spaniards. A month earlier, James would have rated him soundly for his insolence: now, he only turned away in disgust, and asked to be allowed to go to sleep in quiet.[106]
Whilst James was thus wasting his time in unprofitable regrets, his son was occupied, with Bristol’s assistance, in unavailing The Prince attempts to obtain better terms.efforts to induce the Spanish Government to alter its decision. A long paper was drawn up under his directions, in which he proved to his own satisfaction that his word was the best possible guarantee for the fulfilment of any promises which he might think fit to make.[107] But the Theologians could not be induced to agree with him; and the Prince was forced to wait in patience for his father’s reply.
From all these efforts Buckingham stood aloof.[108] He had quarrelled with Olivares, and he had quarrelled with Bristol, <60>whom he had accused of placing too great trust in Spanish promises. Like so many others, he was to find that, though there was no difficulty whatever in instilling the most pernicious advice into the mind of Charles, it was very difficult to lead him right. Charles would not hear of breaking off the treaty. His state of mind, indeed, was most miserable. He no longer took pleasure in amusements of any description; he spent his time, whenever he had a chance, in gazing upon the Infanta;— Olivares sarcastically said, as a cat watches a mouse;— he wrote verses in her praise, which, if she ever cared to read them, she would need an interpreter to understand; and was frequently seen stretching forward out of the window of his own apartment, in the hope of catching sight of her as she was sitting in her room.[109]
Olivares was playing with Charles as an angler plays with a salmon. He had, indeed, a difficult part to act. Again and again Intentions of Olivares.voices were raised in the Council of State against the folly of exasperating the Prince in deference to a pack of theologians who knew nothing about State affairs. Gondomar declared himself on the side of a policy of confidence.[110] But Olivares knew his ground. Sure of the support of the King, he never ceased to screen himself behind the authority of the Junta. With a grave face, he informed Charles that he was doing his best to change the opinion of the Theologians.[111]
There can be no doubt that if the general voice of the English Catholics had been listened to, Gondomar’s opinion would have prevailed. Sir Toby Matthew, the sharp-witted and intelligent son of the Archbishop of York, who had lost his father’s favour by his desertion to the Church of Rome, was now in Madrid, having been despatched by Williams with the hope of inducing the Spanish ministers to listen to reason.[112] <61>The advice which he gave was such as to deserve attention. If the match were broken off, he said, the King would be thrown into the hands of the Parliament, and from the Parliament no Catholic could expect anything but the extremity of rigour. If the Catholics suffered persecution, their blood would be required at the hands of those who advised the rejection of the reasonable terms to which the Prince was ready to consent.[113]
Such arguments fell flat upon Olivares. The two men were not aiming at the same object. Whilst Matthew was pleading for relief from persecution for the English Catholics, Olivares had his eye fixed upon the Palatinate, and as far as England was concerned, would be content with nothing short of the absolute predominance of his Church.
It may be considered as certain that Olivares at this time did not expect that the marriage would ever take place. Four weeks before, he had requested Khevenhüller to renew the proposal for a marriage between the Prince of Wales and the Emperor’s daughter.[114]
Charles was, however, too deeply in love to be easily shaken off. On June 26, June 26.Arrival of James’s consent to the articles.Sir William Croft arrived with James’s promise to agree to the articles as they stood, and with directions for his son’s immediate return. The next morning the Prince sent for Olivares, thinking, no doubt, that all resistance to the Infanta’s journey June 27.Fresh attempts to gain Philip’s assent.would now be at an end. “This morning,” wrote the Prince and his companion, “we sent for the Conde of Olivares, and, with a sad countenance, told him of your peremptory command, entreating him in the kindest manner we could to give us his advice how we might comply with this and not destroy the business. His answer was, that there were two good ways to do the business, and one ill one: the two good ones were either your Baby’s conversion, or to do it with trust, putting all things freely, with the Infanta, into our hands; the ill one was, to bargain and stick upon conditions as long as they could. As for the first we <62>absolutely rejected it, and for the second, he confessed if he were king, he would do it; and, as he is, it lay in his power to do it; but he cast many doubts lest he should hereafter suffer for it, if it should not succeed; the last he confessed impossible, since your command was so peremptory. To conclude he left us with a promise to consider of it, and when I, your dog, conveyed him to the door, he bade me cheer up my heart, and your Baby’s both. Our opinion is, that the longest time we can stay here will be a month, and not that neither without bringing the Infanta with us. If we find not ourselves assured of that, look for us sooner.”[115]
After some further fencing,[116] Olivares returned on July 6 with the final resolution of the Theologians and the King. It was impossible, July 6.Charles informed of Philip’s final determination.he told the Prince, that his wish could be gratified. The utmost that could be done would be to shorten the delay by four months. The marriage might take place in September, and the Infanta would then sail for England in March. His master could not act otherwise, as he was bound by the oath imposed upon him by the Pope. Charles received the message very quietly, and asked if this was a final determination. Being told that it was, he requested to have it in writing. He had, he said, received orders from his father not to consent to leave the Infanta behind him, and he must consider the treaty at an end. Declares his intention of leaving.To Aston, who was sent to demand a reply, Olivares spoke in the most friendly manner. The King, he said, could never abate anything of his demands; but if the Prince liked to leave, no obstacle whatever would be thrown in his way. His Majesty would accompany him many days’ journey, in order to show the respect in which he held him, though he would be much grieved if the Prince refused to consent to so brief a delay, as it would seem to the world as if he had no real intention of carrying out his engagements.[117]
<63>The next morning Charles sent to demand audience of the King, in order that he might take leave. He was accordingly July 7.Changes his mind;admitted the same evening to the Royal presence, where he found Philip fully prepared to bid him adieu; but, to the King’s astonishment, it soon appeared that the Prince had come on a very different errand. and accepts the terms offered.“I have resolved,” said Charles, “to accept with my whole heart what has been proposed to me, both as to the articles touching religion, and as to the security required.” He had found great difficulties, he proceeded to say, and he had done his best to lessen them; but it was better to consent to all that was required, rather than to abandon the hope of so close an alliance with the Spanish Crown. Some of the bystanders who had heard him speak so differently a few days before, naturally asked one another how they were to know what they were really to believe.[118] The truth was that Charles had been merely haggling over the bargain, and he fancied that, by yielding now, he might perhaps win back some of the price hereafter.[119]
For the time, Charles was allowed to dream that the prize, for which he had sacrificed so much, was all his own. Philip The marriage agreed upon.embraced him as a brother. For four successive nights the streets of Madrid were ablaze with illuminations. The President of the Treasury, venturing to speak against the match, was summarily dismissed from his post. The Infanta was openly spoken of as the Princess of England, and was allowed to appear in public at the Court Theatre.[120] Lord Andover was at once despatched to bear the happy news to England.[121] So decided were the advances made <64>to him that Charles imagined he would have no difficulty in obtaining the removal of the bar placed upon the Infanta’s journey. He fancied that, if only his father performed his part of the stipulations punctually, there would be little more heard of the demand for a Parliamentary confirmation, and that he would be permitted to take his bride home with him at Michaelmas.[122] He did not know that Olivares, Spaniard though he was, had a clearer idea than himself of the place and functions of Parliament in the English Constitution.
