ni
•r
-J Jo
LIBRARY of UNIVERSAL HISTORY
AND
POPULAR SCIENCE
CONTAINING
A RECORD OF THE HUMAN RACE FROM THE
EARLIEST HISTORICAL PERIOD TO THE PRESENT TIME;
EMBRACING A GENERAL SURVEY OF THE PROGRESS OF MANKIND
IN NATIONAL AND SOCIAL LIFE, CIVIL GOVERNMENT,
RELIGION, LITERATURE, SCIENCE AND ART
Complete in Twenty -five Volumes
THE TEXT SUPPLEMENTED AND EMBELLISHED BY MORE THAN SEVEN HUNDRED
PORTRAITS AND OTHER ILLUSTRATIONS. MAPS AND CHARTS
INTRODUCTION BY
HUBERT HOWE BANCROFT
HISTORIAN
GEORGE EDWIN RINES
MANAGING EDITOR
Reviewed and Endorsed by Fifteen Professors in History and Educators in
American Universities , among whom are the following :
GEORGE EMORY FELLOWS, Ph.D.,
LL.D.
President, University of Maine
KEMP PLUMMER BATTLE, A.M.,
LL.D.
Professor of History, University of North Carolina
AMBROSE P. WINSTON, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Economics, Washington Uni-
versity
WILLIAM R. PERKINS
Professor of History, University of Iowa
REV. GEO. M. GRANT, D.D.
Late Principal of Queen's University, Kingston,
Ontario, Canada
MOSES COIT TYLER, A.M., Ph.D.
Late Professor of American History, Cornell Uni-
versity
ELISHA BENJAMIN ANDREWS, LL.D.,
D.D.
Chancellor. University of Nebraska
WILLIAM TORREY HARRIS, Ph.D.,
LL.D.
Formerly United States Commissioner of Education
JOHN HANSON THOMAS McPHER-
SON, Ph.D.
Professor of History, University of Georgia
RICHARD HEATH DABNEY. A.M.,
Ph.D.
Professor of History, University 01 Virginia
NEW YORK AND CHICAGO
THE BANCROFT SOCIETY
1910
COPYRIGHT, 1908. BY
GEORGE EDWIN RINES-
CONTENTS OF VOLUME IX.
MODERN HISTORY.-coNTrnuED.
CHAPTER XXXIV.— REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Section I. — The First Two Stuarts and Parliament 2811
Section II. — Civil War and Fall of Monarchy 2840
Section III. — The Commonwealth and the Protectorate 2852
Section IV. — Stuart Restoration and Revolution of 1688 2869
Section V. — England's First Years of Government by the People. . . . 2907
Section VI. — England's North American Colonies 2931
CHAPTER XXXV.— FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Section I. — First Two Bourbons and Cardinal Richelieu 2953
Section II. — Anne of Austria and Cardinal Mazarin 2970
Section HI.— Louis XIV. and His War with Spain 2979
Section IV.— War of Louis XIV. with Holland and Her Allies 2983
Section V. — Louis XIV. and Persecution of the Huguenots 2990
Section VI. — War of Louis XIV. with the Grand Alliance 2994
Section VII. — War of the Spanish Succession 3001
Section VIII. — French Colonies in North America 3017
Section IX. — Spain and Portugal in the Seventeenth Century 8019
Section X. — Seventeenth Century Civilization 3024
CHAPTER XXXVI.— STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Section I. — Wars of Denmark, Sweden and Brandenburg 3031
Section II. — Poland's Dissensions and Decline 3038
Section III. — First Czars and Earlier Romanoffs in Russia 3045
Section IV. — Turkey's Wars with Germany and Her Allies 3056
Section V.— The Great Northern War 3065
3809
CHAPTER XXXIV.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
SECTION I.— THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND
PARLIAMENT (A. D. 1603-1642).
As we have seen, the Tudor dynasty, which had worn the crown of
England for one hundred and eighteen years (A. D. 1485—1603),
ended with the death of Queen Elizabeth, in 1603, when the Stuart
family ascended the English throne in the person of King James VI.
of Scotland, who now became JAMES I. of England. Thenceforth the
crowns of England and Scotland were united, but each kingdom had its
own Parliament until 1707, when a constitutional, or legislative union
took place.
The union of England and Scotland under one sovereign put an
end to the hostility that had existed between them for centuries.
James I. warmly advocated the adoption of measures to strengthen this
union. The two kingdoms were, however, still separate, each manag-
ing its internal affairs in its own way. The English Parliament re-
fused to adopt the king's policy, ascribing it to his partiality for his
Scottish subjects and his desire to benefit them, regardless of English
interests.
James I. was a vain, bigoted and pedantic prince. He was in the
possession of much theological learning, and delighted to engage in
controversies on religious subjects. He loved to make a display of
his wisdom and knowledge in lengthy harangues. James was also
ambitious of the reputation of being a great author, and he wrote
many books. He was plain in person, awkward in manner and ad-
dicted to drunkenness. He was one of the most puerile and the most
presumptuous of English sovereigns.
His pedantic display of his learning caused Henry IV. of France
to call him " the wisest fool in Christendom." His unpopularity was
fully demonstrated by the fact that his peculiarities of person and
character were publicly caricatured in the London theaters, to the
indescribable enjoyment of the people. The public contempt for his
2811
5—19
Stuart
Dynasty.
James I.,
A. D.
1603-
1625.
Union of
English
and
Scotch
Ctowns.
Character
of
James I.
His
Unpopu-
larity.
S812
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
His
Defect*.
"Divine
Right of
Kings."
James I.
and the
Episcopal
Church.
Lady
Arabella
Stuart.
Raleigh's
Impris-
onment.
James I.
and the
Catholics
and
Puritans.
Catholic
Capita-
tion Tax.
Gun-
power
Plot.
meanness was surpassed only by the public resentment at his usurpa-
tions.
James I. lacked the shrewdness and decision essential in a sovereign.
He was so extreme a lover of peace as to sacrifice the honor and dignity
of his kingdom, for the sake of living on friendly terms with foreign
governments. One of the faults of James was his lavishness of favors
to unworthy persons.
James I. was a firm believer in " the divine right of kings." He
believed that his authority was derived directly from God and that
his power was unlimited. As " the Lord's Anointed," he frankly de-
clared in the Star Chamber: " As it is atheism and blasphemy to dis-
pute what God can do, so it is high contempt in a subject to dispute
what a king can do, or to say that the king can not do this or that."
For this reason he hated the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, which
made the king only a common member of the congregation; but he
was zealously attached to the Episcopal Church of England, in which
the monarch was considered the head and origin of all spiritual power ;
and the great object of James was the suppression of Puritanism in
England and Presbyterianism in Scotland, and the full establishment
of Episcopacy as the only form of religion throughout his dominions.
The quiet of King James' reign was soon disturbed by a conspiracy
to place Lady Arabella Stuart, his first cousin, on the throne of Eng-
land; but the design of the conspirators was easily frustrated. Sir
Walter Raleigh, who was accused of complicity in the plot in favor of
Lady Arabella, and tried and convicted on slight evidence, was held
in imprisonment for twelve years, during which he wrote his History
of the World.
Before James I. had reached London he had been approached by
Catholics and Puritans ; the Catholics basing their hopes on his promise
of toleration to obtain Catholic support, and the Puritans expecting
much from his Puritan education ; but both were doomed to disappoint-
ment. As an avowed Episcopalian, and as the Head of the State
Church of England, he soon began to execute the laws against the
Nonconformists more rigorously than Elizabeth had done.
No sooner was James I. seated on the English throne than he forgot
his promises of toleration to the English Roman Catholics, and fol-
lowed the example of Queen Elizabeth in making them pay an oppres-
sive capitation tax, that he might enrich his favorites and defray the
expenses of his court festivals. This aroused the indignation of the
Catholics, some of whom, at the instigation of Robert Catesby, re-
solved upon a conspiracy to blow up the Parliament House with gun-
powder, at a time when the king, the Lords and the Commons would
be assembled there, and thus destroy the government of England.
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
The conspirators hired the cellar under the House of Lords osten- It* Dis-
sibly for business purposes. Lord Mounteagle, a Catholic, received COTery-
an anonymous letter November 4, 1605, warning him to stay away
from Parliament. He showed the letter to Robert Cecil, Earl of
Salisbury, and the Parliament House was at once examined. Thirty-
six barrels of gunpowder were found concealed under a pile of wood
and fagots ; and Guy Fawkes, the keeper of the cellar, was detected Seizure
• f i • „ of Guy
in preparing slow matches lor the explosion on the morrow. Guy Fawkes.
Fawkes was seized and executed, and his fellow-conspirators were fer-
reted out and put to death. This conspiracy is known as the Gun-
powder Plot.
In consequence of this dangerous conspiracy, the English Roman Oath
Catholics were heavily fined, and compelled to take an oath of allegi- Exacted
ance to the king, renouncing the Pope's right to excommunicate sover- Catholics,
eigns or to absolve subjects from their allegiance, as well as the doc-
trine that excommunicated sovereigns might be deposed or murdered by
their subjects or others. Some of the Catholics took the oath. Others
refused to do so, at the Pope's bidding. The 5th of November, or
Pope's Day, has ever since been observed in England as a holiday, one Pope's
of the performances being the burning of Guy Fawkes in effigy. VKJ.
James I. was especially arbitrary in matters of religion. The great James's
mass of the English nation had by this time become Puritan; and, ^J^6
while belonging to the Established Church, they disapproved of many the
ceremonies which had been retained in the Church service, and desired Puntani-
a return to the simple usages described in the New Testament, as
well as a more stringent observance of the Sabbath and a more serious
tone of manners. But the king rejected the petition of eight hundred
clergymen to these ends ; and insulted the Puritan divines whom he had
invited to Hampton Court, by a frivolous display of his learning,
and by brutal expressions of contempt for their grave remonstrances.
The hope that the convention of Episcopal and Puritan divines, His
which James I. had called in 1604 to discuss the religious question, Failure
would harmonize the conflicting religious sects was not realized. The yince
king, who had been the most prominent speaker in behalf of the State Them.
Church, was angry at the obstinacy of the Puritans, who failed to be
convinced by his arguments. He endeavored to convert them by a
threat when the convention closed, saying : " I will make them con-
form, or I will harry them out of the land." The persecutions which
followed obliged multitudes of English subjects to seek an asylum
in foreign lands. £.
The only important result of the convention of Episcopal and Puri- James's
tan divines, summoned by the king in 1604, was the issue of a new ^f1^0
English translation of the Bible in 1611, known as King James's Ver- Bible,
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
sion, the one which is still used by most Protestants among English-
speaking nations, and which was revised by a body of British and
American divines in 1881. Fifty-four learned English divines were
occupied three year in the preparation of King James's Bible.
Puritan The Separatists, or Independents, differed from the more moderate
Plymouth Puritans in withdrawing entirely from the Established Church. One
in New congregation, under the Rev. John Robinson, expecting no indulgence
n^ ' at home, emigrated to Holland — that vigorous little republic which had
just won its freedom from the iron hand of despotic Spain, and which
now offered an asylum to the oppressed of all lands. But the Pilgrim
Fathers, being English at heart, desired to live under English laws
and to educate their children in the English language. They there-
fore returned to their native land and embarked in the Mayflower for
the wilds of America. They finally landed at Plymouth Rock, De-
cember 21, 1620, and laid the foundations of a free state in New
England. Puritan emigration flowed there for some years. The
moral strength of these Puritan colonists entered largely into the
character of New England.
English The Puritan colonists of New England differed entirely from the
Tames- ^e an(^ dissolute adventurers and gold seekers who founded James-
town in town in Virginia in 1607, and who, having come to the New World to
irgima. repajr their ruined fortunes, were saved from starvation only by the
energy and good sense of Captain John Smith, who insisted that
" nothing was to be expected but by labor." This settlement began
to flourish only when " men fell to building houses and planting
corn." These settlements were made in the respective territories of the
Plymouth and London Companies, chartered by King James I. in
1606. A full account of these English colonies in North America
will be given in a separate section.
Plots and The reign of James I. was an era of colonization, not only in
^H2^ America, but also in the North of Ireland, which had been desolated
01 Irish
Chiefs, by Tyrone's Rebellion. In the first few years of the reign of James
I. the Earls of Tyrone and Tyrconnel, the most powerful chieftains
in the North of Ireland, were accused of plotting to overthrow English
authority in that kingdom. They saved themselves by flight, and were
Confisca- attainted of treason and outlawed. In 1608 O'Dogherty, an Irish
Ulster chief of great influence, rebelled, and his estates were declared forfeited.
Estates. As a result of these unsuccessful plots and rebellions, most of the
province of Ulster was confiscated to the English crown.
Scotch Thereupon King James I. disposed of the lands of that part of
teriansyin Ireland to English and Scotch settlers, who so improved it that it
Ulster, soon became the most flourishing portion of the Emerald Isle. The
Scotch settlers of Ulster were Presbyterians ; and their descendants,
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
2815
sometimes called Scotch-Irish, are the most prosperous and contented
of the population of Erin. Leinster was also colonized by English and
Scotch settlers with the same success.
But, notwithstanding the material improvement of Ireland, a deep
injury was inflicted upon the country. The native Irish proprietors
were driven from their homes and lands in numerous instances to make
room for the English and Scotch settlers, thus implanting in the hearts
of the Irish people a sense of injustice which Great Britain has not yet
eradicated.
The English East-India Company, which was chartered by Queen
Elizabeth, December 31, 1600 — the last day of the sixteenth century —
had its charter renewed, and erected its first factory at Surat, on the
western coast of Hindoostan, in 1612.
King James's idea of the " divine right of kings " was the keynote
to the royal policy in Church and State. When Parliament assembled
in 1604 the House of Commons was largely Puritan, and its temper
concerning the principles of absolutism which the king endeavored to
enforce is clearly seen in its action. The Commons petitioned for a
redress of grievances in matters of religion. The king's decided re-
jection of this petition encountered as decided a protest on the part
of the Commons in these words: "Let Your Majesty be pleased to
receive public information from your Commons in Parliament, as well
of the abuses in the Church as in the civil State. Your Majesty would
be misinformed if any man should deliver that the Kings of England
have any absolute power in themselves, either to alter religion or to
make any laws concerning the same, otherwise than as in temporal
causes, by consent of Parliament."
King James I. claimed absolute control over the liberties of the
English people. In 1604 a controversy arose between him and the
House of Commons concerning the claim by that body of the sole
right to judge of the elections of its members. The king insisted
upon the right to command the Commons to accept his decision, but
the House maintained it privileges. A compromise suggested by the
king obviated a more serious misunderstanding.
King James I. levied a tax on all exports and imports, and pro-
cured a judicial decision sustaining its legality. The House of Com-
mons then petitioned for a redress of grievances in matters of state.
The king's refusal to grant this petition called forth another protest
from the Commons, and a prayer that a law be made to declare " that
all impositions set upon your people, their goods or merchandise, save
only by common consent in Parliament, are and shall be void." The
king promptly dissolved Parliament, but his necessities obliged him
to summon another.
English
and
Scotch
Settlers
in
Ireland.
English
East
India
Company.
James I.
and Par-
liament.
Petition
and
Protest
of the
Com-
mons.
Contro-
versy
between
King and
Com-
mons.
Another
Petition
and
Protest
of the
Com-
mons.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
A New
House of
Commons
and Its
Dissolu-
tion.
James I.
and Lord
Chief
Justice
Coke.
The
King's
Absolute
Rule and
Extor-
tion.
The
Royal
Right
of Pur-
veyance.
Revenue
Wasted
Royal
Favor-
ites.
The questions which divided the king and Parliament became the
issue before the English people in the election of a new House of
Commons. The new Parliament was decidedly more antagonistic to
the royal policy than its predecessor had been; as it refused to vote
a grant of supplies except on condition that the king grant a redress
of grievances, particularly that of illegal imposts. The angry king
displayed his obstinacy and folly by again dissolving Parliament.
The English people resisted the king's illegal levy of customs, and
public sentiment was sustained by the decisions of the courts. The
indignant king sent for the judges and abused them into promising
to submit to his will. But the Lord Chief Justice, Sir Edward Coke,
a man of numerous faults, but who would not aid the king in trampling
the laws of England under foot, declared that he would decide the cases
which came before him as a just judge should. James I. at once
dismissed Sir Edward Coke from the royal council; and, as the honest
judge adhered to his determination, the king also removed him from
the office of Lord Chief Justice in 1615. All classes of the English
people regarded this act of the king with horror and resentment, as
they considered it the announcement of his intention to tamper with
the course of justice.
The breach between the English people and their king was widened
by seven years of absolute rule, seven years of extortion. The king
continued the illegal imposts; revived the odious benevolences; prac-
ticed the equally odious system of purveyance, regardless of law ;
renewed the sale of monopolies, and the obsolete system of royal ward-
ship giving to the king during the minority of the heir the incomes of
the estates held under military tenure; and sold patents of nobility
so freely that at the time of his death one-half of the Peers of Eng-
land were those which he had created.
The royal right of purveyance was an old prerogative of the Eng-
lish crown by which the king had the preference over all others in
the purchase of supplies. He could take the supplies at an appraised
value, even without the owner's consent. The royal officers frequently
practiced great injustice, as the right of purveyance became a system
of royal robbery under some of the English kings. An effort to
regulate it was made in Magna Charta, and also by repeated Parlia-
mentary enactments during succeeding reigns. Charles II. finally re-
linquished the right for a compensation.
The money which King James I. wrung from his subjects by his
illegal measures was wasted on his corrupt courtiers, thus exciting the
indignation and disgust of the English people.
The king exhibited his weakness in the choice of his personal favor-
ites, who were generally unworthy persons, and who were entrusted
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
2817
with the highest and most responsible stations in the government.
Robert Cecil, Earl of Salisbury, during his lifetime managed to retain
his influence over King James I. ; but after that nobleman's death the
king surrendered himself entirely to his favorites.
The first of these was Robert Carr, a handsome but ignorant Scottish
youth, whom the king created Earl of Somerset, and to whom he
gave lessons daily in Latin and in " kingcraft." The royal favorite
desired to marry the Countess of Essex ; but was advised by his friend,
Sir Thomas Overbury, not to do so. The countess was so irritated
at this that she persuaded the Earl of Somerset to have Sir Thomas
Overbury imprisoned in the Tower, where he was poisoned soon
afterward. The Earl of Somerset and the Countess of Essex, who had
contrived the murder, were then married ; but the crime threw the earl
into such a state of remorse and melancholy as to spoil his graceful
gayety and make him so dull a companion that the king became weary
of him. The guilt of the earl and his wife was discovered afterward.
They and all who had been accessory to the murder were tried and
convicted. Their accomplices were executed, but the earl and his wife
were only banished. They lived many years, dragging out a most
miserable life ; as their former love, which had led them to murder, was
changed to the most deadly hatred.
King James I. in the meantime had found a new favorite in George
Villiers, whom the king raised by successive promotions to the exalted
rank of Duke of Buckingham, also creating him Prime Minister.
This haughty favorite, who had an unbounded influence over the king,
displayed himself in Parliament, his velvet dress glittering with dia-
monds, openly parading the wealth which he had acquired by the ac-
ceptance of enormous bribes. The only way by which even men of
the highest rank could secure the king's favor, obtain and retain public
office, or even come into the king's presence, was to bribe this hand-
some but corrupt royal favorite and Prime Minister.
The foreign policy of James I. was no more satisfactory to the
English people than was his management of the domestic affairs of the
kingdom. The great Thirty Years' War which broke out in Ger-
many in 1618 eventually involved most of the great powers of Europe.
It was supposed that James I. would at least give his moral support
to the Protestant cause in Germany, especially as his daughter Eliza-
beth was the wife of the Elector-Palatine, Frederick V., whom the
Protestant Bohemians had chosen for their king, in opposition to the
Austrian Ferdinand II., who was also Emperor of Germany.
The English Parliament would have willingly voted funds to sup-
port the Protestant interest in Germany, but King James I. had more
regard for the " divine right " of the Austrian despot than for the
Robert
Cecil,
Earl of
Salis-
bury.
Robert
Carr,
Earl of
Somerset,
and the
Countess
of Essex.
Their
Crime
and Its
Result.
George
Villiers,
Duke of
Bucking-
ham.
James I.
and the
Elector-
Palatine
Freder-
ick V.
2818
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
James I.
and the
Bohemian
Protest-
ants.
James's
Friend-
ship for
Spain.
