Sir,If King Charles the Second could have been prevailed upon to sacrifice the chimerical divine right of his brother to the real interest,and right too,of his people;that happy event would have made him ample amends in future ease and quiet,and the nation in future security,for all precedent disorders,dangers,and fears of danger.But instead of this,he was every day confirmed in the resolution of not giving up,directly and in terms,that right to his brother,which he thought reflected strength on his own.The very measures taken to force him to submit,enabled him to resist.The opposite spirit spent itself in blood and violence.The spirit of him rose visibly in the nation;and he saw very soon the time approach,when he might venture to appeal to his people against his parliament.This time was come,when men were once convinced that a Country party prevailed no longer,but that faction had taken its place.Many appearances,which I have not room to enumerate,served to propagate this opinion;particularly the behaviour and almost avowed pretensions of the Duke of Monmouth;which were carried on even in defiance of the solemn declaration made by the King,that he had never married the Duke's mother.
Some of the worthiest and warmest men,who were engaged for the exclusion,complained themselves,even from the first,of the private interests and factious intrigues which prevailed amongst them.'I must confess',says a very considerable man,who laid down his life for this cause afterwards,and whose original letter is still extant;'I must confess,I do not know three men of a mind;and that a spirit of giddiness reigns amongst us,far beyond any I have ever observed in my life.'And yet he had lived and acted in as factious a time as this nation ever saw.He proceeds:'Some look who is fittest to succeed.--They are for the most part divided between the Prince of Orange,and the Duke of Monmouth.The first hath plainly the most plausible title.--I need not tell you the reasons against Monmouth.The strongest for him are,that whoever is opposed to York will have a good party.
and all Scotland,which is every day like to be in arms,doth certainly favour him,and may probably be of as much importance in the troubles that are now likely to fall upon us,as they were in the beginning of the last.Others are only upon negatives',etc.
I could easily multiply proofs of this kind;but I think I need not take any pains to show that there was such a faction formed at this time;nor to refute Welwood,who asserts that the Duke of Monmouth was not ambitious to the degree of aspiring to the crown,till after his landing in the west.
I will only remark,that the efforts of this faction amongst those who drove on the bill of exclusion,furnished another motive to the division and animosity of parties.The Tories,who had divided from the others,on jealousies of designs to change the constitution in Church and state,began now to apprehend that the opposite party might succeed in another view,and set up a king of their own nomination.A notion then entertained by many,that the worse title a man had,the better King he was likely to make,did not persuade them.They had suffered under the tyranny of a party;many of them had been themselves the abettors of a party-administration;and they feared with reason a party King.Thus personal interests were mingled on both sides with public considerations;and the Duke of York gained a great number of adherents,not by affection to him,but by an aversion to Monmouth;which increased among the Tories,in proportion as the Duke's popularity increased among the Whigs;not by any favourable disposition in the Tories to popery and arbitrary power,but by a dread,as I have observed already,of returning in the least degree under the influence of those principles,and the power of those men,whose yoke had galled the necks of many that were still alive and active on the stage of public affairs.'Men grew jealous of the design'(says bishop Burnet,speaking of Monmouth's popularity)'and fancied here was a new civil war to be raised.Upon this,they joined with the Duke's party';meaning the Duke of York's.
I say nothing of the apprehensions entertained on one side,and the expectations entertained on the other from Scotland;because though there was,even in the beginning of these struggles,a concert between those who were oppressed by the court there,and those who opposed it here,which grew afterwards into a closer correspondence,and became riper for action;yet the seditious spirit,that gave occasion to these apprehensions and expectations,was roused and exasperated by the inhumanity of the Duke of Lauderdale,who,though a Presbyterian himself,was the butcher of that party;pushed the warmest of them into unjustifiable excesses;revived their silly zeal for the Covenant;and wrought up their enthusiasm even to assassination and rebellion.Let me only observe,that this was plainly the fault of the court,and could not therefore be imputed to the Whigs,whatever use some of that party might propose to make of such a disposition.The violence of the conventiclers was founded high,in order to palliate the severities exercised in the government of that kingdom.But the reasonable men of all parties thought then,as they think now,and always will think,that it is the duty of those who govern,to discern the spirit of the people;to consider even their passions;to have a regard to their weaknesses;and to show indulgence to their prejudices;and that ministers,who punish what they might prevent,are more culpable than those who offend.