Whilst Andover was on his way to England with the news, James was still hesitating before he could make up his mind to take Discussion at Wanstead on the articles.the required oath to those articles to which he had already given his consent. To many of them, against which objections might reasonably be raised, he seems to have felt no repugnance; but he considered it an insult to himself that he should be bound to obtain an oath from the Privy Council in confirmation of his own, and — what was of James’s hesitation.far greater importance — he objected strongly to the engagement that the penal laws should never be reimposed under any circumstances, and to the promise to do his best to obtain from Parliament a confirmation of the articles.
“In the first,” wrote Conway, “his Majesty foresaw an infinite liberty and a perpetual immunity granted to the Roman Catholics; which if it should bring them to a dangerous increase, or encourage them to the acting of insolencies, his conscience opposeth his wisdom of government, and his sovereignty runs a danger.
“Touching the Parliament, his Majesty saw it impossible for him to effect, neither did his affection and reason incline to exercise his power that way if it were in his hand.”[123]
To this James had come at last. Nine months before he had soothed himself with the dream that the Infanta and her ducats were to be had for a mere connivance at the breach of the penal laws, which he would be at liberty to withdraw if <65>matters took a serious turn. Yet how could he now go back? In an evil moment he had pledged his honour that he would confirm whatever promises his son might make; and even if he could be brought to understand that it was better that he shduld break his word than that he should inflict so serious a wound upon the nation entrusted to his care, he could not forget that his son’s liberty might depend upon his decision. In common with almost everyone with whom he conversed on the subject, he fully believed that if the articles were now rejected the Prince would never be allowed to leave Madrid.
It was, therefore, with a heavy heart that James summoned his principal councillors to meet him at Wanstead on July 13, and after July 13.The principal councillors consulted.laying his perplexities before them, left them to consider the advice which they might decide upon giving him. He had no sooner quitted the room than it became evident that they, too, shared in his perplexity. Long unaccustomed to be asked by their hitherto self-sufficient monarch to take a decisive step in a matter of such importance, they were unwilling to incur responsibility, and scarcely one of them could think of anything better to suggest than some scheme or other for getting the Prince out of Spain before the oath was taken.
Never was the extraordinary ability with which Williams managed to smooth away a difficulty which he did not attempt to overcome Advice of Williams.more conspicuously exhibited than on this occasion. It can hardly be doubted that he saw that James was only looking out for an excuse to yield, and that the opinion which he delivered was influenced by this supposition. After what they had heard from the King, he said, he did not see how they could give any advice at all, for they must first know whether his Majesty had conscientious scruples against the oath. Until they had received information on that point, they could not tell what to recommend. The councillors, glad to relieve themselves from the responsibility of advising the King either to act against his conscience or to leave his son a prisoner for life, leapt at Williams’s suggestion, and replied, as soon as James returned, by asking whether he felt any conscientious scruples. “My <66>conscience,” said the King, turning to the Lord Keeper as he spoke, “stands as I said before; but I am willing to hear anything that may move me to alter the same.” Upon this hint Williams spoke. He was aware, he said, how little it became him, whose studies had been so frequently interrupted, to discuss a point of divinity with one of his Majesty’s deep learning. Yet he could not but remember that the Prince had already acceded to the articles. He was sure that the Prince was as good a Protestant as any in the world, and in this case he thought that his Highness was in the right; for he had not been asked to be slack in the advancing of the true religion, or even to give his consent to the predominance of Popery. All that was demanded was that he would withdraw from any attempt to suppress or to extirpate the Roman Catholic faith. No one thought of accusing the King of France of sinning against his conscience because he did not suppress the Protestants in his dominions, nor were the States-General thought to be false Protestants because they did not suppress the Roman Catholics. Even his Majesty himself had often relaxed the penal laws, and it was inconceivable that in so doing he had offended against his conscience. “I conclude, therefore,” he ended by saying, “that his Highness — having admitted nothing in these oaths or articles, either to the prejudice of the true, or the equalising or authorising of the other religion, but contained himself wholly within the limits of penal statutes and connivances, wherein the State hath ever challenged and usurped a directing power — hath subscribed no one paper of all these against his own, nor — I profess it openly — against the dictamen of my conscience.”
As a speech in favour of the principles of toleration the Lord Keeper’s argument was an admirable one; but anything more utterly The King satisfied.alien to the point at issue it is impossible to conceive. For, as Williams must have known perfectly well, the question was not whether it was wise to relax or repeal the penal laws, but whether it was wise to enter into an engagement with a foreign power that they should never again, under any circumstances, be put in force.
Yet, beside the mark as Williams’s reasoning was, it was <67>enough for James. It gave him what he wanted — an excuse for a questionable act, which he regarded as the inseparable condition of his son’s return. With a cheerful countenance he declared himself fully satisfied, and the councillors present, as in duty bound, coincided with the opinions of their master.[124]
Three days later the whole Council was summoned to Wanstead. Almost with tears in his eyes, James told them that he knew July 16.Assent of the Council.he had been hardly dealt with by Spain; but what could he do, if he did not mean to desert the Prince? He wished now to have their opinion whether they thought good to take the oath which would be required of them. He would tell them, however, that he meant to give explanations to the Spanish ambassadors to the effect that he could not bind himself to obtain the consent of Parliament, and that the safety of the realm must always be paramount to any obligation entered into by treaty in favour of the Catholics.[125] As soon as he had finished, Abbot, who, for obvious reasons, had not been asked to attend the former deliberation, led the way by asking inconvenient questions. He was at once interrupted by the King, who told him that the matter was already settled, and that all that was wanted was to know if he was willing to join in taking the oath. No further opposition was offered, and the whole Council agreed to swear <68>to the articles on condition of receiving orders to do so under the Great Seal.
The King’s authority, and the fear of leaving the Prince a hostage in Philip’s hands, had prevailed over every other consideration. Yet Dissatisfaction of the Councillors.it was with no good-will that the great majority of the Privy Councillors had given their consent. Questions were asked in a whisper amongst them which showed that they were ill at ease. What, it was said, had become of the temporal articles in which the amount of the dowry was to be settled? What obligation had the King of Spain entered into? When was the marriage to be performed? “All which,” adds the reporter, “ended with wishes that the Prince were well returned, with much doubt what use will be made of his being there.”[126]
Sunday, July 20, was fixed for the important ceremony. In the Royal Chapel at Whitehall, after the morning sermon was ended, July 20.The articles sworn to.the public articles of the treaty were read by Calvert in the presence of the Spanish ambassadors, Inojosa and Coloma, and of the great majority of the Privy Council. When Calvert had finished, James swore to observe them, thereby engaging that, not only should his son’s wife be surrounded by a household nominated by her brother, the King of Spain, but that the spiritual guidance of this little knot of foreigners should be provided for by the exorbitant number of twenty-four priests and a bishop, not one of whom was to be amenable to the laws of England, or to any jurisdiction excepting that of his ecclesiastical superiors; and that wherever the Infanta might fix her dwelling, there should be erected a public church to which all Englishmen who pleased might have access. To these and to other relatively unimportant engagements, James added a promise that he would do everything in his power to obtain their confirmation by Parliament.[127]
<69>The solemnity was followed by a banquet, given by the King to the ambassadors; but it was observed that, of the English who were present, The banquet.only two appeared in the gay attire usually worn on occasions of rejoicing, and that those two were the Roman Catholic Gage, who had lately returned from Rome, and Carlisle, who would probably have decked himself with gold and jewels if he had been invited to a funeral.[128]
As soon as the banquet was at an end, the Privy Councillors repaired to their usual place of meeting, where, one after another, The oath of the Council.they took the required oath not only to observe the public articles, but also to abstain, either personally or by their officers, from exacting any penalty imposed upon the Catholics by the penal laws.