Raleigh's
Expedi-
tion to
Spanish
America.
His
Defeat
and
Loss.
His Exe-
cution.
His For-
titude.
Popular
Indigna-
tion.
James I.
and His
Con-
tinued
Partiality
for Spain.
rights and liberties of the Bohemian Protestants. He consented to aid
his son-in-law to maintain his hereditary dominions, the Palatinate, but
not to secure possession of Bohemia. The sympathies of England's
Protestant king were wholly with Catholic Austria and Catholic Spain
against the German Protestants.
The English people had a most implacable hatred for Spain; and
after the death of Robert Cecil, Earl of Salisbury, the king deliberately
antagonized this sentiment of his subjects. He began to cultivate
friendly relations with Spain, and commenced negotiations for the
marriage of his son, Prince Charles, with a Spanish princess. The
war party in England loudly demanded that war be declared against
Spain, in the interest of the German Protestants ; but James I. treated
this demand with contempt, and became more intimate with Spain,
England's most inveterate enemy.
For the purpose of inducing Spain to declare war against England,
the English war party had caused an expedition to be prepared against
the Spanish colony of Guiana, in South America, and induced the king
to release Sir Walter Raleigh in 1616, that he might lead this expedi-
tion for the purpose of finding a gold mine of which he knew and which
might enrich the king and his courtiers. The king, however, only
released Raleigh without pardoning him of the crime of complicity
in the plot to place Lady Arabella Stuart on the English throne.
King James I. allowed the expedition to sail for Guiana, but treach-
erously informed the Spaniards of it. Raleigh was defeated with the
loss of his eldest son and his entire fortune. On his return voyage
Raleigh attempted to seize the Spanish treasure galleons, for the pur-
pose of forcing Spain to declare war against England. To appease
the clamors of the Spanish government, King James I. consented to
sacrifice Raleigh; and that distinguished personage was beheaded
October 29, 1618, on the sentence for high treason which the king
had kept hanging over his head for fourteen years.
Raleigh met death with manliness and dignity. He desired to see
the ax, and felt the edge of it, remarking to the sheriff : " This
is a sharp medicine, but a sure remedy for all evils." This cruel act
is an indelible stain upon the character of James I., and at the time
aroused great popular indignation. Sir Walter Raleigh had intro-
duced potatoes into England from South America, and tobacco from
the West Indies.
The English people and even the courtiers of James I. vainly ap-
pealed to the king to strike a blow in behalf of German Protestant-
ism. Although the interests of his religion and the welfare of his
son-in-law demanded his intervention, he steadfastly refused to prevent
Spain from engaging in the struggle in Germany. He believed that
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
2819
the Spanish king's friendship for himself would induce him at his
request to relinquish his designs upon the Palatinate; but he was freed
from this delusion when the Spanish army invaded and subdued his
son-in-law's hereditary dominions, after that prince's expulsion from
Bohemia.
James I. was frightened by the burst of fury which broke forth
from the English nation, and he was also angry for the moment at
being duped so easily by Spain, so that he permitted a national sub-
scription to provide funds to enable the Elector-Palatine to raise an
army for his defense, and summoned a Parliament, which he opened
with a speech which led his subjects to hope that he would at least
act as a Protestant king should.
James I. did obtain a cessation of hostilities for a single summer
by threatening to make war on Spain if she continued her attack
upon the Palatinate ; but, when the Catholic League of Germany had
effected the conquest of the Upper Palatinate, he entered into the
same friendly relations with Philip IV. of Spain that he had cultivated
with Philip III., leaving his son-in-law to his fate. During the re-
maining few years of his reign he abstained from intervention in favor
of the Protestants of Continental Europe, giving the benefit of his
friendship to Spain, being influenced thereto by his eagerness to secure
a Spanish bride for his son.
In the meantime the general demand of the English people for
another Parliament forced the king to issue writs for a new election;
and the Parliament of 1621 was the most famous of his reign, in con-
sequence of the boldness with which it resisted the king's unlawful as-
sumptions and attacked abuses and corruption.
This Parliament reasserted a privilege which had long fallen into
disuse, by impeaching the Lord Chancellor, Lord Bacon, the greatest
philosopher of England and one of the greatest of all time, on the
charge of having accepted bribes and for other corrupt practices — an
intolerable stain on the honor of his exalted station and of the Eng-
lish nation. He was dismissed from his high office with ignominy, and
also condemned to pay a fine of forty thousand pounds, to imprison-
ment in the Tower and to perpetual exclusion from office. The king
soon remitted his fine and imprisonment, but the stigma could never
be removed from a name which otherwise would have shone as one of
the brightest in English history. James I. would have stopped
Bacon's impeachment as an attack upon the crown itself had not the
Lord Chancellor incurred the hostility of the Duke of Buckingham,
who induced the king to leave Bacon to his fate.
This Parliament then appealed to King James I. to aid the Ger-
man Protestants, to make war on Spain instead of a treaty of alliance
His
Partial
Submis-
sion to
Public
Senti-
ment.
His
Renewed
Friend-
ship for
Spain.
Boldness
of the
New Par-
liament.
Impeach-
ment,
Dis-
missal,
Fine and
Imprison-
ment
of Lord
2820
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Parlia-
ment
Demands
War with
Spain.
James's
Insolent
Com-
mands.
Manly
Protest
of the
Com-
mons.
Record
Torn out
and Par-
liament
Dis-
solved.
Royal
Extrav-
agance
and Ne-
cessities.
Death of
Prince
Henry.
Proposed
Marriage
of Prince
Charles
with the
Spanish
Infanta.
with that power, and to secure a Protestant instead of a Catholic bride
for the Prince of Wales. As the committee which the House of Com-
mons sent to communicate their demands to the king was announced
to His Majesty, he uttered the following ironical order: "Bring
stools for the ambassadors."
The boldness of the Commons offended the king, who forbade any
further discussion of the affairs of state. He sharply told them that
all their rights and powers were derived from himself and from the
gracious permission of his ancestors, and that he would maintain their
lawful liberties so long only as they kept within the bounds of their
duty.
When the king's commands were repeated by the committee on its
return to the House, a member of the Commons said : " Let us pray,
and then consider of this great business." The representatives of the
English people replied to the king's insolent commands and assump-
tions in the following resolution : " The liberties, franchises, privi-
leges and jurisdictions of Parliament are the ancient and undoubted
birthright and inheritance of the subjects of England."
The king sent for the journals of the House of Commons, and with
his own hand tore out the leaves containing the manly protest, after
which he dissolved Parliament in great wrath; but within two years
his necessities forced him to call for the election of a new Parliament.
Although James I. might destroy the records of Parliament, he could
not extinguish the spirit of liberty enkindled afresh in the hearts of
the patriot Commons and of the English people whom they represented.
It was a very fortunate circumstance for the cause of English con-
stitutional freedom that the extravagant government of James I.
squandered more money even in peace than that of Elizabeth had ever
expended in war ; as his necessities threw him into growing dependence
upon Parliament.
Prince Henry, the king's eldest son, died in 1612, to the great grief
of the English nation, which thus experienced a great loss, as the
dignity and orderly virtue of the prince's little court was a silent re-
buke to the corrupt and extravagant royal household. " Baby
Charles," the king's remaining son, then became the heir to the crowns
of England and Scotland.
Notwithstanding the deep public feeling and the long cherished
policy of England, James I. resolved to secure the marriage of his
son to a Spanish Infanta, thus disregarding the remonstrances of
Parliament and of all his nobles and counselors except the Duke of
Buckingham. To please Spain, he refused to aid the German Prot-
estants, thus allowing the struggle for Bohemia to grow into the great
Thirty Years' War, while he suspended all the laws against the Roman
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
2821
Catholics at home. King Philip IV. of Spain was in favor of the
marriage, but resolved to profit by the eagerness of James I. and make
him pay dearly for the match.
In 1623 Prince Charles and the Duke of Buckingham undertook a
romantic journey into Spain to see the Infanta and complete the
marriage contract. When they arrived at Madrid they were treated
with great respect by King Philip IV. ; but the insolent manners of
the Duke of Buckingham offended the haughty Spaniards ; and, as he
perceived that he would not find any favor from a Spanish queen
when Prince Charles became King of England, he used his great in-
fluence against the match, thus breaking off the negotiations with the
Spanish court. This result was celebrated in England with bonfires
and unbounded rejoicings. Prince Charles was affianced to Henrietta
Maria, sister of King Louis XIII. of France ; but before the marriage
was consummated King James I. died of the ague, March 27, 1625.
It was during the reign of James I. that Shakespeare died, A. D. 1616.
CHARLES I., the son and successor of James I., was in his twenty-
fifth year when he became King of England and Scotland. He had
been very popular with all classes before his accession, and the Eng-
lish people had hoped for much by the change of sovereigns. Charles
I. was a remarkably handsome man, with a body of middle stature, of
great natural vigor and finely proportioned. He was gracious and
dignified in his bearing, and " of a sweet but melancholy aspect."
He excelled in horsemanship and manly sports, and was endowed with
many of the qualities of an excellent sovereign.
Charles I. was unsurpassed in domestic virtue by any sovereign
that has reigned over England. He showed a good example to his
courtiers and subjects in the morality and regularity of his conduct.
He was moderate in all his habits and expenses, refined in his manners,
humane and gentle in his disposition, kind and affectionate by nature,
and a most tender husband and father. He was hasty in temper, but
generous and forgiving. He had great taste for art and literature,
and his mind was highly cultivated. He had extraordinary talents
for reasoning and argument ; but, on account of his indecision of char-
acter, he seldom acted as wisely as he could talk, and was frequently
swayed by the counsels of men of inferior capacity.
But unfortunately for King Charles I., he had imbibed his father's
ideas of absolute power; and he ascended the thrones of England and
Scotland with the resolute determination to make himself the absolute
master of his subjects. He considered himself superior to the laws
of the realm, and looked upon every effort to restrict his power within
the limits of the English Constitution as downright treason to the
crown. Ascending the English throne with such ideas of the " divine
Fruitless
Nuptial
Journey
of Prince
Charles
to Spain.
Death of
James I.
Charles
I., A. D.
1625-
1649.
His
Physical
Traits.
His
Char-
acter.
His
Doctrine
of the
•' Divine
Right of
Kings."
REVOLUTIONS IN El GLAND.
His
Falsity
and In-
sincerity.
His
Marriage
with the
Princess
Henrietta
Maria of
France.
The New
Queen's
Unpopu-
lar Act.
Constitu-
tional
Liberty
Absolute
Royal
Power.
The
Classes.
right of kings," at the most critical period of England's history, he.
was not likely to reform the evils from which England had suffered
so long.
Charles's fatal defect as a king was his falsity of character, which
canceled the most solemn engagements and deprived him of all claims
to confidence. It may have been his misfortune, rather than his crime,
that he was unable to believe in the wisdom or even in the honesty of
any theory of government but his own, or to perceive that his throne
could never be firm and stable until it was " broad-based upon the
people's will."
A few weeks after his accession, Charles I. married the Princess
Henrietta Maria, daughter of the murdered Henry IV. of France, to
whom he had been betrothed during the latter part of his father's
reign, as we have already noticed. This royal marriage was not
pleasing to the English people, as the new queen was a Roman Catholic.
A retinue of priests of her own religious faith accompanied her to Eng-
land, and these priests undertook to interfere in the affairs of the
English court to such an extent that numberless quarrels resulted
therefrom.
These priests induced the queen to make a pilgrimage to Tyburn,
the place for the hanging of the lowest malefactors, and where some
Roman Catholics had been executed during the reign of Henry VIII.
This proceeding excited such intense popular indignation in England
that the queen's French attendants were sent back to their own country.
The French court submitted an apology for their conduct, and the
queen was permitted to have a Roman Catholic bishop and twelve
Roman Catholics priests attached to her household.
Little had been heard of constitutional liberty in England during
the entire period that the Tudor dynasty occupied the English throne
— a result consequent upon the destruction of the mediaeval baronage
of England in the Wars of the Roses. As we have now come to the
threshold of a renewal of the struggle for English constitutional
liberty, a brief retrospect will render the course of events upon which
we are now about to enter more intelligible.
Mediaeval civilization in Europe was based on the Feudal System;
and in England both went down in the Wars of the Roses, along with
the proud baronage founded by the Norman Conqueror. The Wars
of the Roses reduced England to the verge of anarchy ; and a stable
throne was the only power that saved the country, or that was able to
save it, from total anarchy. All parties and classes of En ^lishmeD
therefore turned to the throne with the instinct of self-preservation.
The new English nobility, the landowners and the money? d classes,
remembering the communistic and leveling doctrines of Johi Ball and
THE FIRST TWO rTUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
the leaders of Wat Tyler's Rebellion, looked to the throne for protec-
tion from another peasant revolt.
The Roman Catholic Church, conscious of the silent but vigorous
growth of the ideas implanted by Wycliffe, turned to the throne to
save it from another reformation.
The English masses, having suffered from the evils of a disputed
succession, were ready to welcome any dynasty with sufficient strength
to save them from the horrors of another civil war.
The House of Commons — that great hope of the English nation
during the reigns of the Plantagenets — had degenerated into a mere
appendage of the crown, in consequence of a sweeping restriction of
the elective franchise and a wholesale corruption in the election of its
members ; and under some of the Tudor sovereigns it had become the
great instrument of royal oppression.
During the Tudor period the English sovereigns gradually came into
possession of all the powers of Church and State, thus making them-
selves absolute monarchs. It was natural that the sovereign should
become arbitrary. It was not strange or unnatural that he should
grow despotic.
But, even in the very midst of this absolute rule, silent forces were
sapping the foundations of this absolutism; and these forces were
destined to effect the overthrow of this absolute royal power in the
course of human events. The invention of the art of printing tended
to a general diffusion of knowledge and a consequent elevation of the
masses. An enlightened public sentiment concerning the relation of
sovereign and subject, that was far in advance of the theory and prac-
tice of the government, was silently growing up in England. As con-
victions of the sacredness of human rights grew strong, faith in the
doctrine of the " divine right of kings " grew weak. The advocates
of that doctrine claimed the Christian Scriptures as their authority,
basing their claims upon St. Paul's injunction: "Resist not the
powers that be, for they are ordained of God." As the kings were
" the powers that be," they claimed that resistance to them was opposi-
tion and disobedience to God.
As we have seen, James I. was a firm believer in the " divine right
of kings," and was extremely jealous of any encroachment on the
royal prerogative. He was resolved to preserve and extend the ab-
solute power which the Tudors had wielded; and, as we have seen, he
was consequently involved in a continual contest with the English Par-
liament, which was determined to assert its own rights and to uphold
the liberties of the English people. Though he repeatedly dissolved
Parliaments, the next were always sure to be more obstinate than their
predecessors.
VOL, 9—9
Catholic
Church.
The
Masses.
Degen-
eracy
of the
House of
Com-
mons.
Absolute
Rule
of the
Tudors.
Under-
mining
Forces
at Work,
James I.
and Par-
liament.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Charles I.
and Par-
liament.
Issue
Clearly
Defined.
Anti-
Catholic
Feeling.
English
Sym-
pathy
for the
Elector-
Palatine.
Charles I.
and the
House of
Commons.
The
King's
Arbitrary
Taxation
and Dis-
solution
of Par-
liament.
It was therefore evident that a collision between king and people
was at hand in England during the reign of James I. At his death
there was a brief lull in the civil storm that was soon to break over the
head of his son and successor. It will always be wondered how Charles
I. could be so thoroughly blind to the signs of the times and the spirit
of the age that he should not profit by his father's political errors,
but that he should obstinately pursue his father's foolish policy.
The struggle which was soon to hurry England into the throes of
revolution was defined very clearly. It was constitutional liberty
versus royal prerogative — an oppressed people against a tyrannical
king. The English people, whom the crown alone was able to rescue
from the robber barons during the reign of Henry II., and whom
the patriot barons alone could protect against royal tyranny during
the reign of Henry III. — this great English people had finally out-
grown dependence on king and baron, and eventually proved stronger
than both. This great people thus became the pioneers of modern
constitutional freedom against the " divine right of kings."
At the time of the accession of Charles I. public feeling in Eng-
land ran high against Roman Catholicism. The Thirty Years' War
in Germany, which had commenced in a contest between the Elector-
Palatine Frederick V. and Ferdinand II. of Austria for the crown of
Bohemia, had, as we have seen, widened into a life-and-death struggle
between Roman Catholics and Protestants.
In addition to the sympathy which English Protestants felt for
their brethren in Germany, they were naturally interested in behalf
of the Elector-Palatine because he was the son-in-law of King James I.
Spain having openly taken sides with the Emperor Ferdinand II. and
the Catholic cause, England had entered the lists against Spain, in
addition to sending a small army to the aid of the Elector-Palatine.
The war with Spain lagged through the indifference of the Duke
of Buckingham, whom Charles I. retained as Prime Minister, and to
whose pernicious influence the young king completely surrendered him-
self. As Charles I. began his reign with an empty exchequer he called
upon Parliament for a subsidy; but the House of Commons was now
composed of able and patriotic men, who loved their country and who
were keenly aware of the perils which menaced her. Said one of
these sturdy Commons : " England is the last monarchy who yet re-
tains her liberties. Let them not perish now!"
Suspicious of the king's intentions and watchful of the liberties
of England, the Commons House of Parliament granted the customs
called tonnage and poundage for but one year, instead of for the king's
lifetime. Charles I. resented this limitation and refused to accept
the vote, and then proceeded to levy the customs on his own authority,
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
2825
Parliament proceeded to discuss the public grievances, whereupon it
was dissolved by the angry king, who had fully resolved to enforce
the doctrine of the " divine right of kings." The king's resort to a
forced loan afforded but a temporary relief, and aroused the most
intense popular indignation. The English people were fully as re-
solved to assert their -rights and liberties as the king was to carry into
practice his notions of the royal prerogative.
An English expedition under the Duke of Buckingham against
Cadiz ended in failure, leaving King Charles I. deeply involved in
debt. In his necessities the king was obliged to summon a new Parlia-
ment. This Parliament convened in 1626 ; but, instead of voting a
grant of supplies to the king, the House of Commons, under the
guidance of that fearless patriot, Sir John Eliot, proceeded to impeach
the Ministers of the Crown. Charges of corruption against the Duke
of Buckingham were carried in the House; and Eliot, in a speech
of fiery eloquence, arraigned the royal favorite at the bar of the
House of Lords. The angry king sent the sturdy patriot to im-
prisonment in the Tower. The refusal of the Commons to act on
public affairs forced the baffled king to release the patriotic Eliot,
but their request for the dismissal of the Duke of Buckingham caused
the exasperated king to dissolve this Parliament also.
The illegal taxation, in the form of benevolences and forced loans,
which the king now resorted to, threw the whole kingdom into a fer-
ment and aroused the English people to resistance. Although many
of the clergy preached the doctrine of absolute passive obedience, men in
every part of England refused to give or lend to the king, and the royal
commissioners were driven from the towns with cries of " A Parlia-
ment ! a Parliament ! else no subsidies !" Poor men were punished for
their refusal by being drafted into the army or navy. Two hundred
gentlemen of fortune were imprisoned and finally brought before the
Council. Among these was the resolute John Hampden, that sturdy
patriot and lover of liberty whose name has ever since been cherished
by Englishmen. He declared that he " could be content to lend," but
he feared to bring upor himself the curse in Magna Charta against
all who violated that solemn compact between king and people. He
was accordingly punished by a still more severe imprisonment.
Though Spain and Catholic Germany were now in open hostility to
England, and though the war with Spain had resulted in miserable
failure, Charles I. had the rashness to rush into a war with France
also, at a time when he was utterly penniless and at variance with his
subjects. As he had broken the stipulation which had been made
between England and France when he became betrothed to the Princess
Henrietta Maria, which provided for toleration to the Roman Catholics
Popular
Indigna-
tion.
The New
Parlia-
ment's
Impeach-
ment of
the Duke
of Buck-
ingham.
Sir John
Eliot.
Popular
Resist-
ance to
Arbitrary
Taxation.
John
Hampden.
The War
with
Spain
and
France.
2826
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Disas-
trous
English
Naval
Expedi-
tion to
France.
The New
Parlia-
ment.
Petition
of Right.
Parlia-
ment's
Remon-
strance.
Uproar
in the
House of
Commons.
in England, Richelieu and Olivarez, the able Prime Ministers of France
and Spain respectively, planned a joint invasion of England. The
Duke of Buckingham sought to checkmate this Franco-Spanish scheme
of invasion by an attack on France. He sailed from England with a
large fleet to the relief of La Rochelle, the Huguenot stronghold,
which was then besieged by the French Catholics ; but his mismanage-
ment cost him two-thirds of his expedition and accomplished nothing.