Of the whole number, six were absent. Naunton was now only nominally a member of the Council, and had not been asked to attend. Arundel was at Ghent, hanging over the death-bed of his eldest son; Pembroke and Brooke were detained by serious illness; whilst the absence of Southampton and Zouch can hardly be explained on any other ground than that of disinclination to take the oath.[129]
James kept the ambassadors with him till the evening, when he informed them that he was now ready to proceed to swear to The King’s oath to the private articles.the private articles. They were four in number. He was to promise that no law which pressed upon the Catholics, without affecting their fellow-subjects, should ever be put in force against them; that whilst no fresh laws should be passed against them in future, a perpetual toleration, which was to extend to Scotland and Ireland as well as to England, should leave them free to exercise their religion in private houses; that neither he nor the Prince would ever allow the Infanta to witness anything repugnant to her faith, or attempt to induce her to renounce it; and, finally, that they would interpose their authority, and do their utmost to obtain <70>a parliamentary confirmation of these private articles, would ask Parliament to repeal the penal laws, and at all events, would never give the royal assent to any fresh ones directed against the Catholics.[130]
James’s word was not always to be trusted; for it was but seldom that, when the time came for the performance of his promises, Explanation given by the King.some new gust of feeling had not swept over his mind; but to deliberate hypocrisy he never stooped. It was abhorrent to his nature to enter into an engagement which he had no intention of performing. He therefore took good care to explain to the Spanish ambassadors, in the hearing of Cottington and the two secretaries, in what sense he understood the oath which he was about to take. When he promised to obtain the consent of Parliament, he said he merely meant that he would do his best. As to the relaxation of the penalties imposed on the Catholics, he did not mean to bind himself never, in any case, to reimpose them. If a great state necessity occurred, he should hold himself free from any engagement now made. With this explanation he took the oath, and with this the ambassadors were forced to be content.[131]
James had, indeed, paid a heavy price for his son’s freedom. Since the days of King John, no act so imprudent had been committed Consequences of the treaty.by any English sovereign. He had taught his Catholic subjects that it was better for them to depend upon the favour of a foreign state than upon their own king. He had made it a matter of bargain with a foreign Government that he would rule at variance with the wishes of his people lawfully expressed in Parliament. He had expressly stipulated that he would never put in force the existing laws, although in the eyes of his subjects it was most important for the safety of the nation that they should be executed with rigour. If he had of his own motion adopted the policy which was sketched out in the private articles, he might have had a hard struggle before he could carry it into execution; but he would probably at least have gained the respect of his contemporaries, and he would certainly have <71>earned the admiration of posterity. By making the progress of religious liberty dependent upon a treaty with Spain, he struck a deadlier blow against the rising spirit of tolerance than if he had been in league with all the fanatics in the world. From henceforth the religious Protestant and the patriotic statesman would be banded together in a common determination that a Church which sought to win its way by foreign aid, and which publicly professed its contempt for the laws of England and for the independent action of Parliament, should not be allowed to enjoy even that ordinary fair play for which, under other circumstances, it might have asked. The Spanish marriage treaty was the signal that the milder spirit of the new age had received a check, and that all hope of smoothing down religious differences, and of quenching the fires of religious bigotry, must be indefinitely postponed.
All through the past week the popular mind had been more than usually excited. The acts, the words, the very countenances Popular excitement.of the members of the Privy Council, had been eagerly scanned by multitudes who were anxious to draw from them an augury of the fate of the country. Never were the newsmongers more busy. Strange tales of what had happened in the Council and at Court passed from mouth to mouth, some of them perhaps true, but the greater part of them evidently invented for the occasion. It was thus that James was said to have exclaimed triumphantly, after signing the articles, that all the devils in hell could not now prevent the marriage; and that one of the courtiers, who heard what he said, whispered to another that there were none left there, for they had all gone to Spain to assist in making the match.
At last some one, bolder than the rest, forged a letter to the King, in the name of the Archbishop of Canterbury.
“Your Majesty,” Abbot was supposed to say, “hath propounded a toleration of religion. I beseech you to take into your consideration what your act is, and what the consequence may be. Forged letter attributed to Abbot.By your act you labour to set up that most damnable and heretical doctrine of the Church of Rome, the whore of Babylon. How hateful will it be to God, and grievous to your subjects, the true professors <72>of the gospel, that your Majesty who hath often defended and learnedly written against those wicked heresies, should now show yourself a patron of those doctrines which your pen hath told the world, and your conscience tells yourself, are superstitious, idolatrous, and detestable. Also what you have done in sending the Prince, without consent of your council, and the privity and approbation of your people. For although, sir, you have a large interest in the Prince, as the son of your flesh, yet have your people a greater, as a son of the kingdom, upon whom, next after your Majesty, are their eyes fixed, and their welfare depends. And so slenderly is his going apprehended that, believe it, sir, however his return may be safe, yet the drawers of him into that action so dangerous to himself, so desperate to the kingdom, will not pass away unquestioned and unpunished.
“Besides, this toleration you endeavour to set up by your proclamation, it cannot be done without a Parliament, unless your Majesty will let your subjects see that you now take unto yourself a liberty to throw down the laws of the land at your pleasure. What dreadful consequences these things may draw after, I beseech your Majesty to consider, and above all, lest by this, the toleration and discountenance of the true profession of the gospel, wherewith God hath blessed us, and under which the kingdom hath flourished these many years, your Majesty doth draw upon the kingdom in general, and yourself in particular, God’s heavy wrath and indignation.
“Thus, in discharge of my duty to your Majesty, and the place of my calling, I have taken the humble boldness to deliver my conscience. And now, sir, do with me what you please.”[132]
The letter was at once disavowed by Abbot to the King,[133] and attempts were made to Disavowed by Abbot.discover the author. When these proved unavailing, some dissatisfaction was expressed at Court with the Archbishop, who appears to have <73>been backward in making public his disavowal. It is possible, indeed, that he was unwilling to make a statement which could hardly fail to be accompanied with something like a renunciation of the opinions which the letter contained; and there can be little doubt that, however much he had lately withdrawn himself from opposition to James, he continued to nourish those sentiments which had been put forward in his name. However this may have been, it is certain that, whether the forger had accurately adopted the ideas of the Archbishop or not, he had felicitously expressed the thoughts of the great majority of the people of England.