This second naval disaster of the Duke of Buckingham, more humiliat-
ing than that against Cadiz, left King Charles I. still more deeply
in debt, thus forcing him to summon another Parliament.
The English people, now thoroughly aroused to a sense of the
danger with which their liberties were threatened, returned a House
of Commons more resolute in its hostility to the king than its pred-
ecessors. This Parliament of 1628 also demanded a redress of popu-
lar grievances as the condition on which it would vote a grant of money.
It arrayed its grievances and formulated its demands in a famous
document called the Petition of Right, A. D. 1628, which has justly
been styled " The Second Great Charter of English Liberties." After
enumerating the laws of Edward I. and Edward III. which guaranteed
the rights of the subject, and complaining that, in addition to arbitrary
taxes, imprisonments and executions, large bodies 01 soldiers and sailers
had recently been quartered in private houses, to the grat grievance
and vexation of the people, the petition closed by " humbly praying
His Most Excellent Majesty " for relief from all these grievances,
" according to the laws and statutes of this realm."
The king's refusal to sign this great document was answered by
Parliament in another state paper called a " Remonstrance on the State
of the Kingdom." The remonstrance was aimed at the Duke of
Buckingham ; and when that official's name was mentioned the Speaker
of the House of Commons forbade any further discussion, saying
that he held a royal order against permitting any member to speak
against the Ministers of the Crown.
This direct ~oyal interference with the right of free speech, one
of the most unquestioned privileges of the English Parliament, pro-
duced a scene in the House of Commons that words fail to describe.
The eloquent Sir John Eliot, who was addressing the House, sank into
his seat, stunned with amazement. After a few moments of death-
like silence, followed by sounds of suppressed excitement, the House was
in an uproar. Exclamations of amazement, grief and indignation
broke forth from the astounded Commons. Some wept and others
prayed. Members took the floor to address the House, and then sank
into their seats, overcome with emotion. The venerable Sir Edward
Coke finally arose, and in bitter invective denounced the Duke of
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
Buckingham as the author of all the perils that threatened the liberties
of England.
Alarmed by the dangers that menaced his favorite Minister, King Royal
Charles I. sought to allay the storm by signing the Petition of Right, ^f th"*
But it was too late. The House of Commons had resolved upon the Petition
destruction of the Duke of Buckingham, and pressed the " Remon-
strance on the State of the Kingdom;" whereupon the king hastily
prorogued the House. The public joy at the king's action in signing
the Petition of Right was signalized by ringing bells and blazing
bonfires, as the English people then thought that royal oppression
would be ended.
The Duke of Buckingham soon ceased to be an object of anxiety Assassin-
to either the king or the Commons. While preparing to take charge of the
of another expedition to relieve La Rochelle, he was assassinated at Duke of
Portsmouth, August 23, 1628, by a melancholy and enthusiastic Puri-
tan Irishman named Felton, who had been discharged from the public
service. The assassin had followed the obnoxious Prime Minister for
several days like a shadow, without being able to effect his purpose.
Finally, as the Duke of Buckingham was passing through a doorway,
he turned to speak to Sir Thomas Fryer, who was following him, when
Felton suddenly reached over Sir Thomas's shoulder and stabbed the
duke in the breast with a knife. The duke exclaimed: "The villain
has killed me!" He then pulled the knife from his wound and fell
dead.
No one had seen the blow or the person who inflicted it; but a Arrest,
hat being picked up, on the inside of which was sewed a paper con- o,"yic-
taining four or five lines of the " Remonstrance on the State of the tion and
Kingdom," it was conjectured that the hat belonged to the assassin; ^Cthe°n
and, while those present were conjecturing whose hat it might be, Assassin,
a man without a hat was seen walking very composedly before the
door. One of the bystanders cried out : " Here he is !" Others ran
up, inquiring : " Which is he ?" The man replied very sedately : " I
am he !" He disdained denying the murder, but gloried in the act,
saying that he had considered the Duke of Buckingham an enemy
of his country, and therefore deserving of death. When asked at
whose instigation he had murdered the duke he replied that they need
not trouble themselves as to that matter, that his conscience alone
prompted him to do the deed, and that no man on earth could induce
him to act contrary to its dictates. He was tried, condemned and
executed, dying with the same degree of constancy. There were
many who admired not only his fortitude, but also the deed for which
he met death on the scaffold, so fully was the murdered royal favorite
detested.
&-20
<>82S
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
"The
King Can
Do No
Wrong."
Another
Uproar
in the
House of
Commons.
The
King's
Personal
Govern-
ment.
English
Fleet at
La Ro-
chelle.
New
Royal
Policy.
The
King's
New
Ministers.
An explanation is necessary concerning the persistency with which
the House of Commons pursued the Duke of Buckingham even after
King Charles I. had assumed the responsibility of all the offenses
charged against him. It was then, as it is now, a settled principle of
the English monarchy that " the king can do no wrong." In case of
wrong doing by the government, the king's Ministers are held respon-
sible; and the only way to coerce or punish the king himself, without
the extreme resort of revolution, is the removal or punishment of the
Ministers.
The House of Commons, at its next session, in 1629, summoned the
collectors of the illegal taxes to its bar. They appeared, but refused
to answer, pleading the king's orders. The Speaker, Sir John Finch,
was about to adjourn the House, in obedience to a royal order. The
House was instantly in an uproar. The Speaker was held down in
his chair by some of the members, while others kept the doors locked
against the king's messenger until some resolutions offered by Sir John
Eliot were passed by acclamation rather than by vote. These reso-
lutions denounced " as a capital enemy of the kingdom any Minister
who shall seek to change the established religion or advise the levying
of taxes without consent of Parliament." The House then unlocked
its doors and allowed itself to be dissolved.
Upon the occasion of this dissolution, Charles I. announced that he
would rule thenceforth without a Parliament. The earnestness of the
king's threat was proven by eleven years of personal government, dur-
ing which Parliament was not once assembled, and which constitute
one of the gloomiest periods in English history. Nine of the leaders
of the popular party were imprisoned in the Tower, among whom was
the illustrious patriot, Sir John Eliot, who died within the walls of
that historic state prison.
The English fleet arrived before La Rochelle too late to relieve the
beleaguered Huguenots, who were forced to surrender that stronghold
under the very eyes of their English allies. Poverty soon compelled
King Charles I. to make peace with his foreign foes.
After the assassination of the Duke of Buckingham, Charles I. in-
augurated a new policy, amounting almost to a change in the Constitu-
tion of England. Hitherto the king had chosen his personal favorites,
or men whom he considered able statesmen, for his Ministers, regard-
less of the opinions or wishes of the people.
Charles I. now selected his chief Ministers from the leaders of the
popular party which had opposed the new royal assumptions, thus
making it their interest to maintain the power which had made them
its representatives. But the king did not derive all the advantages
from this policy that he expected ; as his views were opposed so directly
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
2829
to the opinions of the Puritans that the leaders whom he had gained
lost all influence with their party from that moment, and were even
pursued as traitors with implacable resentment.
The chief of these popular leaders who accepted office under the
king was Sir Thomas Wentworth, whom the king raised by successive
promotions to the rank of Earl of Strafford, and whom he made his
Prime Minister. Wentworth had spoken in favor of popular rights
only because of his hatred and jealousy of the Duke of Buckingham;
but no sooner had the assassination of that royal favorite made way
for his rise into power than he threw off the mask and used his great
abilities in building up the power of the crown. The king also raised
his new Prime Minister to the dignity of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.
After subduing that restless country, the new Lord Lieutenant raised
a fleet and army therefrom to enforce the royal will in England and
Scotland. The arbitrary court of the Star Chamber had jurisdiction
over offenses against the king.
Charles I. also attempted to establish the Episcopal Church on a
firmer basis, and to suppress Puritanism in England and Presbyterian-
ism in Scotland, with the view of checking the rapid growth of re-
publican principles among the English people. For the purpose of
accomplishing this end, the king appointed the zealous William Laud,
Bishop of London, to the dignity of Archbishop of Canterbury. Laud
caused the Cathedral of St. Paul's, in London, to be consecrated anew,
and the churches to be supplied with numerous images and ornaments,
and imposed upon the Puritans ceremonies and observances hitherto
unpracticed by the Church of England.
Archbishop Laud, who thus became the chief agent in a religious
tyranny which almost drove both England and Scotland to revolt, im-
proved every opportunity to preach submission to the " Lord's An-
ointed " in the payment of taxes ; and he demanded from English
Puritans and Scotch Presbyterians a strict conformity to his own rules
for public worship.
Charles I. had inherited his father's hatred of the Scotch Presby-
terians ; and, by a most illegal assumption of power, he sought to im-
pose upon Scotland the liturgy and usages of the Church of England.
He also renewed his father's law encouraging public sports and recrea-
tions on Sunday afternoons, and commanded all clergymen to read his
proclamation to that effect after morning service in the churches. For
refusing compliance with this order, multitudes of the Puritan clergy
were ejected from their livings by order of Archbishop Laud. The
new Primate invested the arbitrary court of High Commission with
jurisdiction over offenses against the Church, and that infamous
tribunal pronounced severe punishments upon all who manifested any
Sir
Thomas
Went-
worth,
Earl of
Strafford.
William
Laud,
Arch-
bishop of
Canter-
bury.
His
Religious
Tyranny.
Charles I.
and
Scotland.
Court
of High
Commis-
sion.
2830
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Prynne's
Punish-
ment.
Council
of the
North.
Puritan
Preach-
ers.
Puritan
Emigra-
tion to
New
England.
Massa-
chusetts,
Connect-
icut and
Maryland
Colonies.
At-
tempted
Emigra-
tion of
Hampden
and
Crom-
well.
opposition to his ecclesiastical tyranny. Thus Prynne, a Puritan,
was sentenced to be exposed in the pillory, to lose both his ears and
to be imprisoned for life, for writing a volume against dancing, masks
and theatrical amusements — affairs in which the king and his courtiers
delighted.
Besides the Courts of High Commission and the Star Chamber, there
was a Council of the North, which was vested with almost absolute
authority in the northern counties of England. The proceedings of
these arbitrary tribunals endangered civil and religious liberty in Eng-
land, and threw the whole kingdom into a ferment. The Puritan
preachers who had lost their offices traveled through the country, de-
nouncing the arbitrary measures of Laud as preliminary steps to the
reestablishment of popery in England; and, by their passionate ap-
peals, they excited the people against the king, the Primate and the
clergy.
Archbishop Laud's ecclesiastical tyranny led to a large Puritan
emigration to New England. Patents were secured and companies
organized for that purpose. The Puritans proceeded reluctantly to
the place of embarkation, with their eyes looking longingly toward the
distant refuge of the Pilgrim Fathers across the billowy deep, yet moist
with tears as they turned their backs upon their native land and upon
scenes that were dear to them; their hearts swelling with grief as the
shores of " Dear Old Mother England " faded from their sight, yet
rising to lofty purpose and sublime resignation as they abandoned
home and country to enjoy the blessings of religious freedom in a
strange land. They fully counted the cost of their forced migration
— the peril, poverty and hardships of their new homes in the American
wilderness.
The Puritan exodus continued until the New England coast was
dotted with settlements. John Endicott founded Salem in 1628.
John Winthrop and eight hundred followers founded Boston in 1630.
Lord Say-and-Seal and Lord Brooke obtained a charter for the settle-
ment of the region now comprising the State of Connecticut; and
under this charter the Rev. Thomas Hooker founded Hartford, while
the Rev. John Davenport founded New Haven. Lord Baltimore ob-
tained a grant of the territory now embraced in the State of Maryland,
as an asylum for persecuted English Roman Catholics ; and the colony
under this charter made its first settlement at St. Mary's in 1634.
During the interval between the dissolution of the Parliament of
1629 and the assembling of the Long Parliament in 1640 twenty thou-
sand Puritans had migrated from Old England to New England. It
is said that even John Hampden and Oliver Cromwell once embarked
for America, but the sailing of their ship was stopped by a Royal
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
2831
Order in Council. Even Charles I. never committed a greater blunder,
as these two sturdy patriots became the leaders of the mighty revolu-
tion which cost the king his throne and his life. Hampden had
purchased a tract of land on Narraganset Bay.
It was by the advice of the Earl of Strafford that Charles I. resolved
to govern without a Parliament. The lawless exactions of tonnage
and poundage were still continued. While the Court of High Com-
mission was doing its tyrannical work in the name of religion, the
Star Chamber was crushing out every vestige of civil liberty. The
officers of this infamous tribunal surpassed even the lawyers of Henry
VII. in the ingenuity with which they entrapped and robbed the people.
Obsolete laws and customs — such as had passed away with the feudal
times in which they had originated, but which had never been formally
repealed — were revived, and all who offended against them were fined.
Knighthood was forced on the gentry unless commuted with money.
The forest laws were executed with rigor, and poachers were punished
with heavy fines.
James I. had endeavored to check the growth of London by a royal
order defining its corporate limits. Charles I. ordered every house
since erected to be torn down unless its owner paid into the royal treas-
ury a sum equal to three years' rent. The execution of this relentless
order rendered hundreds of the poor houseless. Monopolies prevailed
in England to a greater extent under Charles I. than under Elizabeth
or James I., raising the price of the necessaries of life to an exorbitant
figure.
The climax of national forbearance was reached when King Charles
I. revived an old tax of the times of Alfred the Great and Ethelred II.,
called ship money, because it was used for the support of the navy.
From the times of those Saxon kings this duty had been imposed as a
war tax upon the maritime counties for the defense of the English
coast, and those monarchs had presumed only to call for this tax with
the advice and consent of the Witenagemote ; while Charles I. ordered
the levy of ship money upon all the English people, inland as well
as maritime, for general purposes and in time of peace, demanding it
by his own arbitrary will.
Sir John Eliot, the early champion of English constitutional liberty
under Charles I., was in his grave ; but he had a worthy successor in
the person of John Hampden, of whom we have already spoken, and
who was a Buckinghamshire farmer of moderate means. This illus-
trious patriot resolutely refused to pay any ship money, in order to
bring the matter to a legal test in the courts. Hampden was con-
sequently tried in the Exchequer Chamber in 1637, and the eyes of
all England were upon the proceedings. Even the Earl of Clarendon,
The Star
Chamber.
The
King's
Efforts
to
Restrict
London.
Ship
Money.
Trial of
John
Hampden
2832
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Hamp-
den's
Moral
Victory.
Scottish
Rebellion
against
Charles I.
His At-
tempts
to Force
Episco-
pacy on
the Scots.
Eis Book
of Canons
and
Liturgy.
in his History of the Rebellion, says that Hampden " grew the argu-
ment of all tongues, every man inquiring who and what he was, that
durst at his own charge support the liberty and prosperity of the
kingdom."
After a long delay, the Court of Exchequer gave its decision. Four
of the twelve judges, though holding their places only during the
king's pleasure, had the moral courage to give a sentence in favor of
the resolute patriot. Seven decided against him, and one gave an
evasive answer. The moral victory remained with Hampden ; for,
though he was defeated through royal influence, and though the court's
sentence placed all the property in England at the king's disposal, the
king's injustice was made apparent to all England, and the public
mind was educated to resistance.
While the royal assumptions were thus violently opposed in Eng-
land, the attempts of King Charles I. to enforce the Episcopal form of
worship in Scotland produced a formidable rebellion in that country
in 1637, which lasted several years. Charles I. had visited Scotland
in 1633, and was then crowned king of that country in the Abbey
Church of Holyrood with imposing ceremonies. On that occasion the
clergy gave great offense to the Scots by wearing the vestments of the
Church of England.
Charles I. increased the ill feeling of the Scots by issuing an order
to the Scottish clergy to wear surplices, and commanding the Scottish
bishops to wear rochets and sleeves instead of the Geneva cloak as
formerly. A change was also made in the manner of choosing the
Lords of the Articles, the committee which directed the legislation of
the Scottish Parliament, thus placing the choice entirely in the hands
of the bishops. This was done by the king's direct order, and the
members of the Scottish Parliament opposed to the measure addressed
a remonstrance to the king. He treated this remonstrance as a
political offense, and imprisoned Lord Balmerinoch, who presented it.
He afterward liberated the captive Scottish lord; but the Scots gen-
erally considered this action as the result of fear, and not as a mark
of the king's good will toward them.
In 1637 Charles I caused a book of canons to be prepared for the
government of the Scottish Church ; and on his own authority, without
the ratification of it by the Scottish Parliament, commanded the Scots
to use it instead of their Book of Discipline. Archbishop Laud soon
afterward prepared a liturgy, and King Charles I. commanded the
Scottish clergy to use it in their churches instead of the Book of
Common Order, which was then in general use by them.
The attempt of the Dean of Edinburgh to use the Episcopal liturgy
in St. Giles's Church, July 16, 1637, produced a violent tumult. The
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
2833
Dean and the Bishop of Edinburgh were driven from the church by
an enraged mob, amid cries of " Pope ! " " Antichrist ! " " Stone him ! "
Other riots ensued.
The king issued a proclamation calling upon the malcontents to
disperse to their homes, and refused to listen to the petitions which
were addressed to him from every portion of Scotland. His obstinacy
inflamed the popular discontent in Scotland, and the Episcopal bishops
and other members of the Privy Council were mobbed in Edinburgh.
At length a committee, composed of four members from each class
of Scotland — nobles, gentry, clergy and burgesses — and known as the
Tables, was formed to represent the Scottish people in their contest
with the government. This committee was more troublesome than the
mob; as it forced its way into the council chamber, where it insisted
on discussing the public grievances, and demanded the removal of the
Episcopal bishops.
The king replied by a threatening proclamation ; whereupon the
Scots renewed the Covenant, which this time contained a provision for
the overthrow of the Episcopal bishops. The previous Covenants had
been signed by the notables of Scotland only; but this National
Covenant, which was industriously circulated, was signed by nine-
tenth of the Scottish people of all classes, rich and poor, noble and
peasant, A. D. 1638. For this reason the national party of Scotland
were called Covenanters.
The closing paragraph of the National Covenant, showing both the
tenor of the Covenant and the temper of the Scottish people, was as
follows : " We promise and swear, by the name of the Lord our God,
to continue in the profession and obedience of the said religion, and
that we shall defend the same, and resist all the contrary errors and
corruptions, according to our vocation and the utmost of that power
which God has put into our hands, all the days of our life."
Later in the year 1638 King Charles I. sent the Marquis of Hamil-
ton to Scotland as Lord High Commissioner, fully empowered to adjust
all difficulties. The Covenanters demanded the obolition of the Court
of High Commission, the Episcopal canons and liturgy, and the sum-
moning of a free assembly of the Scottish Church and a free Scottish
Parliament. In accordance with his instructions, the Lord High Com-
missioner evaded a reply to the Scottish demands, for the purpose of
giving the king time to assemble his troops to force the Scots to
obedience.
Charles I. suddenly promised to grant the Scottish demands ; and an
assembly of the Scottish Church was summoned, which convened at
Glasgow, November 21, 1638, under the presidency of the Marquis of
Hamilton as Lord High Commissioner. Several days afterward an
Outbreak
in Edin-
burgh.
Royal
Procla-
mation.
Com-
mittee
of the
Tables.
Scottish
National
Covenant.
Its Last
Para-
graph.
Demands
of the
Cove-
nanters.
Scottish
Church
As-
sembly.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Its
Action.
Redac-
tion
of the
Highland-
ers by
the Cove-
nanters.
The
Scottish
and
Royal
Armies.
Pacifica-
tion of
Berwick.
Charles I.
and the
Scottish
Parlia-
ment.
English
Sym-
pathy
for the
Revolted
Scots.
effort was made to bring the Episcopal bishops to trial. The Marquis
of Hamilton then withdrew, and ordered the assembly to disperse. The
assembly refused to obey, and proceeded with the trial of the bishops,
deposing all of them and excommunicating eight of them. The
assembly also abolished the Episcopal canons and liturgy, and repealed
all the acts of assemblies since 1606.
The Earl of Huntley ruled the Highlanders of Scotland as the
king's lieutenant. The Highlanders had rejected the Covenant, and
the Covenanters resolved to force them to accept it. A strong army,
consisting largely of veterans who had served as auxiliaries in the
cause of the German Protestants in the Thirty Years' War, was raised
and placed under the command of the Earl of Montrose, who subdued
the Highlanders after a brief campaign, and compelled them to ac-
knowledge the authority of the Covenanters.