Meanwhile James was doing his best to make light of what he had done. In the letter which, on July 21, the day after he had taken the oaths, James complains of the expense to which he will be put.he wrote to his son and his favourite, he had a word to say in praise of the unexpected compliance of Pembroke and Abbot, but nothing about that of which everyone else was talking. His thoughts were running upon the expense to which he was likely to be put by the delay in the Infanta’s voyage. “Since it can be no better,” he wrote, “I must be contented; but this course is both a dishonour to me, and double charges if I must send two fleets. But if they will not send her till March, let them, in God’s name, send her by their own fleet; and forget not to make them keep their former conditions anent the portion, otherwise both my Baby and I are bankrupts for ever.” Other matters of infinitely greater importance were passed over in far fewer words. “This bearer,” he informed his son, “will bring you power to treat for the Palatinate, and the matter of Holland.”[134]
The wretched affair of the Palatinate was at this moment more hopelessly entangled than ever. Almost the first thing which March.Resumption of negotiations with the Infanta Isabella.James had been called upon to do, after his son had left him, was to open negotiations with Coloma and Boischot for the sequestration of Frankenthal, which were to be followed by an agreement for a suspension of arms, to prepare the way for a congress <74>to discuss the final terms of peace in the Empire. Commissioners were appointed to treat, and the first conference was held on March 3.[135] Their discussions had not proceeded far when the news of the transference of the Electorate reached England, and the Commissioners at once wrote to the King. “We cannot,” they said, “with our duties, but humbly deliver our opinions unto your Majesty, that, as things now stand, we hold it most dishonourable for you, and unworthy your greatness, to hearken to any further treaty of the suspension of arms.”[136] Being asked to reconsider their advice, they repeated it more emphatically than before. Frankenthal, they said, had better be delivered to the Infanta on any terms that could be had, in order to keep it out of the hands of the Duke of Bavaria. But a suspension of arms would only serve to ruin the Protestants of Germany. Nor were the men who unanimously tendered this advice by any means partisans of either side. Together with the names of Pembroke and Hamilton, of Chichester, and of Viscount Grandison, who as Sir Oliver St. John, had succeeded Chichester in Ireland, appeared those of Arundel, of Middlesex, of Calvert, and of Weston.[137]
As might be expected, however, the protest of the Commissioners went for nothing. The treaty of sequestration was signed on March 19. Sequestration of Frankenthal.Frankenthal was to be placed in the hands of the Infanta Isabella for eighteen months. If at the end of that time no reconciliation had been effected between Frederick and the Emperor, an English garrison was to be re-admitted. In the meanwhile the religious worship of the inhabitants was to be secured from attack.[138] The treaty was carried into immediate execution. On April 14, the Spanish commander, Verdugo, entered the town, and Sir John Burroughs, with his garrison, prepared to march out with the honours of war.
The treaty for a suspension of arms was the next to follow. <75>On April 21 it was agreed to by the Commissioners.[139] It bound Suspension of arms.James and his son-in-law to enter into no leagues or confederacies by which the peace of the Empire might be disturbed, and to abstain from actual hostilities for fifteen months, during which time negotiations were to be opened at Cologne for a definite peace. The article relating to the associates of Frederick, that is to say to Christian and Mansfeld, was purposely left in obscurity. If they continued to carry on war, they were to be considered as enemies of the Empire, and to be disavowed by James and his son-in-law. Three months were to be allowed for completing the arrangements for the conferences at Cologne.
Saving so far as it might pave the way to a general treaty, this agreement was evidently of no importance whatever. James had no intention of sending an army into the Empire if he could by any possibility avoid it, and Frederick, who would have been delighted to send as many armies as he could, was unable to dispose of a single man.
Scarcely, indeed, had the treaty been ratified by the Infanta, when it appeared that the prospect of a general peace was Frederick refuses his signature.as distant as ever. Without Frederick’s signature the treaty was worth no more than the paper on which it was written, and that signature Frederick resolutely refused to give. Then ensued a long and bitter controversy between James and his son-in-law, James imperiously insisting upon negotiation as the only way in which past losses could be made good, and Frederick no less obstinately refusing to believe that anything could be regained excepting by force of arms.
In truth the controversy was one of those the details of which are worthy only of oblivion. Both parties were thoroughly in the wrong. There was doubtless large scope in Germany for diplomacy. There was doubtless large scope for military resistance; but nothing but ruin could come either from an attempt to make peace under the guidance of James, or from an attempt to carry on war under the guidance of Frederick.
What James proposed was, not to discover an arrangement <76>which would suit the altered circumstances of the case, and would have Impracticability of James’s diplomacy,been acceptable in the existing state of opinion to the German princes and the German people, but simply to blot out the history of the last four years as though they had never been. He fancied that with the help of Spain he could wring from the Emperor a complete restitution of all of which his son-in-law had been in possession before his acceptance of the Bohemian crown. Against this, as the Commissioners for the treaty wisely asserted, the transference of the Electorate effected at Ratisbon was a complete bar. It was certain that Ferdinand would never be induced solely by diplomatic pressure to undo that day’s work; and when James continued to speculate on the possibility of such a concession, he was plainly talking in ignorance both of the special facts of the case, and of the general laws by which human nature is guided.
Frederick was therefore undoubtedly in the right in pronouncing against his father-in-law’s proposal. He saw clearly that and of Frederick’s military designs.the complete restitution which he sought was only to be obtained by victory. How victory was to be obtained he was the last man in Europe to know. In fact, there were two courses before him, neither of which was likely to yield the results at which he was aiming. He might hound on Mansfeld and Christian to their bloody work, and might once more summon Bethlen Gabor with his hated allies, the Turks, to pour ruin and desolation over Ferdinand’s hereditary dominions. Or, on the other hand, by an almost superhuman effort of self-sacrifice, he might have declared that his own personal claims should not be an obstacle to a general pacification, and might thus have paved the way, by his own abdication, for that reconciliation with the Lutheran States of Northern Germany which would have given the surest guarantee for the future stability of Protestantism in the Empire.
Such was the choice which lay before Frederick; but the unfortunate man did not even comprehend that there could be any choice at all. His wild expectations.What he pictured to himself was a general league, in which the Electors of Saxony and Brandenburg, the Kings of England and Denmark, and the <77>States-General of the Netherlands, should agree, in loving union with Christian and Mansfeld, to fight out the quarrel which he had done more than any living man to embitter. Of course all this was but a dream. The Lutheran Princes may have been sluggish and unwarlike. They may have cared quite as much about the security of their domains as they cared about their religion. But if one thing was clearer than another, it was that they detested the armies of freebooters which Frederick was ready, without the slightest compunction, to pour over Germany, far more than they detested the Emperor’s treatment of their fellow-Protestants in Bohemia and the Palatinate. A meeting of the two Protestant Electors ended in nothing more than a resolution to levy troops enough to protect their own territories from invasion. A meeting of the States of Lower Saxony ended in an almost similar manner. From all this, however, Frederick learned nothing. He had not indeed much to expect from Mansfeld, who was not likely to quit his comfortable quarters in East Friesland as long as anything remained to plunder; but from Christian he hoped great things. That headlong warrior had been Christian of Brunswick.taken into pay by his brother the Duke of Brunswick, and efforts had been made, not without success, to obtain his pardon from the Emperor. But all the while his head had been teeming with vaster projects. Covering himself with the negotiations for a pardon, he intended to wait till Bethlen Gabor was ready to move. He would then throw himself suddenly upon Silesia, and before their joint efforts Bohemia and Moravia would once more be snatched from the House of Austria.
These wild plans received a sudden check. The Elector of Saxony prudently refused to Christian and his men permission July 27.Battle of Stadtloo.to pass through his dominions,[140] and the Circle of Lower Saxony ordered them not to presume to make its territories the seat of war. Christian knew that Tilly was approaching, and his first thought was to throw himself upon the enemy. He succeeded in obtaining an advantage over a detachment of Tilly’s forces. The old general, <78>however, knew his man. Placing his troops in an unassailable position, he waited till Christian was compelled to retreat for want of supplies. He had not long to remain in inaction. As usual, Christian had no money to pay his men, or provisions with which to feed them, and in the face of so wary an enemy it was impossible to scatter them in search of spoil.[141] An immediate retreat was necessary, and Christian had no choice but to hurry on for the Dutch frontier, with Tilly following hard upon his heels. Before he reached the boundary, Tilly had been joined by reinforcements which gave him a decided superiority. At Stadtloo, with the Dutch territority almost in sight, Christian reached a heath to which the only entrance was a narrow road amongst the marshes. There, on July 27, he took up a position which he fondly imagined to be unassailable; but the troops which he had placed to guard the entrance, whilst the rest of the army continued its march, gave way almost at the first shock, and the whole of the cavalry, seized with sudden panic, fled at the sight. Christian, seeing that the day was lost, followed their example. A terrible butchery ensued amongst the infantry, which was only stopped by the personal interference of Tilly. Of the whole army which had marched against the enemy little less than twenty thousand strong, five thousand five hundred men alone sought refuge under the flag of Republic.[142]
As in 1622, so in 1623, Frederick’s design of reconquering his position by the help of adventurers without money or means had Aug. 16.Frederick signs the treaty of suspension of arms.ended in disaster. As in 1622, so in 1623, a defeat wrung from him a grudging compliance with his father-in-law’s wishes. The battle of Stadtloo was fought on July 27. On August 16 Frederick accepted the treaty for the suspension of arms.[143] It was then too late. The three months prefixed for making the arrangements for the conference at Cologne had already expired, and all that the Infanta could say when the treaty was presented to her at Brussels was that she wished well to the success of the <79>negotiations, but that it would now be necessary to consult the Emperor afresh.[144]
Such were the results of the divergent efforts of James and Frederick The proposed attack upon the Dutch.during the summer of 1623. It would be strange, indeed, if Charles at Madrid were able to reduce the chaos into order.
It might be thought that in his treatment of the affairs of Germany James had done his worst; but, in dealing with the other difficulty to which he had referred in his letter of July 21,[145] he had strayed even farther from the paths of common sense. It might well have been supposed that after the final settlement of the long disputes between the two East Indian Companies, nothing more would have been heard of that senseless project for a joint invasion of the free Netherlands by Spain and England. Yet it was this very project which James chose to revive at the critical moment when he was talking of engaging in a Continental war, unless the Emperor gave his consent to abandon all the advantages which he had gained during so many weary years.
The renewal of the war between Spain and Holland had been accompanied by the imposition of a strict blockade upon the Flemish ports. The Flemish privateers.Deprived of all share in the commercial enterprise upon which their northern kinsmen were thriving, the seafaring populations of Dunkirk and Ostend gave themselves up to privateering. The swift-sailing vessels which from time to time contrived to slip through the blockading squadron were the terror of the smaller Dutch trading vessels, and especially of the fleet of herring boats, which, as James had bitterly complained, were engaged in reaping the harvest of the sea along the whole line of the east coast of England. 1622.September.Dunkirk vessels in Leith and Aberdeen.It happened that, in the summer of 1622, two of these privateers, chased by Dutch men-of-war, took refuge, the one in Aberdeen and the other in Leith, and that in the ardour of the chase, the Dutch captain, who was in pursuit of one of them, had continued to fire his guns after entering Leith harbour, and <80>had even struck with his balls some of the houses in the town. Against this outrage James had remonstrated with the Dutch Commissioners who were at that time in England, and had demanded that their countrymen should remain in port two tides after Dutch blockade.the Dunkirk vessels had sailed.[146] The demand was, however, rejected, and during the winter months the Dunkirk vessels at Leith and Aberdeen were closely watched by Dutch men-of-war lying in the harbour.[147]
At last, after some months’ delay, James sent orders to Carleton to repeat his demand in the presence of the States-General. 1623.March.Remonstrances of James.Carleton, in addition to his public declaration, spoke in private to the Prince of Orange, who, as he found, was not inclined to yield. Maurice, reasonably enough, declared that what was now asked would be the ruin of Dutch commerce. If every Flemish privateer could be certain of a refuge in an English harbour, from which it might issue forth unmolested by the enemy till two tides were past, there would no longer be a chance left to the honest trader.[148]
Thus pressed, James withdrew his most arrogant pretensions, and laid down the rule which even now prevails in maritime warfare. He had never meant, he said, to deny the Dutch their right of blockade. As long as they remained outside a harbour, they were at liberty to pursue their enemies wherever they could find them. It was only when they entered his ports that they were bound to wait two tides after the enemy’s vessel had sailed. The present case, however, was not a mere case of blockade. The Dutch captain had fired guns in his harbour and had knocked down some chimneys in the town. It was in reparation for this wrong that he expected that the blockaded vessels at both ports should be allowed to escape.[149]
<81>To this declaration the States-General returned answer, accepting at once the King’s exposition of maritime law, and apologising for the error of their sailors. On the mode of reparation suggested by James they were altogether silent, hesitating naturally enough to let the caged privateers loose upon their fishermen who were toiling on the billows of the North Sea.[150]
To the considerations by which they were influenced James was indifferent. Both at Leith and at Aberdeen the Dutch vessels had Two ships ordered to Scotland.actually entered his harbours, and they must be prepared to take the consequences of relinquishing the blockade. He ordered two ships of the Royal Navy to be got ready for service in Scotland. He would set his ports free, he said, one way or other.[151]
As ill luck would have it, just at the moment when James’s displeasure was at its height, news arrived of a fresh violation of an English harbour. April.Seizure of a ship at Cowes by the Dutch.A few days before two Dutch captains, one of whom was the noted Moy Lambert, came to an anchor in Cowes roads. Their sight at once fell upon a vessel manned by countrymen of their own, which they knew to have been engaged in piracy. As soon as they notified the fact, the pirate officers were arrested by the Commander of the Castle, and information was sent to London. The question whether the ship and its crew should be delivered up to the Dutch was being examined by the Privy Council when Lambert, acting on his own authority, took possession of the vessel and sailed away with it to Holland.[152]
Worse than this was to follow. On the night of May 3 the captain of the Dunkirk ship at Leith, weary of his long <82>detention, made an effort to escape, and ran his vessel aground May 4.Attempt of the Dunkirker at Leith to escape.upon a sandbank, just as it had passed the pier-head. When the morning dawned, the crews of the Dutch men-of-war caught sight of their enemy in this disabled position. Ranging up alongside, they poured broadside after broadside into the stranded vessel, till It is attacked by the Dutch.the falling tide compelled them to sheer off. So close were they to the shore that a man standing on the pier-head was killed by the shot. In vain the Lord Chancellor, Sir George Hay, with other members of the Privy Council, hurried down from Edinburgh to stop the slaughter. Before noon the Dunkirker was lying a hopeless wreck, abandoned by her crew.
The fugitive sailors had no sooner reached the shore than a new danger awaited them. Nowhere was the Spanish flag more thoroughly detested than in Scotland. By the ties of religious and of commercial sympathy the inhabitants of Leith and Edinburgh were brought into close communication with the Dutch. The sailors robbed on shore.The moment, therefore, that the unfortunate sailors set foot on shore they were set upon by an angry mob, and were robbed and ill-treated in every possible manner. The Privy Councillors were powerless. No one would assist them in maintaining order, or would give information where the stolen property had been concealed.