Another army of Scottish Covenanters under General Leslie, who
had served under the valiant King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden in the
Thirty Years' War, was sent to oppose the royal army which King
Charles I. was leading northward to reduce the Covenanters to sub-
mission. General Leslie took an admirable position commanding the
king's line of march; and Charles I., perceiving that he would cer-
tainly be defeated in case he attacked the Scottish general, consented
to treat with General Leslie for peace. By the treaty known as the
Pacification of Berwick, June 9, 1639, it was agreed that the questions
at issue between the king and his Scottish subjects should be referred
to a free assembly for adjustment, and that in the meantime both
armies should be disbanded and the Scottish fortresses surrendered to
the king.
An assembly was summoned and convened at Edinburgh, and this
assembly ratified all that the Glasgow assembly had done. The
Scottish Parliament assembled June 2, 1640, confirmed the acts of the
Edinburgh and Glasgow assemblies, and ordered every Scot to sign
the Covenant on penalty of severe punishment. King Charles I. ad-
journed the Scottish Parliament; but it assembled again in spite of
him, and appealed to France for assistance. Upon hearing of this
action of the Scottish Parliament, the king sent Lord Loudon, one
of the Scottish commissioners, to imprisonment in the Tower, and made
preparations to invade Scotland.
The king's arbitrary treatment of the Scots had aroused a strong
sympathy in England for them, as the English saw that the Coven-
anters were fighting in the cause of religious freedom against arbitrary
royal power. Charles I. therefore had much trouble in raising an
army in England to subdue the Scots, and the one which he collected
was mutinous and discontented. But the Scots raised a strong force,
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT. 2885
which crossed the border into England, August 20, 16-10, and took
possession of Durham, Tynemouth and Shields without striking a
blow ; while the Scottish army at home seized the Castles of Edinburgh
and Dumbarton. King Charles I. was again obliged to treat with
the Scots ; and by the Treaty of Ripon he granted all the demands of Treaty of
the Covenanters, while both armies were disbanded. The king visited lpon'
Edinburgh and summoned the Scottish Parliament, but he made no
effort to interfere with its action, and confirmed its right to meet once
in three years, A. D. 1641.
In the meantime the constitutional struggle in England was re- A Crisis
newed with increased vigor, and matters were speedily brought to a Kew Par.
crisis. When the zealous Scots, who went forth to battle with prayer, liament.
and who had imbibed the spirit as well as the faith of John Knox, had
marched into England and threatened York, King Charles I. found
himself obliged to summon another Parliament, after an interval of
eleven years, to solicit aid against the Scotch rebels.
The Parliament just summoned, instead of voting supplies against Dissolu-
the rebellious Scots, which they consented to do only upon condition the New
of a redress of grievances, began to attack the king's unlawful assump- Parlia-
tions and to discuss the grievances of the English people. In a fit of
exasperation Charles I. dissolved this Parliament after a stormy ses-
sion of three weeks. Said St. John, one of its members : " Things
must go worse before they go better." They quickly went worse.
A Great Council of Peers met at York as a last expedient, but ac- Advanc-
complished nothing except delay. The advancing Scots had reached ^d ^Q^
Newcastle and were on the march for York. Archbishop Laud was in
mobbed in London, and the Court of High Commission was broken up
at St. Paul's Cathedral. All England was on the verge of revolt
against the king, whose necessities forced him to summon another Par-
liament.
This Parliament, which assembled November 3, 1640, is known in The Long
history as the Long Parliament, on account of the extraordinary memf
length of its existence, which lasted thirteen years. Its leading mem-
bers were Sir Arthur Haslerig, John Hampden, John Pym and Oliver
Cromwell, who were opposed to absolute monarchical power and Epis-
copal church government, and who were staunch advocates of repub-
lican, or popular institutions.
Instead of affording the king any assistance against the Scottish Impeach-
insurgents, the Long Parliament entered into a secret league with them. Trial and
Parliament next impeached the Earl of Strafford for high treason, in Execution
endeavoring to overthrow the constitutional liberties of England ; but Eari Of
the letter of the law provided no penalty for this worst of political Strafford.
crimes, restricting its punishments to offenses against the king's person.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
John
Pym's
Threat.
The
King's
Vain
Efforts.
Fate of
Arch-
bishop
Laud.
Impor-
tant Bill.
Reform
Measures
of the
Long Par-
liament.
Both Houses of Parliament therefore passed a Bill of Attainder. The
king vainly endeavored to save his favorite Minister. The Commons
were resolved upon his destruction. After a trial of seventy days and
a dignified and eloquent defense, the Earl of Strafford was declared
guilty and condemned to death. After much hesitation and in a
moment of weakness, the king signed the death-warrant ; and the un-
fortunate Earl of Strafford was beheaded on Tower Hill, May 12,
1641. He died with firmness and resolution. The popular joy and
relief manifested itself in shouts of triumph, and bonfires blazed in
every city of England.
Thus was literally executed the threat of John Pym, one of the most
active of the Puritan members of the House of Commons, who, when
the Earl of Strafford had left the popular party to serve the king,
had said to him : " You have left us ; but we will not leave you while
your head is on your shoulders."
The king's signature to the death-warrant had been extorted from
him, but no suffering of his own caused Charles I. so severe a pang
as the execution of his faithful friend and servant. Even after sign-
ing the warrant the king had sent a letter to the House of Lords, en-
treating them to confer with the House of Commons, and to obtain the
consent of that body to a mitigation of the sentence or a delay in its
execution ; but the Commons were inexorable.
Archbishop Laud was also impeached by the Commons, and was
imprisoned in the Tower, while all his property was confiscated. Three
years afterward he was tried at the bar of the House of Lords, for
high treason in endeavoring to destroy the religious liberties of the
people of England. He was declared guilty, and was beheaded Janu-
ary 10, 1645.
On the very day of the sentence of the Earl of Strafford to death,
King Charles I. also signed a bill of vast importance, providing that
Parliament should not be dissolved, prorogued or adjourned without
its own consent, and that a Parliament should be held at least once in
three years.
The Long Parliament went about the work of reform in earnest.
The Courts of the Star Chamber and High Commission were abolished ;
patriots were released from prison; the judgment against John Hamp-
den was annulled; ship money and arbitrary taxation were again for-
bidden ; and the king's instruments for oppression were brought to
trial, from the judges who had decided against Hampden to the
sheriffs and custom-house officials who had collected the illegal taxes.
The Scots, whose military operations had made these procedings of the
English Parliament possible, were declared to have been " ever good
subjects " ; and a gift of sixty thousand pounds, in addition to their
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
2837
pay, was voted to them for their brotherly aid to the friends of liberty
in England. Perceiving the storm that was arising against them, the
Episcopal bishops voluntarily relinquished their seats in the House of
Lords, to avoid the expulsion which the popular party resolutely and
inexorably demanded.
In the meantime, during this memorable year 1641, a dangerous re-
bellion broke out in Ireland, as a result of the tyranny inaugurated by
the Earl of Strafford as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in 1633. This
tyranny had lasted seven years, and the Irish took advantage of that
statesman's execution in 1641 to assert their freedom by a rising to
overthrow English authority in the Emerald Isle. Religious zeal added
bitterness to political animosity.
The plan for a general Irish revolt was inaugurated by Roger
O'Moore, who had served in the Spanish army, and who was full of zeal
for the Roman Catholic Church. He imagined that, by a sudden
rising of the Catholic Irish, all the English and Scotch Protestant
settlers in Ireland might be massacred or driven from Irish soil, and
the independence of Erin restored. As a part of his plan was the
entire restoration of the Catholic religion in Ireland, he counted upon
the aid of the Catholic lords of the English Pale, most of whom joined
in the plot and concerted measures with O'Moore and Phelim O'Neill,
the most powerful native Irish chief.
The insurrection was to break out in all parts of Ireland on the
same day, when the forts were to be seized by the Irish rebels upon a
given signal. The secret had been well kept until the night before the
execution of the conspiracy, when it was betrayed by an Irishman
named Conolly, who informed the English authorities of the intended
attack upon Dublin Castle, in which a large quantity of arms and
ammunition were stored. Several of the conspirators were instantly
arrested, but it was too late to check the progress of the revolt, which
burst forth with tremendous fury, October 23, 1641.
The English and Scotch colonists of Ulster, who were totally un-
aware of the existence of such a dreadful conspiracy, suddenly found
themselves surrounded by mobs of infuriated Irishmen armed with
staves, pitchforks and other rude weapons, which they brandished aloft
with the most frightful yells. One of the most barbarous and brutal
massacres recorded in all history ensued, sparing no age, sex or condi-
tion.
Without provocation and without resistance, the defenseless English
and Scotch settlers, being Protestants, were murdered in cold blood by
their nearest Irish neighbors, with whom they had long maintained a
continued intercourse of kindness and good offices. The houses of
these settlers were set on fire or leveled with the ground. Where the
Serious
Rebellion
in
Ireland.
Roger
O'Moore
and His
Plans.
First Out-
breaks.
Massacre
in Ulster.
The
Victims.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Bigotry
of the
Assas-
Spread
of the
Rebellion.
Refugees
in
Dublin.
Desola-
tion of
Ireland.
Parlia-
ment's
Accusa-
tion.
The
King's
Decision.
unfortunate owners endeavored to defend themselves, their wives and
their children they all perished together in the flames.
In the midst of these atrocities, the sacred name of religion re-
sounded on every side, not to stay the hands of the assassins, but to
enforce their blows and to harden their hearts against every movement
of human sympathy. The English and Scotch settlers, as heretics,
abhorred of God and detested by all good Catholics, were marked by
the Irish priests for slaughter.
The flames of rebellion spread from Ulster to every part of Ireland.
In the provinces of Leinster, Munster and Connaught the English and
Scotch who were not massacred were driven from their homes, robbed
of all their clothes, and left exposed naked and defenseless to perish
by the winter frosts and storms.
Only Dublin remained to the English, and the failure of the plot
there preserved in Ireland the remains of the English name. The
roads were crowded with multitudes of wretched refugees hastening
to that city ; and when the gates were opened these fugitives presented
to the view of the astonished inhabitants a scene of misery which words
fail to describe.
The number of English and Scotch Protestants who thus fell vic-
tims to Irish Catholic bigotry has been estimated at from forty thou-
sand to two hundred thousand. The war which followed this rebell-
ion continued ten years, and reduced Ireland to extreme poverty and
misery. Portions of the unhappy country that escaped the ravages of
fire and sword were desolated by famine and pestilence. The plague
ravaged Ireland more or less during the whole of this unhappy period,
and was supposed to have been caused by the unwholesome food which
the people were obliged to eat.
Parliament accused the court, and particularly the queen, of in-
stigating the Irish rebellion and the massacre, and declared that the
Catholic and Episcopal bishops and the court had entered into a plot
for the destruction of religious liberty in England. So thoroughly
did Parliament distrust the king that it took upon its own hands the
task of dealing with the Irish rebellion.
King Charles I., exasperated at the increasing demands of the
Commons, perpetrated one rash act which hastened civil war. He
had for some time looked on bitterly but helplessly while the ab-
solutism in which he had sought to intrench himself was rudely swept
away. Conscious that his throne was tottering to its fall, he en-
deavored by one bold stroke to crush all opposition to his will and to
reestablish his lost authority.
The king's blow was aimed directly at the House of Commons. The
Commons had refused to surrender five of their boldest leaders —
THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND PARLIAMENT.
2839
Haslerig, Hollis, Hampden, Pym and Strode — at the king's demand;
and the next day Charles I., with three hundred soldiers, went in person
to the hall of the House of Commons to arrest these five leaders,
January 5, 1642, Leaving the soldiers outside the chamber, the king
entered the hall alone, all the members of the House rising to receive
him. The Speaker vacated the chair, and the king occupied it. After
seating himself he told the Commons that he was sorry for the occasion
that had forced him thither; that he had come in person to sieze the
five members whom he had accused of high treason, seeing that they
would not deliver them to his sergeant-at-arms. He then looked over
the hall to see if the accused were present ; but they had escaped a few
minutes before he had entered, and the king remarked : " I see my
birds have flown." With the expectation that the Commons would
send the accused members to him, and a threat to secure them for
himself it they would not, the baffled king abruptly left the chamber.
Thus disappointed, perplexed, and not knowing on whom to rely,
the king next proceeded to the Common Council of the city of London,
and made his complaints to that body. On his way thither he was
greeted with cries of " Privilege ! privilege !" from the angry populace.
The Common Council answered his complaints only with a con-
temptuous silence ; and, on his return, one of the populace, more insolent
than the others, cried out : " To your tents, O Israel !" This was a
watchword among the ancient Jews when they intended to abandon
their kings.
By his rash act Charles I. offered a flagrant insult to the House of
Commons and violated a fundamental law of the realm. The crisis
had now arrived. The occasion being too solemn for business, the
House of Commons adjourned. The next day the king issued a
proclamation branding the five accused members as traitors and order-
ing their arrest. London was in a tumult, and the city rose as one
man for the defence of the accused. The citizens sheltered the ac-
cused members, and their train-bands held the city and guarded the
House of Commons. These train-bands escorted the historical five
back to their seats amid the cheers of the excited populace, the river
and the streets by which they passed being guarded by cannon and
men-at-arms.
After returning to Windsor, King Charles I. began to reflect on
the rashness of his recent proceedings, and when too late he resolved
to make some atonement. He accordingly apologized to Parliament
in a humiliating message, in which he informed the Commons that he
desisted from his recent violent proceedings against the accused mem-
bers, and assured them that upon all occasions he would be as careful
of their privileges as of his crown or his life. Thus, while the king's
VOL. 9—3
His Rash
Blow
at the
House of
Commons
Charles I.
and the
Common
Council of
London.
The
Accused
Members
and the
Citizens
of
London.
The
King's
Humili-
ating
Apology
.^840
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Encroach-
ments
of the
Com-
mons.
former violence had rendered him hateful to the Commons, his pres-
ent submission rendered him contemptible.
From this time Parliament encroached more and more on the royal
prerogative, until scarcely a vestige of monarchical power remained.
The Commons now demanded that the appointment of Ministers of
State and of military and naval commanders should depend upon
their approval. The Commons also required that the Tower of Lon-
don, several of the sea-ports and the management of the navy should
also be given into their possession. When Parliament demanded that
the king should relinquish the command of the army for a certain
period His Ma j esty angrily replied : " No, not for one hour ! " This
refusal dispelled all hopes for a peaceful settlement of difficulties, and
both parties resolved upon an appeal to arms.
Begin-
ning
of the
Civil
War.
Cavaliera
and
Round-
heads.
Independ-
ents and
Presby-
terians.
SECTION II.— CIVIL WAR AND FALL OF MONARCHY
(A. D. 1642-1649).
THE breach between King Charles I. and Parliament continually
widened ; and in the summer of 1642 the king withdrew from London,
retiring to York, where he declared war against Parliament. On the
25th of August, 1642, Charles erected the royal standard at Notting-
ham, but it was soon blown down by the violence of the wind. For the
next six years English soil was reddened with English blood shed in
civil war. Englishmen fought against Englishmen to decide the
momentous issue of constitutional liberty against royal prerogative —
the question of the inalienable rights of the English people against
the " divine right of kings," thus forced upon them by the arbitrary
action of the royal House of Stuart.
On the side of the king were the nobility and the gentry, the Ro-
man Catholic and Episcopal clergy, and all the advocates of the
Established Church and of absolute monarchy. The whole of the
king's party were called Cavaliers. On the side of Parliament were the
Puritans, all who advocated a reform in Church and State, and all
believers in republican principles. All the adherents of Parliament
received from their enemies the nickname of Roundheads, because their
hair was cropped close to their heads. London and the other great
cities of England were on the side of Parliament, excepting Oxford,
which remained loyal to the king.
The opponents of the king were divided into several factions. The
Independents, who were Puritans in religious belief and republicans in
political faith, aimed at the overthrow of the monarchy ; while the
Presbyterians, or moderate party, merely wished to put an end to the
abuses of the royal power, but not to deprive the king of his crown.
CIVIL WAR AND FALL OF MONARCHY.
2841
The two great parties which were now arrayed against each other
in civil war — the one democratic, and the other aristocratic ; the one
striving for progress and reform, and the other adhering to the tradi-
tions of the past — have continued to struggle for supremacy to the
present day, under the names of Whig and Tory, Liberal and Con-
servative.
The royal and Parliamentary parties differed from each other almost
as much in dress as in principles. The Cavalier costume consisted of a
tunic of silk or satin with slashed sleeves ; an elegant lace collar adorn-
ing the neck, and a short cloak hanging gracefully over one shoulder.
Short full trowsers reached almost to the top of the wide boots, which
extended half-way up the calf of the leg. The head was covered with
a broad-brimmed beaver hat, adorned with an elegant band and a plume
of feathers. The hair hung in curls over the shoulders, and the beard
was trimmed to a point ; while the love-locks, the tress on the left side,
were tied up by a pretty colored ribbon. The love-locks were so obnox-
ious to the Puritans that John Pym wrote a quarto volume against them.
The Puritan Roundheads wore a cloak of sad-colored brown or black,
a plain linen collar laid carelessly down on the plaited cloth, and a hat
with a high, steeple-shaped crown over their closely-clipped or thin,
straight hair.
The Cavaliers were as gay in their manners as in their dress, thus
presenting a marked contrast to the gloomy fanaticism of the Round-
heads. The rigid severity of the Puritans tolerated no recreations,
except such as were afforded by the singing of hymns and Psalms.
They looked upon theaters, dances and all other amusements as sinful
frivolities. They regarded horse-racing and bear-baiting — popular
diversions of that period — as wicked enormities.
The commanders of the king's armies were his nephew, Prince Ru-
pert of the Palatinate, and the Marquis of Newcastle. Prince Rupert
was the son of the king's sister Elizabeth and her husband, the unfor-
tunfHe Elector-Palatine Frederick V., who had tried to become King
of 3ohemia, and whose action brought on the great Thirty Years'
War in Germany. Prince Rupert was a brave soldier, but was too
rash and impetuous to be a rood general.
The popular leaders on the Parliamentary side were John Hampden,
John Pym and Sir Henry Vane, the last of whom had severel years
before been Governor of the Puritan colony of Massachusetts Bay in
New England. The chief commanders of the armies of Parliament
were Sir Thomas Fairfax and the Earl of Essex, the latter of whom
was the son of Queen Elizabeth's wayward favorite. As the struggle
advanced, Oliver Cromwell became the rising star on the Parliamentary
side, as we shall presently see.
The Two
Great
Parties.
Costumes
of the
Rival
Parties.
Their
Manners.
The
Royal
Com-
manders.
Prince
Rupert.
The
Parlia-
mentary
Leaders.
2842
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
The
Parlia-
mentary
Armies.
First
Two
Years
of the
War.
Battle of
Edge
Hill.
Cam-
paign of
1643.
Death of
John
Hampden.
Royalist
Victories
in 1643.
First
Battle of
Newbury
and
Death
of Lord
Falkland.
At the beginning of the civil war Parliament appointed lieutenants
for all the counties of England, and levied troops in the king's name
for the defense of the kingdom against the king himself. The armies
which Parliament had raised to crush the Catholic rebellion in Ireland
were retained in England and placed under the command of the Earl
of Essex. Citizens brought their plate, and women their ornaments,
even their thimbles and wedding-rings, to be melted up in the service
of the " good cause " against the " Malignants," as the Cavaliers were
called by their Puritan foes. On the royal side the queen sailed for
Holland to pawn the crown jewels for arms and ammunition.
While the king raised the royal standard at Nottingham, August 25,
1642, the Earl of Essex mustered the Parliamentary forces at North-
ampton. During the first two years of the war the king's forces were
victorious in almost every encounter with the undisciplined troops in
the service of Parliament ; but as the latter gained skill and experience
they became superior to any troops that the king could bring into the
field.
The first great battle of the civil war was fought at Edge Hill, in
Warwickshire, October 23, 1642, between the royal army under Prince
Rupert and the Parliamentary forces under the Earl of Essex ; about
five thousand men being left dead on the field, and the battle being inde-
cisive.
The campaign of 1643 was generally favorable to the royal cause.
Early in the spring the Parliamentary forces under the Earl of Essex
captured Reading, the capital of Berkshire; but about the same time
the royal generals conquered Cornwall in the West and the four northern
counties — Durham, Northumberland, Cumberland and Westmoreland.
On June 18, 1643, the Parliamentary party experienced a severe loss
in the death of the brave, upright and illustrious John Hampden, who
was killed in a skirmish with Prince Rupert at Chalgrove Field, in
Oxfordshire.
The king's forces were victorious at Stratton Hill, in Cornwall; at
Atherton, in Yorkshire ; at Lansdowne Hill, near Bath ; and at Round-
way Down, near Devizes, in Wiltshire. By the capture of the im-
portant city of Bristol, Prince Rupert became master of the West of
England. The king besieged Gloucester, which was relieved by the
Earl of Essex, September 5, 1643.
In the first battle of Newbury, in Berkshire, September 20, 1643, the
royal army was repulsed, and the good Lucius Gary, Lord Falkland, was
slain. He was a true patriot, and had opposed the tyrannical assump-
tions of King Charles I. ; but when Parliament attempted to deprive the
king of every vestige of power, and to overthrow the Established
Church, he took sides with the king, hoping that Charles I. would
CIVIL WAR AND FALL OF MONARCHY.
2843
eventually concede the just demands of the English people. He there-
fore fought on the side of the king. On the morning of the fatal daj
he was heard to remark : " I am weary of the times, and foresee much
misery to my country, but believe that I shall be out of it ere night."
In 1644 the king secured the aid of some Irish Roman Catholics, but
his plan to bring an Irish army into England to slaughter his English
foes on their own soil was resented by his own English supporters, and
large numbers of his officers of all grades resigned their commissions in
the royal army and deserted to the Parliamentary side. In the same
year Parliament secured the alliance of the Scots by entering into the
Solemn League and Covenant with them, by which both parties bound
themselves to strive for the extirpation of " popery and prelacy, super-
stition, heresy, schism and profaneness," and to uphold the rights of
Parliament in proper regard to the royal authority .
In the meantime the king called a Parliament of his own at Oxford,
to oppose the designs of the Parliament at Westminster; but after this
shadow of a Parliament had voted a grant of money to the king it was
prorogued, and was never again convened.
Victory crowned the arms of Parliament after the sturdy Hunting-
donshire Puritan, Oliver Cromwell, took the field in the cause of God and
liberty, at the head of his invincible Ironsides — a body of pious cavalry-
men, who spent their leisure in prayer, Psalm-singing and Bible-read-
ing.
An army of Scotch Covenanters marched into England to assist the
forces of Parliament, while King Charles I. called over his troops from
Ireland. A large force of these royal troops were defeated and cap-
tured at Nantwich by Sir Thomas Fairfax, who afterward united with
the Scots in laying siege to York. Prince Rupert advanced with the
royal army to raise the siege; but he was overwhelmingly defeated at
Marston Moor, about five miles from York, July 2, 1644, with the loss of
all his artillery, Cromwell's Ironsides being chiefly instrumental in achiev-
ing the Parliamentary victory. This great defeat of the royal army
was partly due to the impetuosity of Prince Rupert. The battle of
Marston Moor gave the Parliamentary forces possession of the whole
North of England.
The royalists defeated the Parliamentarians under Sir William Wal-
ler at Cropredy Bridge, in Oxfordshire; and in the second battle of
Newbury, October 27, 1644, the king broke through the Parliamentary
army under the Earl of Manchester and reached Oxford.
The Puritans now banished the Book of Common Prayer from re-
ligious worship, and substituted the Calvinistic form of worship and
church government for the Episcopal. They also caused images and
ornaments to be taken from the churches and forbade festivities. But
5—21
Irish
Royalists
and
Scotch
Cove-
nanters.
The
King's
Parlia-
ment.
Oliver
Cromwell
and His
Ironsides.
Battle of
Marston
Moor.
Royalist
Refeat.
Second
Battle of
Newbury.
Presby-
terians
and Inde-
pendents.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
The Self-
Denying
Ordi-
nance.
The New
Model.
Royalist
Ravages.
Battle of
Naseby.
the Puritans were divided into two great parties — the Presbyterians and
the Independents — between whom the greatest animosity already pre-
vailed. The Presbyterians, or moderate Puritans, inclined toward the
support of monarchical and aristocratic institutions, and longed for the
establishment of their Church, to the exclusion of all others, and op-
posed toleration. The Independents, or radical Puritans, held demo-
cratic, or republican views in regard to civil government, and desired
toleration for all Christian faiths.
Oliver Cromwell belonged to the Independents ; while the Earl of
Essex, who held the chief command of the Parliamentary forces, be-
longed to the Presbyterians. The Independents caused the enactment,
by Parliament, of the Self-denying Ordinance, which allowed no member
of Parliament to hold a command in the army. The Earl of Essex
was therefore compelled to resign ; and Sir Thomas Fairfax, an able
general, was appointed to the chief command of the army of Parlia-
ment. Cromwell, who had been one of the most enthusiastic supporters
of the Self-denying Ordinance, hastened to resign his command; but
through the influence of Fairfax, who felt that Cromwell's services in
the army were necessary to insure the overthrow of the royal party,
the Parliament dispensed with the Self-denying Ordinance in Cromwell's
case, and he was permitted to retain his position.
With the consent of Fairfax, the commander-in-chief of the Parlia-
mentary forces, Cromwell now introduced the New Model of discipline
into the Parliamentary army. His first aim was to collect a force of
honest, self-respecting, God-fearing men ; and another such an army
probably never was seen. The soldiers spent their leisure hours in
studying the Scriptures and in mutual exhortations to a godly life.
Wherever they moved they respected very man's house and field, and
honestly paid for all provisions.
The king's army, on the contrary, though superior at first in military
discipline, was worse than swarms of grasshoppers to the districts which
it visited. The wild young Cavaliers under the command of Prince
Rupert had learned their occupation among the direful scenes of the
Thirty Years' War in Germany, where the burning of villages and the
devastation of harvest-fields were matters of daily occurrence. The
citizen-soldiery of Parliament, called from their looms and desks, ere
long acquired the necessary discipline; while the gallantry of the
Cavaliers scarcely compensated the royal cause for their disgraceful
misbehavior.
Some efforts at peace having failed, the civil war again burst forth
with all its fury. The army of King Charles I. was completely over-
thrown and his cause was utterly ruined in the desperate battle of
Naseby, in Northamptonshire, June 14, 1645. The Parliamentary
CIVIL WAR AND FALL OF MONARCHY. 2845
forces were commanded by Fairfax, Skippon, Cromwell and Ireton;
and the royalists by the king, Prince Rupert, Lord Astley and Sir
Marmaduke Langdale. The defeat of the royal army was caused, in
a great measure, by the rashness and impatience of Prince Rupert, who
overruled the more prudent judgment of the king. Rupert, with the
right wing of the royal cavalry, dashed with the most fiery impetuosity
upon the Parliamentary left wing, commanded by General Ireton, Crom-
well's son-in-law. At the same time Cromwell, with the Parliamentary
right wing, assailed the royal left wing; while the centers of the two
armies, led respectively by Fairfax and the king, were struggling des-
perately. The Parliamentary left was thoroughly annihilated, and
Ireton was made a prisoner; but Rupert lost precious time in an un-
necessary pursuit of Ireton's broken forces, when he should have gone
to the aid of the king. In the meantime Cromwell with his Ironsides
defeated the royal cavalry, after which he flew to the aid of the Parlia-
mentary center, which was beginning to give way before the royalists.
Cromwell and his Ironsides, who insured victory wherever they appeared, Ruin
soon put the king's infantry to a total rout ; and Charles I., seeing that R0yal
the day was lost to his cause, retired with his shattered forces, leaving Cause.
the field, all his baggage and cannon and five thousand prisoners in the
hands of the victorious Parliamentarians.
Among the king's captured baggage were found papers revealing Papers
his plot with the Irish Catholic rebels, conceding all their wild demands CaPtured-
on condition of their aid to the royal cause against the forces of the
English Parliament.
By their victory at Naseby the Parliamentarians obtained possession King
of all the strong cities in the kingdom, such as Bristol, Bridgewater, ^ Prisoner
Bath and Chester. Exeter was besieged and taken by Fairfax, where- to the
upon the king and his broken hosts retreated to Oxford, which Fairfax
and Cromwell were preparing to besiege. Rather than be taken
prisoner by his enemies, and hoping to find respect and kind treatment
among his Scotch subjects, Charles I. went into the camp of the Scots
at Newark, May 5, 1646; but, instead of treating him as their king,
the Scots placed a guard around him and kept him as a prisoner. The
fanatical Scotch preachers, unable to restrain their zeal, insulted him to
his face, and, in sermons preached in his presence, bitterly reproached
him as a wicked tyrant.
One of these fanatical Scotch preachers ordered the fifty-second The King
Psalm to be sung: «J*»
Preach-
" Why dost thou, tyrant, boast thyself. en
Thy wicked deeds to praise?"
Whereupon the king stood up, and, with a dignity and meekness that
2846
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
The War
in
Scotland.
The
Marquis
of Wor-
cester.
Colonel
Sir Henry
Washing-
ton.
Presby-
terians
and Inde-
pendents.
Presby-
terian
Intoler-
ance.
Negotia-
tions
with the
King.
affected even the rigid enthusiasts, called for the fifty-sixth Psalm,
which was sung accordingly :
" Have mercy, Lord, on me, I pray,
For men would me devour!"
In Scotland in the meantime the Marquis of Montrose had deserted
the Covenanters and raised an army of Irish and Highlanders, with
which he defeated the Covenanters at Tibbermuir, near Perth, in 1644 ;
at Alford, in Aberdeenshire, in 1645 ; and at Kilsyth, in Stirlingshire,
in 1645. But he was utterly defeated at Philiphaugh, near Selkirk, by
the Covenanters under General Leslie, September 15, 1645.
The captive king was now obliged to issue orders for all his troops
to submit to the triumphant Parliament. The venerable Marquis of
Worcester, then over eighty-four years of age, held out in Rayland
Castle until reduced to the greatest extremity, and was the last man in
England to lay down his arms. Colonel Sir Henry Washington, an
ancestor of General George Washington, fought on the king's side,
leading a storming party at Bristol, and defending Worcester against
the Parliamentary forces in 1646.
Although the Great Civil War was now vitually over, religious dis-
sensions raged with the greatest fury. As we have already seen, the
king's enemies were divided into the Presbyterian and Independent
parties. The most inveterate animosity now existed between these two
factions. The Presbyterians had a majority in Parliament, while the
Independents had a majority in the army. The Presbyterian majority
in Parliament proceeded to reorganize the Church of England on the
Presbyterian plan, while the Independents contended for religious free-
dom and a separation of Church and State.
The perils that had menaced civil liberty in England had passed
away when the king surrendered to Lord Leven, the Scottish commander
at Newark; but the religious intolerance to which the Presbyterian
majority in Parliament still clung became well-nigh as dangerous to
the state as the absolutism which had gone down in blood on the field
of Naseby. The Presbyterians had abolished the civil despotism, only to
impose a religious tyranny upon the English nation.
The Presbyterian and Independent parties each sought reconcilia-
tion and alliance with King Charles I., with the view of advancing its
own success ; the Independents on the basis of religious toleration, and
the Presbyterians on the adoption of the Scotch Covenant. The royal
captive rejected the offers of both parties, because he hoped to induce
one or the other to accept his own terms. He wrote : " I am not with-
out hope that I shall be able to draw either the Presbyterians or the
Independents to side with me for extirpating one another, so that I
CIVIL WAR AND FALL OF MONARCHY.
2847
shall be really king again." A Presbyterian asked : " What will be-
come of us, now that the king has rejected our proposals?" An In-
dependent replied : " What would have become of us had he accepted
them?"
The king believed that he had freed himself from the hostility of
the Scots by conceding all their demands, and that he might count more
on the affection and good will of the subjects among whom he had
been born than of the new people among whom his father had come
as a foreigner ; but he still refused to sign the Covenant or to accept
the terms which the English Parliament offered him. The Scots, the
royalist officers and even the queen urged him with tears to provide
for his safety in this way.
When the English Parliament was informed that the king was in the
hands of the Scots it began to negotiate with them for the possession of
his person. As he obstinately refused to sign the Covenant, the Scots
finally surrendered him into the hands of commissioners appointed by the
English Parliament, upon receiving four hundred thousand pounds'
sterling, the amount due them as pay, February, 1647. The captive
king selected two of the commissioners, Mr. Herbert and Mr. Harring-
ton, to attend him, in place of his own servants, who had been dis-
missed. The Scots were ever afterward ashamed of the reproach of
having sold their sovereign to his inveterate foes.
The Presbyterians, thinking that their victory was now assured, as-
sumed a more decided stand by establishing presbyteries throughout
England, and voting to disband the old Parliamentary army, which was
Independent, and to organize a new one with Presbyterians at its head ;
but the officers and troops of the old army, instigated by Oliver Crom-
well, the leader of the Independents, refused to disband without an as-
surance of religious toleration, or until its work was completed and
English freedom established on a secure basis.
Parliament was then more dangerous than the king, as it enacted a
law in its sectarian zeal more ferocious than even the persecuting
statutes of Henry VIII. or " Bloody Mary." By this terrible statute
the death penalty was fixed upon all who should deny the doctrine of
the Trinity, or Christ's divinity, or the inspiration of the Scriptures,
or the resurrection of the body ; while persons who believed that " man
by nature hath free will to turn to God," or who denied the lawfulness
of " Church government by Presbytery," were to be punished with im-
prisonment. Though this terrible statute was never enforced, its en-
actment showed the danger and justified extraordinary means of resist-
ance.
The triumph of Parliament under its Presbyterian majority was of
short duration ; as a body of troopers under an officer named Joyce,
The King
and the
Scots.
The King
in the
Power
of the
Parlia-
ment.
Parlia-
ment
and the
Army.
Parlia-
ment's
Bloody
Statute.
2848
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
The King
in the
Power
of the
Army.
Cromwell
and the
King.
The
Queen's
Letter
to the
King.
The
King's
Reply
and Its
Contents.
His
Escape
to the
Isle of
Wight.
secretly sent for that purpose by Cromwell, surrounded Holmby House,
in which the king was detained under the charge of the commissioners
of Parliament, and placed him in the custody of the army, June, 1647.
Parliament openly charged Cromwell with inciting the act, and Crom-
well did not deny the charge, but marched to London and subjected the
city and Parliament to his authority.
Cromwell now reinstated the captive king at Hampton Court, where
he lived with dignity and with every appearance of personal freedom,
though under guard. Cromwell and his son-in-law, General Ireton,
desired to spare the king's life, and entered into negotiations with the
royal captive ; but they discovered, as Parliament had before discovered,
that the king's word and promises meant nothing. With his char-
acteristic insincerity, Charles I. intended to violate his plighted word
and to deceive the victorious party in whose mercy he was. Had he
possessed the least sincerity he might have saved his life and his throne,
but his treachery to both Presbyterians and Independents sealed his fate.
The queen wrote a letter to her royal husband, reproaching him for
having made too great concessions to " those villains." These con-
cessions were mainly that Cromwell should be Lord Lieutenant of Ire-
land for life ; that an army should be kept in that island under the com-
mand of Cromwell himself, and that Cromwell should be honored with
a garter. The queen's letter was intercepted, and was then forwarded
to the captive king.
Cromwell and Irton, disguised as troopers, found the king's letter in
answer to the queen's in the possession of the messenger at the Blue
Boar Inn in Holborn. In his letter the king told his wife that she
should leave him to manage matters, as he was better informed of all
the circumstances than she could possibly be; but that she might be
entirely easy in regard to all the concessions that he should make to
" those villains " ; as he should know in due time how to deal with " the
rogue," who, instead of a garter, should be fitted with a hempen cord.
This letter sealed the king's fate. Cromwell thus discovered that he
was dealing with one who would violate every pledge that he had made
as soon as he was reinstated on his throne, and would make a jest of
putting a halter around his neck as the practical fulfillment of his
promise of the garter.
In November, 1647, the captive king, eluding his guards, escaped
to the Isle of Wight, whose governor, Colonel Hammand, conducted
him to Carisbrook Castle, where he was detained as a prisoner, though
treated with every mark of respect, as before ; but when the royal cap-
tive attempted to escape from Carisbrook Castle he was deprived of
communication with his friends, and even of the attendance of his ser-
vants.
CIVIL WAR AND FALL OF MONARCHY.
The captive Charles I. was still stirring up war between his English
and Scotch kingdoms by secret agents, while royalist outbreaks con-
vulsed every portion of England. The Scottish Covenanters, ashamed
of the reproach of having sold their sovereign, sent an army under
the Duke of Hamilton into England, in 1648. But Cromwell routed
the invading army of Scots at Preston, in Lancashire, with terrific
slaughter, August 18, 1648; after which he pushed across the border
into Scotland, and reinstated the Marquis of Argyle in power at Edin-
burgh. In the meantime General Sir Thomas Fairfax had quelled the
royalist risings in Kent and Essex.
In September, 1648, Parliament entered into negotiations with the
captive king, and the commissioners of Parliament were moved to tears
at sight of the change that had taken place in the king's aspect and at
beholding his " gray and discrowned head." Cromwell, after sub-
duing the Scots, returned to England and hastened to London ; and a
body of troopers secretly sent by him again seized the king and con-
fined him in Hurst Castle, on the coast of Hampshire, opposite the Isle
of Wight, to the utmost consternation of the Presbyterian majority in
Parliament, December 5, 1648.
The following day Parliament accepted the king's concessions as a
" sufficient foundation for a treaty of peace." The next day Crom-
well, anticipating the design of Parliament to destroy him, and resolv-
ing to annihilate their power by a decisive blow, a coup d' etat, caused
Colonel Pride with two regiments to surround the Parliament House and
to exclude all the Presbyterian members from their seats, thus leaving
sixty Independents as the only members of Parliament, which was there-
after known as the " Rump Parliament." By this arbitrary proceed-
ing— known as Colonel Pride's Purge — Cromwell and the army, at the
head of the Independent party, triumphed over the Presbyterian ma-
jority in the Long Parliament, December 7, 1648.
The " Rump Parliament " passed an act declaring it high treason
for a king to levy war against the people's representatives ; and de-
clared also that " the people are, under God, the origin of all just
power," and that " the Commons of England in Parliament assembled,
being chosen by and representing the people, are the supreme authority
of the nation." The " Rump Parliament " also, by a unanimous vote,
impeached " Charles Stuart " in the name of the people of England,
and resolved to bring him to trial for " the treason, blood and mischief
he was guilty of."
Colonel Harrison, the son of a butcher, was sent to bring the king
from Hurst Castle to Windsor, and thence to London, where he was
confined in St. James's Palace. The people were greatly affected at the
sight of the change in his appearance, and he stood a lonely figure of
Revolt of
Scotch
Cove-
nanters
Subdued
by
Crom-
well.
Crom-
well's
Seizure
of the
King.
Colonel
Pride's
Purge.
The
" Rump
Parlia-
ment "
and
"Charles
Stuart."
The King
Brought
to
London.
<>850
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Disre-
spect
Shown
Him.
The King
and the
Duke of
Hamilton.
High
Court of
Justice.
Impeach-
ment of
Charles I.
Conduct
of Lady
Fairfax.
majesty in distress, which even his adversaries could not behold with-
out reverence and compassion. He had long been attended only by an
old, decrepid servant, Sir Philip Warwick, who could only deplore his
master's fate, without being able to avenge him. Charles I. was now
treated with more severity. His guards and attendants were ordered
to treat him no longer as if he were a sovereign, and to call him simply
" Charles Stuart." His own servants were not permitted to wait on him
at table; and common soldiers, attired in armor, were appointed to
bring his meals to him. The fallen king was shocked much by this
disrespect, but soon recovered his composure, and said : " Nothing is
so contemptible as a despised king."
The Duke of Hamilton, the leader of the Scotch Covenanters, was
reserved for the same punishment as King Charles I., and upon leaving
Windsor threw himself at the king's feet, exclaiming : " My dear
master!" The unhappy king raised him up, embraced him tenderly
and replied, while tears ran down his cheeks : " I have indeed been a
dear master to you." These were severe distresses, but Charles I. never
could persuade himself that his subjects would accuse him and try him
as a criminal — an indignity to which royalty had not until then been
subjected; but expected every moment to fall a victim to private
assassination.