The next day, in spite of repeated orders, it was found that no aid was to be got in Leith for the preservation of the abandoned ship. May 5.Equally in vain was an attempt to obtain assistance from Edinburgh. The Provost came, but scarcely a man accompanied him. Guns were at last brought down from the castle, and on the following day, after the King’s flag had been hoisted on the wreck, an attempt, which proved fruitless, was made to get the vessel into the harbour. The Lord Chancellor himself lent a hand to the work, only to find on his May 6.The ship burnt.return to land that the Edinburgh men, who had been induced with much difficulty to guard the cannon, had gone off leaving the guns to their fate. His labours were at last drawing to a close. That night the <83>Dutchmen set fire to the wreck, and spared him any further trouble.
The Council contented themselves with reporting to the King the misconduct of the Dutch. The Secretary, Melrose, who, Melrose suggests the levy of a standing force.as Lord Binning, had tyrannised over the clergy at the Assembly at Perth, following the dictates of his harsh and despotic nature, reserved his bitterest indignation for his unruly countrymen. The only remedy for the evil, he said, lay in the possession of sufficient treasure to enable the King to keep on foot a standing force, which could be trusted to obey orders, whether they were pleasing to the populace or not. Utterly impracticable as the suggestion was for the moment, it was one which, without fail, would be again heard of, if the antagonism between the Stuart kings and their subjects proved to be of long continuance.[153]
The infraction of English neutrality by the Dutch had now reached such a pitch as to be intolerable to any Government which Carleton’s remonstrances.retained the slightest feeling of self-respect. Carleton was directed to remonstrate seriously at the Hague, and to demand the arrest of the captains in command of the ships at Leith, and the withdrawal of the Dutch men-of-war from Aberdeen.[154] About the same time Conway wrote a private letter to the Prince of Orange, adjuring him to avert so great a disaster as a war between England and the Netherlands.[155]
It was not long before an answer came from Maurice. The seizure of the ship at Cowes he declared to have been the result of June 10.The Prince of Orange’s letter.a pure mistake. With respect to the affair at Leith, he did his best to explain it away. The captains, he said, had been unable to restrain their too fervent zeal when they saw themselves in the presence of men who had exercised such cruelties upon the poor fishermen. About a fortnight later, a formal letter from the States-General, <84>acknowledging the fault which had been committed, and expressing a hope that the King would pass it over, was placed in Carleton’s hands.[156]
This letter the ambassador refused to accept. There was nothing in it, he said, about allowing the ship at Aberdeen to proceed to sea.[157] July.Hesitation of the Dutch.Great was the perplexity of the Dutch. They were evidently prepared to offer any reasonable reparation; but they could not forget that to allow the privateer to set sail unpursued from Aberdeen, would subject hundreds of poor fishermen to utter ruin, if not to a cruel death.
For all this James, in his present state of exasperation, was without the slightest consideration. His two ships were already Best sails for Aberdeen.on the way to Scotland, under the command of Captain Best. Scarcely had they started when news arrived that four more Dutch men-of-war had cast anchor in Aberdeen roads. Immediate orders were despatched to send four more ships from the Royal Navy to join Best in the North.[158]
The King’s wrath was not appeased by the active measures which he had taken. Scarcely had July 21.Renewal of the scheme for an attack upon the Netherlands.the orders been given when he wrote to his son to look after the matter of Holland; and by looking after the matter of Holland, he meant nothing short of putting into execution the old scheme for the partition of the Netherlands.[159]
Two days later, formal powers were despatched to Buckingham and Bristol, July 23.Formal powers sent to Spain.directing them to enter upon negotiations with the Spanish ministers for the attainment of this object.
“Having now brought,” he wrote, “the main and principal business, which is the match of our son, to a happy conclusion, <85>as we have lately understood both from himself and by your despatches, there riseth two other particulars of great importance, as you know; the one whereof is public, namely, the restitution of our son-in-law and his posterity to the Palatinates and dignity electoral; the other private, concerning the transposing of some part of the Netherland Provinces, and annexing them to our crown, both which will now fall fitly to be treated on. And, because this letter is a matter of supreme secrecy, and not communicable to many, we have thought fit only at this time to give you authority by this letter, under our hand and signet, as hereby we do give you full authority and commission jointly and severally, to proceed to the treaty of both those particulars aforementioned with the commissioners to be appointed on that side by our good brother the King of Spain, according to such instructions or directions as you have heretofore had from us. And whatsoever further powers shall be necessary to be given you in this behalf, you may cause it to be drawn up there formally and legally, transmitting the same hither unto us, whereupon we shall pass the same under our signature and great seal of England, and so return it back unto you. In the meantime, you may proceed to the treaty according to the authority here given you, and whatsoever you shall thereupon conclude in our name, we shall ratify and confirm; not doubting but that you will acquaint our dear son, the Prince, with all your proceedings, from time to time, whilst he remains in that Court, and assist yourselves also continually with his advice and directions, for so is our pleasure.”[160]
Never probably, in the history of the civilised world, was a war of conquest against a neighbouring nation projected so lightly, and on They are never acted on.so utterly inadequate grounds. That the consequence of this wild and iniquitous proceeding, if by any strange chance it happened to be successful, would have been the ruin of England as well as of the Dutch Republic, and the unchecked supremacy of the Pope and the Catholic monarchies in Europe, James never paused to consider for an instant. Fortunately, he had at least one amongst <86>his servants who was able to think for him. The letter bears on the back the brief indorsement, in Bristol’s handwriting, “The King’s letter touching Holland, 23rd of July, 1623. His Majesty’s pleasure to be first known.”