On January 20, 1649, a High Court of Justice — consisting of one
hundred and thirty-three members, and presided over by John Brad-
shaw, an eminent lawyer — assembled in Westminster Hall to try the
king. Never was there a more august assemblage in that historic old
edifice. The counsel for the Commons opened the case by stating that
" Charles Stuart, being admitted King of England and intrusted with a
limited power, yet, from a wicked design to erect an unlimited and
tyrannical government, has traitorously and maliciously levied war
against the present Parliament and the people whom they represent, and
is therefore impeached as a tyrant, traitor, murderer and a public and
implacable enemy to the Commonwealth."
When, during the calling of the roll of the members of the court,
the name of General Sir Thomas Fairfax was mentioned, a voice cried
out from among the spectators : " He has more wit than to be here !"
When the article of impeachment was read, declaring that the king was
accused in the name of the people of England, the same voice replied:
" Not a tenth part of them !" The soldiers were ordered to fire at the
spot whence the voice had proceeded ; but when it was discovered that the
voice was that of Lady Fairfax, they, in consideration of her sex and
rank, did not fire. Lady Fairfax had been an ardent politician, and
had urged her husband to oppose the king on the battlefield ; but now,
perceiving that the struggle was likely to end in the sacrifice of the
_1
LU
S
O
U
x
O
UJ .3
Q Q
S
CIVIL WAR AND FALL OF MONARCHY.
2851
king and in the exaltation of Oliver Cromwell, both she and her hus-
band heartily repented of the part they had taken against their sover-
eign.
Charles I. appeared more majestic in this hour of peril than he had
ever appeared in the days of his power and prosperity. He replied with
dignity, but with mildness. As the " Lord's Anointed," he persistently
denied the jurisdiction of the court, claimed himself to be beyond the
power of all courts and all Parliaments, and obstinately reasserted that
his kingly rights were derived from the " Supreme Majesty of Heaven."
There is no doubt that Charles I. firmly and sincerely believed what he
asserted, and that he thought he was only guarding a sacred trust
which God had conferred upon him, contrary as this theory was to the
entire spirit of the English Constitution, as well as destructive to the
safety and just rights of the English people. Thirty-two witnesses
were examined ; and, on January 27, 1649, after a trial of seven days,
the royal prisoner was declared guilty and was condemned to death as
" a tyrant, traitor, murderer and public enemy." The death-warrant
was signed two days later, and the king was ordered to prepare for
death the next day.
The Scots protested against this trial of their hereditary sovereign ;
the French and Dutch ambassadors at London interceded in the king's
behalf ; and the Prince of Wales sent a blank sheet of paper, with his
name and seal affixed, upon which Parliament might write any terms
it chose as the price of sparing his father's life. But all was in vain,
as the Commons were inexorable.
On his way through the hall, upon entering and leaving the court-
room, during the sessions of the trial, the fallen king was insulted
by the soldiery and the mob, who cried out : " Justice ! justice ! execu-
tion ! execution !" Upon one of these occasions, one more rude than his
companions even went so far as to spit in the king's face. The king
bore all their insolence with patience, saying : " Poor souls, they would
treat their generals the same way for a sixpence." Some of the popu-
lace expressed their sorrow in sighs and tears. One soldier, more com-
passionate than his fellows, uttered a blessing in the king's behalf;
whereupon an officer struck the soldier to the ground. The king, ob-
serving this affair, said : " The punishment, methinks, exceeds the
offense."
On the day preceding the execution, Charles I. was permitted to see
his son Henry and his daughter Elizabeth. His other two sons, Charles
and James, were in Holland ; and his other daughter, Henrietta, was in
France. Henry was only seven years old. His father said to this
little boy as he sat upon his knee : " Mark, my child, what I say.
They will cut off my head, and will want, perhaps, to make thee king;
Trial and
Convic-
tion of
Charles I.
Fruitless
Efforts
to Save
Him.
Eels
Insulted
by the
Soldiers.
His Sad
Farewell
to His
Family.
2852
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Execu-
tion of
Charles I.
" Day of
King
Charles
the
Martyr."
Remark
on the
Execu-
tion.
but thou must not be king so long as thy brothers Charles and James
are alive. Therefore, I charge thee, do not be made a king by them."
The child, in his innocence, looked earnestly into his father's face, and
exclaimed : " I will be torn in pieces first !" This answer made the
king shed tears.
King Charles I. was taken to the place of execution, in front of the
palace of Whitehall, January 30, 1649. He ascended the scaffold with
a firm step ; and in his last moments he reasserted his " divine rights,"
and declared that " the people have no right to any part in the govern-
ment, that being a thing nothing pertaining to them." Addressing
those around him, he declared himself innocent toward his people and
forgave his enemies. Turning to Bishop Juxon, he said : " I go from
a corruptible to an incorruptible crown, where no disturbance can take
place." The bishop replied : " You exchange a temporal for an
eternal crown ; a good exchange." The king then laid his head upon
the block, saying to Bishop Juxon : " Remember." One of the execu-
tioners then cut off the king's " gray and discrowned head " ; and the
other, holding it aloft, exclaimed : " This is the head of a traitor !"
Many of the spectators wept at the horrid spectacle, and a groan of
pity and horror proceeded from the vast multitude.
The execution of Charles I. aroused horror and indignation through-
out Europe, and the English ambassadors in the different European
capitals were driven away or murdered. From 1660 to 1859 the 30th
of January was commemorated annually as the " Day of King Charles
the Martyr," by special services in the Church of England, and by
solemn mourning on the part of the English royal family.
Charles I. was the only King of England who was condemned to
death and executed under the sentence of the law. This was not a
time for calm measures, when England was in the throes of a great
political revolution. The proper course would have been to depose the
king, as he had violated his coronation oath. Charles I. fell a victim
to the spirit of the age, which he persisted obstinately in refusing to
understand.
Abolition
of Mon-
archy.
Common-
wealth of
England
SECTION III.— THE COMMONWEALTH AND THE
PROTECTORATE (A. D. 1649-1660).
A FEW days after the execution of Charles I., the monarchy and
the House of Lords were abolished by the Commons ; and the " Rump
Parliament," upheld by Oliver Cromwell and the army, governed the
country. The new republic was styled The Commonwealth of England.
The Commons declared it high treason to acknowledge the Prince of
THE COMMONWEALTH AND THE PROTECTORATE.
2853
Wales King of England, and ordered a new Great Seal to be engraved
with the legend : " The first year of freedom by God's blessing re-
stored, 1648." In the year 1633 an equestrian statue of brass had
been erected in honor of Charles I. Parliament now ordered this, the
first equestrian statue in England, to be broken in pieces and sold for
old brass.
The execution of Charles I. involved Parliament in a new and greater
difficulty, and perils gathered thick and fast around the new Republic
of England. The Dutch Republic hastened to recognize Prince
Charles, who was then living in exile at The Hague, as King of Eng-
land. At home the royalists, who had been beaten into silence, looked
with deadly hatred and indescribable disgust upon the Puritan Republic,
and only waited for a favorable opportunity to make an effort to re-
store the fallen monarchy. But the first attempts at a royalist rising
were sternly crushed by Cromwell's iron hand. A most menacing spirit
had begun to infect the army, which would have caused the wildest
excesses if not checked. An extreme faction of the army, called
Levelers, because they held the socialistic doctrine that all men should
be " leveled " to an equality in rank and property, broke out into open
mutiny ; but this outbreak was sternly quelled by Cromwell's vigorous
hand.
The royalists in England, Scotland and Ireland considered Prince
Charles his father's legitimate successor. Though no formidable
royalist rising was undertaken in England for the time, the royalists in
Ireland raised the standard of the Stuarts; while the Covenanters of
Scotland, who had bound themselves to the support of monarchy, also
proclaimed Prince Charles in their country. These Irish and Scotch
rebellions against the English Commonwealth demanded very prompt
action on the part of the republican Parliament and its great general.
The strength of the Puritan Independents was in their army of fifty
thousand men, and in the iron will of Oliver Cromwell, who was now
appointed Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.
The royalist rebels in Ireland, under the direction of the Marquis of
Ormond, speedily took every town except Dublin. Cromwell crossed
over into that island with twelve thousand troops, fully resolved to stamp
out every vestige of rebellion and to establish fully the authority of the
English Commonwealth. His campaign was short but terrible, and it
resulted in the first thorough English conquest of the Emerald Isle. He
began his Irish campaign by taking Drogheda by storm, and massacred
its garrison of three thousand men, in stern retaliation for the massacre
of the English and Scotch Protestant settlers in Ireland in 1641.
Wexford was also taken by storm and its garrison put to the sword.
Terrified by this severity, town after town opened its gates to Crom-
King's
Statue
De-
stroyed.
The
Puritan
Republic
of
England
and Its
Diffi-
culties.
Royalist
Hostility.
The
Levelers.
Prince
Charles
and the
Irish
Royalists
and the
Scotch
Cove-
nanters.
Crom-
well's
Conquest
of
Ireland.
Reduction
and Mas-
sacres of
Drogheda
and
Wexford.
2854
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Irish
Migra-
tions.
English
Colonists
in
Ireland.
Over-
throw
and
Execution
of the
Marquis
of
Montrose.
Prince
Charles in
Scotland.
Cromwell
Sent
against
the Scots.
well, or fell before his assaults if it offered any resistance. The memory
of Ulster nerved every arm and hardened every heart in Cromwell's
army for the dreadful work of vengeance, and every Irish royalist
taken with arms in his hand was put to death.
At the end of a campaign of nine months, in 1649 and 1650, Crom-
well had so completely subdued Ireland that he was able to return to
England to take the field against the Scotch Covenanters, leaving his
son-in-law, General Ireton, in command in Ireland. Under the sway
of the English Commonwealth, all the discontented and conquered Irish
chiefs that desired to do so were allowed to leave their country and to
enter the service of foreign monarchs. Accordingly the Marquis of
Ormond and more than forty thousand Irish royalists enlisted in the
armies of France, Spain and Austria. Large numbers of the van-
quished Irish were shipped to the Barbadoes ; and many of the Irish
landholders who had borne arms against the English Parliament were re-
moved to lands assigned to them in the province of Connaught and
in County Clare ; while Parliamentary soldiers and many other English
colonists were settled in the provinces of Ulster, Munster and Leinster.
As the most troublesome elements of the native population were thus
drawn off, Ireland enjoyed such tranquillity as she had not experienced
for centuries, but the country became a land of beggars.
In Scotland, in the meantime, the brave and loyal Lord Marquis of
Montrose had roused the Highlanders in favor of Prince Charles ; but he
was defeated and betrayed into the power of the Covenanters, who took
him to Edinburgh and hanged him without a trial. Prince Charles
disavowed the enterprise of the Marquis of Montrose after being in-
formed of its failure, though it had been undertaken with his approval
and also with his promise of support.
The Scots allowed Prince Charles to land in their country and agreed
to acknowledge him as King Charles II. only on condition that he should
sign the Covenant, enter the Presbyterian Church and accept a limited
royal prerogative. After some hesitation, the prince agreed to these
terms, left Holland and made his appearance in Scotland. The daily
and hourly sermons and exhortations to which he was subjected by the
zealous Scots appeared to the gay young prince to be a dear price to
pay for his comfortless crown. He was obliged to issue a proclamation
declaring himself humbled in spirit and afflicted for his father's tyranny
and for his mother's idolatry. But with all this, none trusted him, so
that he was only a nominal king, while the Scottish Parliament con-
tinued to exercise all the real power in that country.
Cromwell, who had received the thanks of Parliament after reducing
Ireland to submission, and who had been created Captain-General of all
the troops in England, was sent to subdue the Scots also; and he at
THE COMMONWEALTH AND THE PROTECTORATE.
£855
once invaded Scotland with a large army. At the head of sixteen
thousand troops, Cromwell marched against the Scotch Covenanters,
but many of his troops died from hunger and sickness on the way.
At Dunbar, Cromwell, with only twelve thousand men, was opposed
by twenty-seven thousand Scotch Covenanters, who considered victory
certain. The Scotch preachers endeavored to prove from the Old
Testament that the Covenanters would conquer, and urged an attack
upon Cromwell's army. When Cromwell saw the Scots advancing, he
exclaimed : " The Lord has delivered them into our hand !" A furious
battle ensued on September 3, 1650, and Cromwell gained a glorious
victory. The Scotch troops threw down their arms and fled in every
direction, after losing four thousand killed and wounded and ten thou-
sand prisoners.
While Cromwell was still in Scotland, Prince Charles, with a body of
Scotch troops, marched into England, and was joined by a considerable
number of English royalists. Cromwell at length advanced against
the prince; and on September 3, 1651, exactly one year after the battle
of Dunbar, was fought the battle of Worcester, in which Cromwell
gained another brilliant victory. The royal army was hopelessly
annihilated. Prince Charles fled from the field and became a fugitive.
Thus left alone in the very heart of England, with Cromwell's troop-
ers occupying every road and scouring the country in search of the
fugitive prince, Charles was in a most perilous situation. For six weeks
he wandered in various disguises and through innumerable dangers,
hiding by day and journeying by night. At one time, while concealed
in the thick branches of an oak, he saw and heard his pursuers pass
beneath him. A large reward was offered to any one who would betray
the prince, and those who concealed him were threatened with death;
but forty men and women, chiefly poor laborers, at different times con-
cealed him. Finally he reached Shoreham, on the southern coast of
England, where he embarked for France, in which country he arrived
safely and became a pensioner of his young cousin, King Louis XIV.
General Monk, whom Cromwell had left in command in Scotland,
subdued that kingdom in a campaign as terribly severe as that of Crom-
well in Ireland. The inhabitants of Dundee were massacred ; and
Aberdeen and many other towns and fortresses of Scotland surrendered
to the forces of the English Commonwealth.
General Ireton, Cromwell's son-in-law, completed the conquest of
Ireland, but died at Limerick, and was succeeded in his command by
General Ludlow. The Puritan colonies in New England rejoiced in
the triumph of their party in the Mother Country, and the other Eng-
lish colonies in North America were forced to acknowledge the Com-
monwealth.
VOL. 0—4
Battle of
Dunbar.
Prince
Charles in
England.
Battle of
Worces-
ter.
Adven-
tures and
Escape of
Prince
Charles.
Conquest
of
Scotland
by
General
Monk.
The
English
Colonies
in North
America.
2856
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Power
of the
English
Common-
wealth.
Admiral
Blake's
Cruisea.
Naviga-
tion Act.
England's
First
Naval
War
with the
Dutch
Republic.
Blake's
Defeat
by Van
Tromp.
After a half century of humiliation under the first two Stuarts, Eng-
land now had a government that could command order at home and
respect abroad, as in the " golden days of Good Queen Bess." For
the first time in English history the war-making power was in the same
hands as the purse-strings ; and the abolition of rank and titles opened
a freer career to all talents and energies, so that men who in previous
times might have lived and died in obscurity now rose to high commands.
Among these was Admiral Blake, whose brilliant achievements gave
the English navy a renown which it had never before possessed.
Prince Rupert was at this time cruising in the Atlantic. Admiral
Blake forced him to seek shelter in the Tagus; and when King John
IV. of Portugal refused to admit Blake's pursuing fleet Blake took
revenge by seizing twenty richly-laden vessels belonging to the Portu-
guese king, who was allowed to renew his alliance with England only
by making the most humble apology and submission.
The neighboring Republic of Holland was the next to feel the power
of the English Commonwealth. The passage of the celebrated Navi-
gation Act by the English Parliament, October 9, 1651, prohibiting
foreigners from bringing into England in their own ships anything but
their own productions, operated injuriously to the Dutch, whose
country was small, but whose merchant fleet was the largest in the world,
and who subsisted largely by the carrying trade between foreign ports.
The final result of this arbitrary measure was a fierce and bloody naval
war between the Republics of England and Holland.
The English required the ships of other nations to lower their flags
in British waters. The English fleet under Admiral Blake met the
Dutch fleet under Van Tromp in the Downs. Blake fired three guns
as a signal for the Dutch admiral to salute the English fleet by lowering
his flag ; but, instead of giving this customary salute, Van Tromp
answered Blake's signal with a broadside. The fight that ensued be-
tween the two fleets led to a declaration of war against the Dutch Re-
public by the English Commonwealth in May, 1652.
In this naval war between the two republics twelve great battles
and many smaller encounters ensued between their respective fleets. In
an obstinate battle off the Goodwin Sands, near Dover, November 29,
1652, Blake was defeated and wounded with the loss of five ships taken
or destroyed, and was obliged to seek shelter in the Thames. After
gaining this victory, the Dutch admiral Van Tromp sailed up and down
the English Channel with a broom at his masthead, to signify his inten-
tion of sweeping the English from the seas.
A desperate battle of three days occurred in the English Channel, off
Portland, in February, 1653, between the English fleet of eighty vessels
under Admiral Blake and General Monk and the Dutch fleet of seventy-
THE COMMONWEALTH AND THE PROTECTORATE.
2857
six vessels under the great admirals Van Tromp and De Ruyter; end-
ing in an English victory, the Dutch being crippled so thoroughly that
the English were for several months undisputed masters of the seas. In
June of the same year (1653) the Dutch fleet under Van Tromp was
defeated off the North Foreland by the English fleet under Admiral
Blake; and in July following (1653) Van Tromp was defeated and
killed in a battle off the Texel with the English fleet under General
Monk, who proved to be as good a commander on sea as on land. These
three great English naval victories impoverished the Dutch Republic
and made the English Commonwealth mistress of the Channel and the
neighboring seas.
In the meantime, while the war with Holland was raging, a quarrel
had risen between Oliver Cromwell and the Long Parliament. This
Parliament had now lasted thirteen years, during the last four of which
it was but the fragment of a Parliament under the designation of the
" Rump Parliament." This Parliament had ceased to represent the
wishes of the English people, and all parties considered its longer con-
tinuance to be impolitic, but there was no power with the legal right
to dissolve it.
The odium attached to the " Rump Parliament " was increased by
charges of corruption against its members in the appropriation of the
public spoils. It had been hated by all denominations but its own from
the very outset, and was fast becoming detested by its own sect and
party. Cromwell became impatient at the selfishness and uncertainty
that characterized the action of the " Rump Parliament," and urged a
prompt " settlement of the nation " and an early dissolution. Parlia-
ment retaliated by a resolution to disband the army, but failed in the
accomp'ishment of that purpose.
Finally there was an understanding that Parliament should soon dis-
solve and that the army should be disbanded, but Parliament soon
manifested an inclination not to dissolve at all. In April, 1653, a
proposition was made to call a new Parliament, in which all the members
of the " Rump Parliament " should continue to hold seats, and also
act as judges of the election of the new members. As a member of
Parliament, Cromwell opposed this scheme.
A mutual council held at the palace of Whitehall adjourned for one
day with the understanding that no action be taken in the meantime.
At 'the time appointed for the second meeting of the council almost all
cf the friends of the measure and all of its leaders were absent. A
messenger soon made his appearance at Whitehall, bringing the an-
nouncement that the measure wras under discussion in Parliament, and
that Sir Henry Vane was fast pressing the bill to a final passage.
Cromwell angrily exclaimed : " It is contrary to common honesty !"
Blake's
Three
Great
Victories
over Vap
Trorap
and Da
Ruyt«r
Crom-
well's
Rapture
with the
" Rump
Parlia-
ment."
Progress
of the
Quarrel.
Final
Under-
standing
and Par-
liament's
Inclina-
tion.
Parlia-
ment's
Action
and
Crom-
well's
Decision
2858
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Cromwell
in the
Parlia-
ment
House.
Cromwell
Scolds
the
Members.
His
Signal.
Cromwell
and Sir
Hei.ry
Vane.
Dissolu-
tion of
the Long
Parlia-
ment.
He no longer hesitated ; but, as he was secure in the attachment of the
army, he resolved upon a decisive blow, a coup d'etat.
Cromwell accordingly left the council of officers at Whitehall, and
hastened to the Parliament House with three hundred soldiers, April 20,
1653. Posting the soldiers in the lobby of the chamber, he entered
and took his accustomed seat while Sir Henry Vane was still speaking in
behalf of the bill under consideration. He said to St. John, one of the
members : " I am come to do what grieves me to the heart." He,
however, still sat quiet, until Sir Henry Vane pressed the House to
waive its usual forms and pass the bill at once. Thereupon he said to
Colonel Harrison : " The time has come." Harrison replied :
" Think well, it is a dangerous work !" Cromwell listened quietly for
a quarter of an hour longer, until the moment for decisive action on
his part should arrive.
At the question "that this bill do pass," Cromwell suddenly started
up, exclaiming : " This is the time — I must do it !" Then addressing
the members, he said : " Your hour is come ! The Lord hath done with
you
! He hath chosen other instruments to do his work !" A crowd of
members started to their feet in angry protest. Cromwell replied:
" Come, come, we have had enough of this !" He then strode into the
midst of the chamber, clapped his hat on his head, and exclaimed:
" I will put an end to your prating !" The House was at once in an
uproar. In the din and confusion, Cromwell was heard to exclaim:
" It is not fit that you should sit here any longer ! For shame, get you
gone ! You should give place to honester men — to men who will more
faithfully discharge their duties ! You are no longer a Parliament !
I tell you, you are no longer a Parliament !"
At this point Cromwell stamped his foot upon the floor as a signal,
whereupon thirty musketeers entered the chamber. The fifty members
present crowded to the door. As Wentworth passed him, Cromwell ex-
claimed : "Drunkard !" Martyn was taunted with a still coarser name.
Sir Henry Vane was fearless to the last, and boldly told Cromwell that
his act was " against all right and all honor." Cromwell exclaimed :
" Ah, Sir Henry Vane, Sir Henry Vane ! You might have prevented all
this, but you are a juggler, and have no common honesty 1 The Lord
deliver me from Sir Henry Vane!"
The Speaker refused to leave the chair until Colonel Harrison offered
to lend him a hand to come down. Cromwell lifted the mace from the
table, saying: "What shall we do with this bauble? Take it away!"
As the members rushed out at the door, Cromwell exclaimed : " It is
you that have forced me to do this. I have sought the Lord night and
day that he would rather slay me than put me upon the doing of this
work-" After the hall had been cleared, Cromwell ordered the door to
THE COMMONWEALTH AND THE PROTECTORATE.
2859
be locked ; and, putting the key into his pocket, he returned to White-
hall, undisputed master of England.
Thus ended the famous Long Parliament, April 20, 1653, after an
existence of thirteen years. A few hours later its executive committee,
the Council of State, was dissolved. When Cromwell summoned this
committee to withdraw, John Bradshaw, one of its members, replied:
" We have heard what you have done this morning at the House, and in
some hours all England will hear it. But you mistake, sir, if you think
the Parliament dissolved. No power on earth can dissolve the Parlia-
ment but itself, be sure of that !"
The " Rump Parliament " had become so unpopular that few ap-
peared to have found fault with Cromwell's violent action. He was
deluged with addresses of congratulation from the army, the navy
and many of the counties. In alluding to this dissolution several years
afterward, Cromwell remarked : " We did not hear a dog bark at their
going."
Oliver Cromwell was now virtually sole ruler of England, with more
real power than any of her most absolute kings. To keep up the ap-
pearance of a Commonwealth, he summoned another Parliament, com-
posed of Independents selected by a new Council of State from lists
furnished by the Independent, or Congregational churches. This
Parliament met July 4, 1653, and was called the Little Parliament, or
the Barebone Parliament; one of its leading members being the leather-
seller, " Praise God " Barebone, who was noted for his religious zeal
and fanaticism.
The radical reforms of the Barebone Parliament in Church and State
— such as a new code of laws, the establishment of civil marriage, the
proposals to substitute the free contributions of congregations for the
payment of tithes, and the scheme for the abolition of lay patronage —
aroused the hostility of the lawyers, the clergy and the landed pro-
prietors ; all of whom accused Parliament of a design to ruin property,
the Church and the law, and of being an enemy to knowledge and in-
fected with a b'ind and ignorant fanaticism. Cromwell himself, who
hated " that leveling principle " *> hich tended to reduce all to one
equality, also shared the general dissatisfaction with the proceedings of
this Parliament. Said he : " J* othing is in the hearts of these men
but ' overturn, overturn.' '
Hume tells us that this Parliament, in its religious fanaticism, had
adopted new names for its members, consisting of several words and
sometimes of whole sentences, as " More-fruit " Fowler, " Good-re-
ward " Smart, " Stand-fast-on-high " Stringer, " Fight-the-good-fight-
of-f aith " White; Barebone himself being named "Praise-God," while
his brother received as his name, " If-Christ-had-not-died-for-you-you-
fr-22
Cromwell
and
Brad-
shaw.
Cromwell
Congrat-
ulated.
Bare-
bone's
Parlia-
ment.
Its
Radical
Reforms.
Hume's
Account
of Its
Members'
Names.
2860
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Its
Resigna-
tion and
Dissolu-
tion.
A New
Parlia-
ment.
Instru-
ment of
Govern-
ment.
Oliver
Cromwell
as Lord
Pro-
tector.
Peace of
West-
minster.
had-been-damned " Barebone, and as this was too long to say every time
his name was mentioned he was generally called " Damned " Barebone.
The whole conduct of the Barebone Parliament was unsatisfactory ;
and, after appointing another Council of State consisting of eight
members with Cromwell at its head, the members, agreeing that they had
sat long enough, went, with Rouse, their Speaker, at their head, to
Cromwell, and voluntarily resigned their power into his hands, De-
cember, 1653. Cromwell gladly accepted their resignations; and, be-
ing told that some of the members had determined to remain, he sent
Colonel White with a body of troops to drive them from the house.
The colonel, entering the hall, asked the refractory members what they
were doing there. One Moyer, whom they had placed in the chair, re-
plied : " We are seeking the Lord." White replied : " Then you may
go elsewhere ; for, to my certain knowledge, the Lord has not been here
these many years." The members then withdrew from the hall, and
Cromwell's authority was undisputed.
The new Council of State summoned a Parliament to represent Eng-
land, Scotland and Ireland; the right to vote for members of this
Parliament being granted to all possessing property valued at two
hundred pounds, excepting Roman Catholics and those who had borne
arms in the royal cause during the Great Civil War between Charles
I. and the Long Parliament.
Meanwhile, December 16, 1653, a new constitution, called the In-
strument of Government, projected by General Lambert, was adopted
by the Council of State, intrusting Oliver Cromwell with the supreme
power, with the title of Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of Eng-
land, Scotland and Ireland. But a strictly constitutional government
was organized. The Lord Protector, whose power was conferred upon
him for life, was to summon a Parliament once in three years, and to
allow it to sit at least five months without prorogation. Parliament
was empowered to levy taxes and to make the laws, subject for twenty
days to the Lord Protector's veto. The Lord Protector was to consult
the Council of State in the management of foreign affairs, in questions
of peace and war and in the appointment of officers.
One of Cromwell's first acts as Lord Protector was to bring the
ruinous and destructive naval war between England and Holland to a
close; and by the Peace of Westminster, in April, 1654, signed by
Cromwell as Lord Protector of the English Commonwealth, the Dutch
were required to lower their flag in salute to the English whenever vessels
of the two nations met at sea.
In the writs for the election of the new Parliament it had been ex-
pressly stated that Parliament should not have power to change the
government as conferred upon one person and a Parliament. When the
THE COMMONWEALTH AND THE PROTECTORATE.
2861
new Parliament assembled at Westminster in September, 1654, its first
act was to take into consideration the organization of the government.
After the question of the Lord Protector's vote power had been debated
three days, Cromwell barred the way to the Parliament chamber by a
file of soldiers, and turned back all who refused to sign an agreement
not to change the form of government. Three hundred members signed
this agreement, and were permitted to enter the chamber; but one
hundred refused to sign, and were turned back. The signers observed
their agreement, but refused to vote money for the army without a re-
dress of grievances. Thereupon Cromwell, in a fit of anger, dissolved
Parliament ; and the Lord Protector became as absolute a ruler as
Charles I. had been before the Great Civil War, levying taxes and mak-
ing laws on his sole authority.
This state of things produced a powerful reaction in the public mind
in England in favor of the restoration of monarchy. Faith in the
fundamental principles of the English Commonwealth vanished, as the
outward fabric of the Commonwealth crumbled under Cromwell's
usurpations. Formidable royalist outbreaks occurred in various parts
of England, but the Lord Protector's vigorous hand easily crushed these
risings. This royalist revolt was punished by what was called the
decimation of that party — a tax of the tenth penny on all their
revenues. For the collection of this tax, England was divided into ten
military districts, and each was placed under martial law, each of the
ten major-generals who were placed over these; districts respectively
being authorized to imprison all whom they suspected. Scotland and
Ireland were reduced to order, but the severities which the English
soldiers practiced in Ireland have left their bitter fruit of undying
hatred of English rule to the present day.
As Lord Protector, Cromwell governed vigorously and successfully,
and made himself feared and respected at home and abroad. England
was never more prosperous than under his firm rule. Cromwell re-
formed the law and established uniformity in the administration of
justice. He declared that " to hang a man for sixpence and pardon
murder " did not accord with his idea of justice.
He never deviated from the great principle of religious toleration,
on which he took an early stand. He quietly permitted the Jews, who
had remained banished from England ever since the reign of Edward I.,
to return, and exerted himself to his utmost to protect them from
persecution. He also protected the new Puritan sect of the Friends, or
Quakers, founded by George Fox, a Leicestershire shepherd, during the
period of the civil wars.
Cromwell's crude but effective statesmanship displayed itself to its
best advantage in his management of foreign affairs. He boasted that
Crom-
well's
Quarrel
•with the
New Par-
liament
and Its
Dissolu-
tion.
Royalist
Reaction
and Out-
breaks.
Irish Ani-
mosity.
Crom-
well's
Vigorous
Rule.
His Pro-
tection
of the
Jews and
Quakers.
2862
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Foreign
Respect
for
England
under
Crom-
well.
The
Piratical
Barbary
Powers
Humbled
by
Admiral
Blake.
War with
Spain.
Conquest
of
Jamaica.
Blake's
Victories
over the
Spanish
Fleets.
English
Acquisi-
tion of
Dunkirk.
he would make the name of Englishmen as much feared and respected
as had been that of Roman, and the uniform success of his military
and naval enterprises went far to realize this saying. European mon-
archs, in whose capitals at the beginning of the Commonwealth the
lives of English ambassadors were in peril, now earnestly sought the
Lord Protector's alliance. He made his power felt and feared by the
pirates of the Barbary coast who had terrorized the Mediterranean for
more than a century, and by the Spaniards in Europe and America.
Admiral Blake sailed into the Mediterranean with his fleet, and con-
quered all that ventured to oppose him. Casting anchor before Leg-
horn, he demanded and received satisfaction for some injuries which the
Duke of Tuscany had inflicted upon English commerce. He next
sailed to Algiers and forced the Dey to a treaty of peace and to restrain
his piratical subjects from injuring the English any further. In 1655
Blake proceeded to Tunis, where he made the same demands. The Dey
of Tunis desired the English admiral to look at the two castles, Porto
Farino and Goletta, and to do his utmost. Blake showed him that he
was ready to accept the challenge, entered the harbor of Tunis, burned
the Dey's ships, and then sailed out of the harboi 'n triumph to pursue
his voyage. Thus Admiral Blake cleared the sea of the pirates who
had so long infested it, and secured the liberation of the captive Chris-
tians he'd in slavery in the Barbary states.
In 1655 the shrewd Cardinal Mazarin, the Prime Minister and virtual
ruler of France during the minority of King Louis XIV., by flattering
Cromwell, induced England to become the ally of France in a war
against Spain. In 1655 Admiral Penn and General Venables con-
quered the island of Jamacia, in the West Indies, from the Spaniards ;
and that island ever since has belonged to England. Admiral Sir
William Penn was the father of the founder of Pennsylvania.
Admiral Blake captured two Spanish treasure galleons of immense
value at Cadiz. In 1657 he defeated a fleet of Spanish merchant
vessels and treasure galleons off the harbor of Santa Cruz, in the
island of Teneriffe, under the cannon of their castle and seven forts;
but this was the last conflict in which the great admiral engaged, as he
died within sight of the English coast on his homeward voyage. Blake
was an ardent republican, and he therefore opposed Cromwell's usurpa-
tion ; but said he to his seamen : " It is still our duty to fight for our
country, into whatever hands the government may fall."
In 1658 an English force of six thousand men under General
Reynolds joined the French in the Spanish Netherlands ; and the im-
portant harbor and fortress of Dunkirk, which the allies took from the
Spaniards, was ceded to England by France as a reward for the Eng-
lish aid in the war.
TttS COMMONWEALTH AND THE PROTECTORATE.
2863
Under Cromwell, England again occupied the position which she had
heM under Elizabeth as the protectress of the Protestant interests in
Europe. The Waldenses, or Vaudois, in the valleys of Piedmont and
among the Alps, had suffered cruel persecutions from their ruler, the
Duke of Savoy, many of them being cruelly massacred. Cromwell
sent an envoy to the duke's court with haughty demands for redress,
and was threatening earthly vengeance ; while the Puritan poet, John
Milton, called upon God to avenge his " slaughtered saints whose bones
lie scattered on the Alpine mountains cold." A refusal of the Lord
Protector's demands would have been followed by instant war, and so
the Duke of Savoy desisted from his persecutions, being largely in-
fluenced thereto by Cardinal Mazarin, the French Prime Minister.
This intervention, which saved the Vaudois from further massacre and
persecution, pleased the English and commanded the respect of all
Europe. Cromwell was resolved upon the protection of the Prot-
estants of the Continent of Europe from persecution, and was ready
to make the thunder of his cannon heard at the Castle of St. Angelo
and the Vatican, if necessary to secure such protection.
In 165() Cromwell summoned another Parliament. This Parlia-
ment voted supplies, but protested against the military despotism
which prevailed in England. Cromwell at once withdrew the troops
quartered in the ten military divisions. This Parliament offered to
Cromwell its " Humble Petition and Advice " that he would assume the
crown and the kingly title. This offer of the ro3'al dignity was not
intended so much as an additional honor to Cromwell as for the security
and tranquillity of the nation.
An existing law provided that no subject should be accused of trea-
son because of his allegiance to the king for the time being, however the
crown might be disposed of afterward. No such security existed, in
case of a Stuart restoration, for the supporters of the Lord Protector.
But an acceptance of the crown by Cromwell, while it would have
satisfied his moderate and timid partisans, would have offended the army
and all staunch republicans ; and for that reason Cromwell refused the
title and emb'ems of royalty. He was, however, reinvested with the
Lord Protectorship, with well-nigh royal ceremony — with the purple
robe, the scepter and the sword — and was empowered to name his suc-
cessor.
The Lord Protector was already worn out by the cares of state.
Even his enemies conceded that his administration had been marked with
almost unparalleled energy and success. His firm, wise and tolerant
policy had put an end to the religious dissensions which had agitated
England for more than a century. But in managing the prejudices
of the nation, Cromwell had been more arbitrary and tyrannical in hi*
Crom-
well's
Inter-
vention
in Favor
of the
Perse-
cuted
Vaudois.
Parlia-
ment
Offers
Cromwell
a Crown.
His
Rejection
of the
Offer.
Crom-
well 's
Arbitrary
and Tyr-
annical
Rule.
3864
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Conspir-
acies
against
Crom-
well.
His
Daugh-
ters.
His Fear
of Assas-
sination.
His
Death.
His
Great-
ness and
Motives.
treatment of Parliament than even King Charles I. had ever been. The
Lord Protector had also levied taxes without the consent of Parliament ;
and when one who had thus suffered appealed to the courts for legal
redress, as John Hampden had done in 1637, his lawyers were arrested
and imprisoned in the Tower. Although the Protectorate ably pro-
moted the private interests of the English people, it was a despotism in
form, and Cromwell was painfully aware of the fact.
Cromwell's situation was not an enviable one. He was now equally
hated by the royalists and the republicans, and many plots were formed
against his power and his life. The emissaries of Prince Charles
Stuart at Brussels or Cologne were active. Every hour added to
Cromwell's disquietude. Lord Fairfax, Sir William Waller and many
other Presbyterian leaders had secretly conspired to destroy him. His
expensive and extravagant administration had exhausted his revenue
and burdened him with debt. Cromwell's eldest daughter, Mrs. Fleet-
wood, the wife of General Fleetwood, whom she had married after the
death of her first husband, General Ireton, was so violent a republican
that she dreaded to see her father invested with supreme power. His
favorite daughter, Mrs. Claypole, was a staunch royalist; and on her
deathbed she reproached her father for overturning the monarchy.
His other daughters, Lady Franconberg and Lady Rich, were also
zealous royalists.
Conspiracy after conspiracy embittered the last days of Cromwell's
life. And finally, to render the Lord Protector's last days more miser-
able, Colonel Titus published a book entitled Killing no Murder, in
which the assassination of Cromwell was held up as desirable and even
meritorious. Said this writer: " Shall we, who would not suffer the
lion to invade us, tamely stand to be devoured by the wolf? " Cromwell
read this spirited pamphlet, and was never seen to smile again. There-
after the Lord Protector was in constant fear of assassination. He
wore armor under his clothes, and always carried pistols in his pockets.
His countenance was gloomy, and he trusted no one. When he traveled
cut he was attended by a numerous guard. He never returned by the
same road which he went, and he did not sleep more than three nights
in the same room.
Cromwell was delivered from his miserable existence by an attack of
ague, of which he died September 3, 1658 — the anniversary of his great
victories at Dunbar and Worcester, and a day which he had always re-
garded as the most fortunate of his life. Thus died the greatest man
that England ever produced — a great general, statesman and ruler.
There is a wide difference of opinion concerning Cromwell's char-
acter and motives. Personally he was a great man, having risen from
the common walks of life until he acquired a renown truly royal^ but he
THE COMMONWEALTH AND THE PROTECTORATE.
2865
still retained his Puritan simplicity and piety. Of course he was some-
what actuated by the promptings of ambition; but it is possible that
he possessed a great, earnest soul, chiefly animated by a patriotic desire
to promote the welfare of his country.
Had Cromwell been of royal blood, and had the English throne been
his birthright, his administration would have been the pride and boast of
Englishmen of all subsequent ages. But he has been obliged to bear
the odium of all the extreme measures that followed the Great Civil
War. His moderate counsels, however, availed to frustrate the wild
schemes that always spring up in times of revolution and civil commo-
tion, both when he was Captain-General of the Puritan army and when
he was Lord Protector of the Commonwealth. He sometimes en-
dangered his influence with his own soldiers and his prestige with his
partisan followers by his conservatism.
Seldom are armies composed of such positive minds as the Puritan
soldiers of England in the days of the Commonwealth. Almost any one
of them was able to preach to his fellows what they called a sermon,
and each one also had his own ideas of government as well as of religion.
Even such an iron will as that of Cromwell was not always able to direct
and control such stiff-necked material. It has been said with great truth
concerning his policy with his army, that " to ordinarily govern, Crom-
well was sometimes compelled to submit."
Cromwell was far ahead of his time in some respects. In her treat-
ment of the religious question, England is at the present time slowly
moving along in the path which the great Lord Protector marked out
for her more than two centuries ago. He had an intuitive sense of the
English nation's ills and of the proper remedies to be applied. The
wonderful success of his policy is the best evidence of the general cor-
rectness of his intuitions.
The personal and constitutional elements were strangely mingled in
Cromwell's government. Though ordinarily ruling in accordance with
the laws, he did not hesitate to override or change them when they stood
in his way. When Parliament failed to meet his expectations, he dis-
solved it, like Charles I. ; and, like that king, he then ruled alone. But
the parallel ends there. Charles I. ruled to uphold the royal preroga-
tive. Cromwell ruled to promote the tranquillity and prosperity of
England. But, while Cromwell lived, there was a universal feeling that
the laws and the Constitution of England were always at the mercy of
an individual will. However favorable to public order and national
progress under a wise administration, such a system as Cromwell's was
incompatible with a free constitution. Under a weak head anarchy
would be the inevitable result, and under an ambitious one the natural
consequence would be a despotism.
His
Modera-
tion and
Conserv-
atism.
Character
of the
Puritan
Soldiers.
Crom-
well's
Intui-
tions.
Views
of Bis
Arbitrary
Rule.
SS66
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Royalist
Views.
His
Usurpa-
tion
and Its
Result.
Richard
Cromwell
as Lord
Protector.
Sir
Henry
Vane
and £ir
Ashley
Cooper.
Cooper's
Violent
Attacks.
Cromwell's enemies were unrelenting. In the view of priest and
Churchman he was the very ideal of a fanatic, although he was the
most tolerant man in England. In the opinion of Cavalier and noble-
man he was simply an upstart and an interloper, though his adminis-
tration was able and just, commanding the respect of all Christendom.
The royalist considered him only a low-born usurper and a proper vic-
tim for every assassin's dagger, though he made England so great and
powerful that the very name of Englishman became a shield to the
humblest individual bearing it in any part of the civilized world.