Long before an answer could be received from England, James’s anger had cooled down. Upon Caron’s assurance that Compromise with the Dutch.the Dutch captains would refrain from further aggression, the preparation of the four additional ships was countermanded. In point of fact, in the very midst of the quarrel, a compromise had been struck out which, if James had not been too angry to understand what was passing before him, would have saved him from disgracing himself by his ignoble despatch to his representatives in Spain. Best had Best’s orders.carried with him orders not, as had been James’s original intention, to let loose the privateer upon the fishing-boats of his neighbours, but to convoy her safely to Dunkirk or Ostend, without suffering her to do any damage by the way. In a Flemish port she would be watched closely by the blockading squadron, and the Dutch would be in no worse position than they had been before.[161] Nor was there any fear that the States-General would be dissatisfied with this solution. As early as June 7, they had issued directions to their captains to accompany the privateer to the Flemish coast, without firing a shot, unless she attempted to leave the convoy.[162] Fearing lest this should not be enough, they placed in Carleton’s hands, August.on August 9, a passport, by which their commanders on the Flemish coast were directed to allow the vessel from Aberdeen to pass unharmed through the blockading squadron.[163]
But for the folly of the Dunkirk captain, this affair, which had at one time threatened to embroil two nations in war, would have given July.The voyage from Aberdeen.no further trouble to anyone. Best and the Dutch captains came to a mutual understanding before they left Aberdeen, and the convoy sailed away, steering south, accompanied by four out of the <87>six vessels which were watching over the interests of the Republic. Unluckily, the privateer captain was not content with the humble position assigned to him, and, wishing to show that he could go faster through the water than any of the others, crowded all sail, and speedily outstripped both friends and enemies. Fight between the Dunkirker and the Dutch.The Dutch captains, either fearing for the fishing-boats, or, simply from the pleasure of catching their enemy unprotected, started in pursuit, and came up with the privateer after he had shortened sail, and was waiting for the English convoy, which was already nearly two miles astern. Before Best’s slow-sailing vessels had come up, the Dutch ships opened fire, shot away the main yard of the Dunkirker, and killed the captain and five men. The English vessels now appeared upon the scene, and poured in their fire in return; but they soon found that they were no match for their adversaries in speed. The Dutchmen sheered off, and keeping well out of gunshot, amused themselves by sailing round his Majesty’s ships at a respectful distance, till Best anchored in the Downs, when they took up a position of observation near the South Foreland.[164]
Best could not be ignorant that the Dunkirk captain had no one but himself to blame; yet the old sailor was filled with Best’s attack upon the Dutch.indignation at the attack which had been made upon a vessel under his charge. By daylight, as he was aware, it was impossible to bring the Dutch captains to task, unless they chose to lie to for the approach of the sluggish vessels with which the Navy Commissioners had provided him. He, therefore, waited for a dark night, and dropping down unperceived amongst the Dutch squadron, fired a broadside into their hulls, and drove them triumphantly out of the roads.[165]
A fortnight earlier this thoughtless act of violence upon the crews of a friendly nation who had been doing no more than their duty, would probably have met with the warmest approbation at Court. But it was not in James’s nature to retain his indignation long. Already he had forgotten all about his <88>wish to proceed to the partition of the Netherlands. Orders were He is called before the Council.sent down to Best to bring his own ship and the Dunkirker up the Thames, where they would be in safety from the vengeance of the Dutch, and to present himself before the Council, in order to give an account of his proceedings.[166]
Two or three days later, Carleton’s messenger arrived with the fresh passport from the States. With this, and with the accompanying acknowledgment of the justice of his demands, James was highly delighted. He now began to speak of the Republic in the most friendly terms, and even went so far as to declare openly, that as soon as his son came home, he was September.Bingley takes the Dunkirk vessel to Mardike.‘firmly minded to do something’ for the States.[167] Best was, therefore, superseded in his command by Sir Richard Bingley, who carried the vessel which had been the cause of so much contention into the Flemish harbour of Mardike, without any further interruption from the Dutch.[168]
So ended James’s scheme for subduing the Netherlands with Spanish aid. It could hardly be long before his other scheme, for regaining the Palatinate with the same assistance, would break down still more ignominiously.
[75] Meade to Stuteville, June 21, Ellis’s Orig. Letters, Ser. i., vol. iii. 152. Gwynne’s Relation in the Appendix to Hearne’s edition of Vita Ricardi II., 299.
[76] Hacket, 115.
[77] Francisco de Jesus, 73.
[78] Corner to the Doge, May 17⁄27, Venice MSS. Desp. Spagna.
[79] Francisco de Jesus, 73.
[80] Corner to the Doge, May 14⁄24, Venice MSS. Desp. Spagna.
[81] In the letter just quoted, it is said impersonally “si respondi.” But the despatch of May 17⁄27 attributes the idea to De Massimi. “Perch la negativa di dar subito la Infanta al Principe era persuasa del Nuncio,” etc. It had been suggested to the Nuncio by the Congregation of Cardinals. Francisco de Jesus, 60.
[82] Corner to the Doge, May 14⁄24, 17⁄27, May 24⁄June 3, Venice MSS. Desp. Spagna. Corner’s authority is quite good enough, and is not invalidated by the fact that there is no mention of the engagement to listen to discussion in the answer as given in Goodman, ii. 260. Charles may have said it in conversation after the formal reply was given.
[83] The Prince to Gregory XV., Hardwicke S. P. i. 452. The letter, contrary to the general belief in England at the time, was written either by the Prince himself, or by his direction, without any reference to his father. See the letter of June 6, Hardwicke S. P. i. 419.
[84] Francisco de Jesus, 76.
[85] The conversation is given by Hacket, 146, as taking place at a later date. But this writer is not to be trusted for details, and Valaresso, writing on the 20th⁄30th of June, says that in a letter written to him by some one about the Prince on May 28⁄June 7, he was told ‘che Spagnoli portando l’affare come non più lor ma fatto del Pontefice, aggionti ai proprii moti anco gl’ eccitamenti degli Inglesi Catolici, lasciassèro il vecchio tratatto con la stabilita conivenza, ed in suo luogo dimandassero aperta libertà de conscienza; che ad indolenza del Principe di questa innovatione fosse <52>risposto che le trattationi prima della sa andata si tenevano di sola mostra, et esser falso opinione che nella sua ultima volontà i fu Rè ordinasse questo matrimonio; mentre anzi lasciò l’Infanta al figliuolo del Imperator.’ Valaresso to the Doge, Venice MSS. Desp. Ingh.
[86] Bristol to the King, Aug. 18, S. P. Spain.
[87] The story is told by Howell, in a letter said to have been written on the 10th of July. It is, however, referred to by Corner in his despatch of June 3⁄13, Venice MSS. Desp. Spagna.
[88] Ibid. Aston to Calvert, June 10⁄20.
[90] The Prince and Buckingham to the King, June 6, Hardwicke S. P. i. 419.
[91] Conway to Wentworth, April 4, S. P. Dom. cxlii. 34.
[92] “This day … his Majesty came to Hyde Park, at the entry whereof he found a fair lady, indeed the fairest Lady Mary in England, and he made a great deal of love to her, and gave her his watch, and kept her as long pleased with him as he could, not without expression to all the company that it was a miracle that such an ugly, deformed father should have so sweet a child.” — Conway to Buckingham, May 3, Goodman’s Court of King James, ii. 290.
[93] Chamberlain to Carleton, May 3, S. P. Dom. cxliv. 11.
[94] The Prince and Buckingham to the King, April 22, Hardwicke S. P. ii. 414. The King to the Prince and Buckingham, May 9, Halliwell’s Letters of the Kings, ii. 203.
[95] The Prince to the King, April 29, Hardwicke S. P. ii. 417.
[96] The King to the Prince and Buckingham, May 11, ibid. 46. The King to the Prince, May 11, Goodman’s Court of King James, ii. 298.
[97] Valaresso to the Doge, May 16⁄26, Venice Transcripts. Coloma to Ciriza, May 25⁄June 4, Madrid Palace Library.
[98] Rutland’s Instructions, May 26. Chamberlain to Carleton, May 28. D. Carleton to Carleton, June 3, S. P. Dom. cxlv. 33, 65; cxlvi. 6. Salvetti’s News-Letter, June 13⁄23.
[99] Valaresso to the Doge, June 6⁄16, June 20⁄30, Venice Transcripts.
[100] The King to the Prince and Buckingham, June 14, Hardwicke S. P. ii. 421.
[101] The King to the Prince and Buckingham, June 15, S. P. Spain. Compare Instructions to Cottington, May 28, Clarendon S. P. App. xviii.
[102] Conway to Buckingham, June 15, Goodmman’s Court of King James, ii. 291.
[103] Salvetti’s News-Letter, Jan. 20⁄30.
[104] Rutland to Conway. Conway to the Navy Commissioners, June 15, S. P. Dom. cxlvi. 93, 94.
[105] “Già fatto stupido.” Valaresso to the Doge, June 20⁄30, Venice Transcripts.
[106] Valaresso to the Doge, June 27⁄July 7, ibid.
[107] The Prince’s Reply, June, Clarendon S. P. i. App. xxiii.
[108] Corner to the Doge, June 21⁄July 1, Venice MSS. Desp. Spagna.
[109] “Non sta mirando se non la Infanta, et con ogni licentia nella conspicua piazza si facea fuori della sua finestra per colpire con l’occhio in quella dove ella sedea, sfogando poi anco al solito delle inamoratile fiamme in versi.” Venice MSS. Desp. Spagna.
[110] Consulta of the Council of State, June 25⁄July 5, Simancas MSS. 2516, fol. 39. Corner to the Doge, July 5⁄15, Venice MSS. Desp. Spagna.
[111] The Prince and Buckingham to the King, June 26, Hardwicke S. P. i. 122.
[112] Hacket, 135.
[113] Matthew to Philip IV., Cabala, 303.
[114] Khevenhüller, x. 255.
[115] The Prince and Buckingham to the King, June 27, Hardwicke S. P. i. 423.
[116] The Prince and Buckingham to the King, June 29, ibid. i. 425.
[117] Corner to the Doge, July 9⁄19, Venice MSS. Desp. Spagna.
[118] Francisco de Jesus, 81.
[119] Writing two days earlier, the Venetian Ambassador shows that there was a general impression amongst those best able to judge, that the Prince would give way. “Quei di più fondato discorso,” he says, “stimano impossibilità che una delle parti non declini dal presuposto, ma dal Principe si pensa sarà la declinatione, et che si accomoderà al volere di quà.” Corner to the Doge, July 5⁄15, Venice MSS. Desp. Spagna.
[120] Aston to Conway, July 8. Bristol to Carleton, July 9, S. P. Spain. Bristol to Cottington, July 15, Prynne’s Hidden Works of Darkness, 49.
[121] Williams to Buckingham, July 21, Hacket, 145.
[122] The Prince and Buckingham to the King, July 15, Hardwicke S. P. i. 426.
[123] Conway to Buckingham, July 17, Ellis, Series 1, vol. iii. 154.
[124] Williams to the Prince, July (?), Hacket, 141. Conway to Buckingham, July 17, Ellis, Series 1, vol. iii. 154.
[125] “Invitò bene ogn’uno a consigliarlo liberamente in si importante occasione; ma artificiosamente li constrinse, per non mostrarsi poco desiderosi del ritorno d’esso Principe et male amatori del loro futuro Rè, di approbar propositione et di essibirse pronti a suoi comandi in ogni punto. Disse delli due articoli più importanti, cioé di convocare il Parlamento, et del non offender Cattolici, che li ammetterebbe con le restrittioni; a quello di procurarlo a suo potere, et a questo di farlo salva la salute del Regno. I Consiglieri eccettuatine due che fecero in contrario alcune poche considerationi prometterono cieca ubbidienza ad ogni volere di Sua Maestà. Certo del Rè si può ben dire che ne’ proprii danni tenghi un eccelente artificio, et de’ Consiglieri ch’ habbino dato l’ultimo saggio della loro debbolezza, havendo perduto quest’ opportunità di parlar liberamente a servicio del Regno et di far conoscer al Rè che il vero mezzo, non di ricuperar il Principe, ma di far crescer le dimande a Spagnuoli, sia questa facilità alle loro sodisfattioni.” Valaresso to the Doge, July 18⁄28, Venice Transcripts.
[126] Conway to Buckingham, July 17 (a different letter from the one quoted in the last note), Harl. MSS. 1580, fol. 309.
[127] “Insuper verbo regio fidem daturi sumus, nos omnem operam navaturos ut omnia suprà capitulata per Parlamentum stabiliantur.” Clarendon State Papers, i. App. 25.
[128] Chamberlain to Carleton, July 26, S. P. Dom. cxlix. 48.
[129] The oath seems finally to have been taken by all except perhaps Zouch, who was about to take it when the breach with Spain took place. Whether he took it or not does not appear.
[130] Clarendon State Papers, i. App. 25.
[131] Conway to Buckingham, July 23, Hardwicke S. P. i. 429.
[132] Printed with the name of the Archbishop of York, Cabala, 108.
[133] Valaresso to the Doge, Aug. 1⁄11, Venice Transcripts. This shows that the letter must have been written in July. Mrs. Green places it conjecturally under the date of Aug. 8.
[134] The King to the Prince and Buckingham, July 21, Hardwicke S. P. i. 428.
[135] The Commissioners for the Treaty to the King, March 3, S. P. Germany.
[136] The Commissioners to the King, March 6, S. P. Germany.
[137] The Commissioners to the King, March 9, ibid.
[138] Treaty of Sequestration, March 19, ibid.
[139] Treaty of Suspension, April 21, S. P. Germany.
[140] Frederick to Bethlen Gabor, June 17, July 3. Nethersole to Calvert, July 1, S. P. Germany.
[141] Nethersole to Calvert, July 25, S. P. Germany.
[142] Carleton to Calvert, July 30, Aug. 1, Aug. 16, S. P. Holland.
[143] Carleton to Conway, Aug. 16, ibid.
[144] Trumbull to Calvert, Sept. 5, S. P. Flanders.
[146] Aitzema, i. 200. The vessel is called in the correspondence sometimes a Dunkirker, and sometimes an Ostender.
[147] The Council of Scotland to the King, Feb. 15, Melros Papers, Abbotsford Club, ii. 497. Best to Conway, July 23, S. P. Dom. cxlix. 28.
[148] Carleton’s Proposition, March 5; Carleton to Calvert, March 6, S. P. Holland.
[149] Conway to Carleton, March 10, ibid.
[150] Carleton to Calvert, April 7; Answer to the States-General, April 16, S. P. Holland.
[151] Conway to Carleton, May 6, ibid. Calvert to Buckingham, April 24; Conway to Buckingham, May (?), Harl. MSS. 1580, fol. 158, 287.
[152] Conway to Carleton, May 15, with enclosed statement of the proceedings of the Dutch, S. P. Holland. Caron to the States-General, April 17, Add. MSS. 17,677 K, fol. 278.
[153] The Council of Scotland to the King, May 7, S. P. Dom., cxliv. 20. Melrose to the King, May 7, Melrose Papers, ii. 512. Statement of Juan de Sagasticaval, May 7, S. P. Flanders.
[154] Carleton’s Proposition, May 23, S. P. Holland.
[155] Conway to the Prince of Orange, May 22, S. P. Holland.
[156] The Prince of Orange to Conway, June 10⁄20. The States-General to the King, June 27⁄July 7, S. P. Holland.
[157] Carleton to Calvert, July 5, S. P. Holland.
[158] Conway to Calvert, July 17, ibid.
[159] The King to the Prince and Buckingham, July 21, Hardwicke State Papers, i. 428.
[160] The King to Buckingham and Bristol, July 23, Sherborne MSS.
[161] Conway to the Prince of Orange, July 26, S. P. Holland.
[162] Best to Conway, July 23, S. P. Dom. cxlix. 28.
[163] Carleton to Calvert, Aug. 9; Carleton to Conway, Aug. 16, S. P. Holland.
[164] Best to Conway, Aug. 4, 11, S. P. Dom. cl. 18, 83.
[165] Best to Conway, Aug. 6; Best to the Council, Aug. 11, S. P. Dom. cl. 33, 84.
[166] Calvert to Conway, Aug. 12, S. P. Dom. cl. 86.
[167] Dudley Carleton to Carleton, Aug. 21, S. P. Holland.
[168] Locke to Carleton, Sept. 14, S. P. Dom. clii. 140. The Infanta Isabella to the King, Sept. 30⁄Oct. 10, S. P. Flanders.