Nevertheless, with all his patriotism, Cromwell was a usurper. Any
ruler who can, even once, set aside an established constitution, or
trample the recognized law under foot, is a usurper; and Cromwell did
this at will. The English people had just overthrown a royal tyranny
to preserve their constitutional liberties ; but, when the violent despotism
of the Stuart dynasty merely made room for Cromwell's milder despot-
ism, English freedom was won only to be lost again. The legitimate
result of Cromwell's usurpation in 1653 was the restoration of the
Stuart monarchy in 1660, along with the disappearance of religious
toleration and constitutional liberty for well-nigh a generation.
Richard Cromwell, Oliver's son, was proclaimed Lord Protector of the
Commonwealth of Eng^nd, upon his father's death ; but Richard, who
had no executive abilities or firmness whatever, and who was of a quiet
and unambitious nature, found himself unable to hold in check the con-
tending factions in Parliament and in the army, or to govern a people
almost on the verge of rebellion. The tide of reaction was felt even in
his Council of State, which at once cast aside one of the greatest of
his illustrious father's reforms, and summoned a new Parliament on the
old system of election. In the new House of Commons the republicans
under Sir Henry Vane, adroitly backed by the royalists, violently
assailed Cromwell's system. The fiercest attack of all was made by
Sir Ashley Cooper, a Dorsetshire gentleman, who had changed sides
during the Great Civil War, having first fought for King Charles I.
and then for the Lone: Parliament, and who had been a member of
fj '
Cromwell's Council of State and had recently ceased to be a member
of that Council.
Sir Ashley Cooper denounced Oliver Cromwell as " His Highness of
deplorable memory, who with fraud and force deprived you of your
liberty when living and entailed slavery on you at his death." Cooper
also made a virulent attack on the army in these words : " They have
not only subdued their enemies, but the masters who raised and main-
tained them ! They have not only conquered Scotland and Ireland,
but rebellious England too ; and there suppressed a Malignant party
of magistrates and laws."
THE COMMONWEALTH AND THE PROTECTORATE.
2867
The army under Generals Lambert and Fleetwood — the latter of
whom was Richard Cromwell's eldest sister's husband — then conspired
against the new Lord Protector. The Commons at once ordered the
dismissal of all. officers who refused to engage " not to disturb or in-
terrupt the free meetings of Parliament." Richard Cromwell there-
upon ordered the council of military officers to dissolve. They forced
the new Lord Protector to dissolve Parliament. The army was resolved
upon the overthrow of Richard Cromwell ; and, rather than confront the
crisis, Richard quietly resigned the Lord Protectorship, after holding it
a few months, and retired to private life, early in 1659.
After the resignation of Richard Cromwell, England was virtually
without any government, and each party endeavored to obtain the
supremacy. The " Rump Parliament," which Oliver Cromwell had so
violently dissolved in April, 1653, reassembled, and assumed the direc-
tion of national affairs. But this Parliament did not possess the con-
fidence of any party. A royalist rising occurred in Cheshire under
Sir George Booth. The nation was tired of military rule ; and Sir
Arthur Haslerig, encouraged by the temper of the troops in Scotland
and Ire'and, made a demand in Parliament for the dismissal of Generals
Fleetwood and Lambert from their commands. Thereupon the army
under General Lambert dissolved Parliament by driving the members
from Westminster. This was the end of the reconvened Long Parlia-
ment, and General Lambert then undertook the control of public affairs,
A. D. 1659.
It was now the settled conviction of many that nothing but the
restoration of monarchy would free England from a state of anarchy.
General Monk, who commanded the army in Scotland and who had long
hated General Lambert, secretly formed the design of restoring the
monarchy in the person of Prince Charles, the eldest son of the late
unfortunate monarch ; and at once entered into a correspondence with
the prince, who was then living in Holland.
As Governor of Scotland, General Monk assembled a convention at
Edinburgh, and strengthened himself with money and recruits. He
then advanced to Coldstream, whereupon the cry of " a free Parlia-
ment " spread over all England like wildfire. The cry was taken up
by General Fairfax, who rose in arms in Yorkshire, and also by the
fleet in the Thames and the mob of London. The army endeavored
to check the tide of popular feeling by recalling the Commons ; but it
was too late, as the restoration of monarchy under the Stuart dynasty
was fast becoming inevitable.
So well did General Monk conceal his design that no one knew with
which party he was acting, and he was enabled to march unopposed
from Scotland to London, which city he entered February 3, 1660.
Menacing
Attitude
of the
Army.
Richard
Crom-
well's
Resigna-
tion.
Straggle
between
the
" Rump
Parlia-
ment"
and the
Army.
General
Monk's
Secret
Design.
His
March
from
ScoJand.
Royalist
Reaction.
General
Monk's
Secret
Action.
2868
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Conven-
tion-Par-
liament
of 1660.
General
Monk and
Prince
Charles
Stuart.
Monk's
Proposal
and Its
Popular
Recep-
tion.
Restora-
tion of
Mon-
archy.
Acces-
sion of
Charles
II.
"The
Downfall
of Puri-
tanism."
General Lambert in the meantime had been imprisoned in the Tower by
his own troops, who now joined Monk, having been deceived by that
general's declaration of loyalty to the " good old cause." Monk had
also protested his loyalty to the old " Rump Parliament," while he ac-
cepted petitions for a " free Parliament."
At Ashley Cooper's instigation, the Presbyterian members of the
Long Parliament, who had been excluded from the House of Com-
mons by Colonel Pride's Purge, again forced their way into Parlia-
ment, and at once resolved upon a dissolution and the election of a
new House of Commons. The new Convention-Parliament met April
25, 1660, and showed its Presbyterian temper by adopting the Solemn
League and Covenant, and by drawing up terms upon which a restora-
tion of monarchy under the Stuart dynasty might be assented to ; but,
in the midst of their deliberations, they found that they had been de-
ceived and betrayed by General Monk, who had secretly negotiated with
the exiled Prince Charles Stuart, who was then at Breda, in Holland;
thus rendering all exaction of terms impossible.
On May 1, 1660, Monk threw off the mask by proposing to the
Convention-Parliament, which had just been assembled, the restora-
tion of the monarchy. This proposal was hailed with joy by the Eng-
lish people, who were tired of the condition of anarchy which had pre-
vailed since the death of Oliver Cromwell. The House of Lords
hastened to reinstate itself in its former dignity. In the " Declaration
of Breda," the exiled Prince Charles Stuart promised a general amnesty,
religious toleration, and satisfaction to the army — promises which were
received with an outburst of popular enthusiasm throughout England.
The Convention-Parliament at once voted " that according to the
ancient and fundamental laws of this kingdom, the government is, and
ought to be, by King, Lords and Commons." The vote had hardly
passed when Prince Charles Stuart landed at Dover, May 25, 1660.
Four days later, May 29, 1660 — his thirtieth birthday — he made his
triumphal entry into London, amid the exultant shouts of the populace,
and was on that memorable day solemnly crowned King of England,
Scotland and Ireland with the title of CHAELES II. Puritan England
ended with the Stuart Restoration, and all was restored as before.
The thirty thousand veterans of the old Puritan army, drawn up
at Blackheath to witness the return of young Charles Stuart to the
land and throne of his father, was one of the most suggestive pictures
in the annals of England. That spectacle can be truly termed " The
Downfall of Puritanism." Those grim and stalwart veterans, who had
controlled the destinies of England for almost a score of years — whose
dauntless valor and irresistible charges had carried consternation into
the ranks of the Cavaliers, the Scotch Covenanters and the Irish rebels
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
— stood like lifeless statues, while the pealing bells, the blazing bonfires
and the exultant shouts of the populace welcomed the returning Stuart
to the throne of his ancestors.
These Puritan soldiers had swept away the English throne, the House
of Lords and the State Church of England, and had reorganized or
dismissed the House of Commons as they saw fit. But now they were
beaten without a battle, in the presence of the people, who were rein-
spired with their old reverence for royalty. The old heroes of Mar-
ston Moor and Neasby, of Preston, of Dunbar and Worcester, now
sadly and thoughtfully, but without a murmur, laid down their arms and
quietly returned to their homes, thereafter to be distinguished from
their neighbors only by greater industry and sobriety. Puritanism had
its representative in Oliver Cromwell, and his usurpation of power was
considered a Puritan usurpation. Puritanism became a political force,
instead of a moral power, when Cromwell assumed the powers and
dignity of royalty without the name, and when he governed England
through his army instead of his Parliament; and therefore at Crom-
well's death the downfall of Puritanism was inevitable.
As a political experiment, Puritanism had fallen never to rise again —
had ended in utter failure and disgust; but as a religious system of
national life it brought about the wildest outbreak of a moral revolt
that ever convulsed England. But Puritanism was not dead. Its
political death was merely a transformation. There now arose a nobler,
a grander Puritanism, whose spirit and whose influence has fully mani-
fested itself in two great works which have since been transmitted from
generation to generation — John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress, that
Puritan allegory which has been the most popular of all religious books ;
and John Milton's Paradise Lost, that Puritan epic which has been
the most popular of all English poems.
Quiet Dis-
banding
of the
Puritan
Army.
Puritan
Trans-
forma-
tion.
Works of
Bunyan
and
Milton.
SECTION IV.— STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION
OF 1688 (A. D. 1660-1689).
FEW sovereigns ever ascended a throne under more auspicious circum-
stances than did CHARLES II. No English king was ever welcomed
with so wild a delight as was he. The frenzied joy of the people of
London was demonstrated by ringing bells, blazing bonfires, glad songs
and shouts. The English people were relieved of great anxiety, as it
had been doubtful who could take hold of the helm of state which
Oliver Cromwell's strong hands had dropped; and Englishmen hoped
that adversity and exile would have a tendency to make the young
Stuart a wise and useful monarch.
Charles
II., A D.
1660-
1685.
Popular
Rejoic-
ings at
His Ac-
cession.
2870 REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Reasons Although Cromwell ruled with justice and made England glorious,
Public ^^e English people did not become reconciled to the practical despotism
Joy. which he had established. Even republicans were reluctant to live
under a government republican merely in name. As we have seen,
under Richard Cromwell and after his resignation England was fast
relapsing into anarchy. In fact, after his resignation England was
virtually without a head, and even without a settled government. The
monarchy had been abolished, and the republic had proven a failure.
None could tell what would follow, but all saw very clearly that the
Puritan army was the sole arbiter of the fate of England. The one
fate to be dreaded was a succession of irresponsible military despots.
England's Puritans and Churchmen, republicans and royalists, perceived the
from abyss that yawned before them, and forgot their differences for a time.
Anarchy. The only alternative for a peril that all could see but none could
fathom was the restoration of the monarchy and the return of the
Stuart d}rnasty. It was not, as has sometimes been asserted, the fickle-
ness of the English people that caused them to welcome the return of
the younger Charles Stuart to his father's throne with such unbounded
enthusiasm ; but it was their conscious and narrow escape from count-
less national woes.
Anti- The rule of the Puritans had been made irksome to the English
Reaction Peop-e because of their extreme legislation. Piety, or its profession,
had been made an essential qualification for office ; while innocent amuse-
ments had been strictly prohibited. The restoration of monarchy was
followed by the repeal of Puritan legislation, and the inevitable result
was reaction and a great social revolution. At no other time was the
dance around the May-pole on the village green so joyous as now, and
Christmas festivities were resumed with more than their accustomed
hilarity.
Popular The reign of Charles II. wouM have been more peaceful and popular
Disap- haci he possessed but ordinary wisdom, and had his father's experience
with and his own early misfortunes taught him to study and respect the
Charles wishes of his subjects. But he violated all the promises which he had
made, and disappointed all the expectations of the English people.
Although they welcomed the removal of the unnatural restraints in-
troduced by Puritanism, they were were not prepared for the unbridled
license that prevailed throughout the country after the Stuart Res-
toration. Very soon they were turning in disgust from the king whose
accession they had hailed with such delight, and were wishing that
they still had the great Lord Protector to rule over them.
The history of the stage most vividly illustrates the extent of this
great social revolution. Under Puritan rule even the most innocent
theatrical performances had been rigidly prohibited. After the Stuart
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
2871
Restoration the theater was restored, foul and revolting, even destitute
of a French refinement to its grossness. Real life in fashionable circles
was reflected by the painted scenery and loose manners of the new
stage. King Charles II. himself took the lead in the disgraceful revels
of the royal court. The court furnished the standard of morality to
the capital, whence the deadly contagion spread, infecting fashionable
society throughout the entire kingdom. Religion became a byword,
and morality became a mockery.
Says Macaulay concerning the corrupt state of fashionable society
in England during the reign of Charles II. : " There have come over
with him vices of every sort, and the basest and most shameful lust
'without love, servitude without loyalty, foulness of speech, dishonesty
of dealing, grinning contempt of all things good and generous. The
throne is surrounded by men whom the former Charles would have
spurned from his footstool. The altar is served by slaves whose knees
are supple to every being but God. Rhymers whose books the hang-
man should burn, panders, actors and buffoons, these drink a health and
throw a main with the king ; these have stars in their breasts and gold
sticks in their hands ; these shut out from his presence the best and
bravest of those who bled for his house. Even so doth God visit those
who know not how to value freedom."
The great mass of the English people, however, remained uncon-
taminated by this incoming tide of vice. Although Puritanism, as a
political power, was dead, and its very name had become a jest among
the now dominant Cavaliers, the minds and hearts of the English
people had become too deeply imbued with the sturdy virtues and the
deep religious spirit which were the very essence of Puritanism to be
corrupted by the social pollution which followed in the wake of the
Stuart Restoration. These Puritan virtues and this religious spirit
still remained to mould English character" and to modify English in-
stitutions, and are now the most precious inheritance of Englishmen.
Charles II. was thirty years old when he found himself so unex-
pectedly seated on the throne of England. He had an agreeable
person, a polished address and a cheerful and engaging demeanor.
His whole deportment tended to secure favor and popularity. His
excessive indolence and love of pleasure made him hate business and
leave the affairs of government to others. All that the new sovereign
cared for was to live idly and jovially.
The first measures of the new monarch gave general satisfaction to
the English nation. Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon, highly
esteemed for his virtues, was placed at the head of the Ministry ; and
by his uprightness and prudence the government was conducted for
some time with justice and moderation,
voi. 9 — 6
Vulgarity
of the
Stage and
Fashion-
able Life.
Macau-
lay's
State-
ment.
Perma-
netice of
Puritan
Virtues.
Char-
acter of
Charles
II.
Ministry
of the
Earl of
Claren-
don.
2872
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Act of
Oblivion
and In-
demnity .
Fate of
Regicides.
Trial of
Regicides.
General
Harrison
on
His Way
to the
Scaffold.
His
Address
on the
Scaffold.
His
Horrible
Execution.
The Convention-Parliament which restored the monarchy in 1660 at
the beginning of the new reign passed an Act of Oblivion and In-
demnity, extending a general amnesty to all who had taken sides against
King Charles I. during the Great Civil War, excepting the leaders who
had been most directly concerned in procuring the death of Charles I.
Of those brought to trial, thirteen were executed as regicides, and many
were imprisoned for life, although Charles II. had practically promised
to pardon all who voluntarily came forward and surrendered themselves.
Many fled to foreign lands; three of them — Goffe, Whalley and Dix-
well — finding refuge in the English colonies in America.
A court was organized for the trial of twenty-nine of the regicides.
This court was partly composed of men who as Parliamentary leaders
had been most active in bringing on the crisis, but who had no im-
mediate part in the death of Charles I. The twenty-nine regicides
who were brought before this court for trial were not permitted to make
any defense. Their judges acted as witnesses against them. By a re-
finement of cruelty, the executioner, with his axes, was brought into
court and seated beside the prisoners. The few witnesses against them
were suborned, but almost all of the prisoners were condemned to death.
The first of these regicides to suffer death was the good old repub-
lican general, Harrison, whose honest soldier-like appearance and gal-
lant demeanor had disarmed the suspicion and even excited the involun-
tary admiration of Charles I. when that king was a captive. General
Harrison was drawn on a hurdle from Newgate to Charing Cross, within
sight of the palace of Whitehall, October 13, 1660. As he was borne
along, his countenance was serene and even cheerful. A brutal wretch
called out from the multitude : " Where is your good old cause now ? "
Harrison smiled as he put his hand on his breast, and said : " Here it
is. I am going to seal it with my blood." On the way he said aloud
several times : " I go to suffer upon account of the most glorious
cause that ever was in the world."
General Harrison ascended the high scaffold with a firm step, and
there addressed the multitude of his revilers and accusers. Among
other things he told them that, though he was unjustly charged with
murder, he had always kept a good conscience both toward God and
toward man ; that he had no guilt upon his conscience, but comfort
and consolation, and the blessed hope of eternal peace in the next
wor.d.
Then followed a most revolting scene. Harrison was cut from the
gallows alive, and saw his own bowels thrown into a fire. He was then
quartered; and his heart, still palpitating, was torn out and shown to
the people. King Charles II. looked at this detestable scene from a
short distance.
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
Two days later, October 15, 1660, John Carew mffered death in the
same manner, declaring with his last breath that the cause of liberty
would survive. The next day, October 16, 1660, Coke and Peters were
also drawn to Charing Cross. In order to strike terror into the heart of
the learned Coke, who had been the counsel for Parliament in the trial
of Charles I., Charles II. caused the ghastly head of General Harrison,
with the face exposed and turned toward him, to be carried in the same
hurdle ; but the brave Coke was animated with fresh courage at be-
holding the horrid sight. The good old Puritan preacher, Peters, was
brought within the railing around the scaffold, and was thus obliged
to see the quartering of Coke. When the executioner had gotten
through with Coke he came to Peters, rubbing his bloody hands, and
asked the old preacher how he liked that work. Peters replied that he
was not in the least terrified, and he met death with a serene smile upon
his countenance.
Scenes as revolting characterized the execution of the other regicides
who had been condemned to death. All died with firmness, glorying
in the cause of liberty for which they now suffered on the scaffold.
Among the number was Sir Henry Vane. The bold and determined
attitude of those who suffered, and their addresses from the scaffold to
the multitudes before them, produced their natural effect upon the
people. Popular sympathy turned in favor of the executed regicides,
and thus their execution was demonstrated to have been a political
blunder.
Says Burnet : " Though the regicides were at that time odious be-
yond all expression, and the trials and executions of the first that
suffered were run to by vast crowds, and all people seemed pleased with
the sight, yet the odiousness of the crime came at last to be so much
flattened by the frequent executions, and by most of those who suffered
dying with so much firmness and show of piety, justifying what they
had done, not without a seeming joy for their suffering on that ac-
count, that the king was advised not to proceed farther, or at least
not to have the scene so near the court as Charing Cross."
Oliver Cromwell, though dead, was regarded as a proper object of
revenge. His body, and those of Ireton and Bradshaw, were torn from
their tombs in Westminster Abbey, and hung upon the gallows at Ty-
burn, the place for the execution of the lowest malefactors. This
base and silly revenge upon the lifeless remains of these three great
leaders of the Puritan Commonwealth furnished a mark for the drunken
insults of those who feared them when they were living. Their remains
were thrown into a deep pit at Tyburn, and the bodies of Pym and
Blake were also cast out of Westminster Abbey into St. Margaret's
churchyard. Indignities were also offered to the bodies of Cromwell's
Execution
of Carew,
Coke and
Peters.
Execution
of Sir
Henry
Vane and
Others.
Burnet's
State-
ment.
Indig-
nities
to the
Bodies
of Crom-
well,
Ireton,
Brad-
shaw,
Pvm and
Blake.
2874
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Milton's
Dismissal
Monk' 3
Reward.
Royalist
Dissatis-
faction.
Last
Vestige
of the
Feudal
System
Abol-
ished.
The
Cavalier
Parlia-
ment.
Corpora-
tion Act.
Act of
Uniform-
ity.
Conven-
ticle Act.
mother and his eldest daughter, the last of whom had been the wife of
General Ireton and General Fleetwood successively; though both women
had been models of female domestic virtue.
Charles II. also let the weight of his displeasure fall upon the
illustrious Puritan poet, John Milton, one of the best and greatest
men of the age, who had been Cromwell's Latin secretary. Milton was
now deprived of all his emp'oyments, and narrowly escaped with his
life, for having written a noble Defense of the English People in their
controversy with Charles I. General Monk was rewarded for his
treason to his late republican associates by being created Duke of
Albemarle and generalissimo.
The Act of Oblivion and Indemnity restored to the royalists the
estates which the Commonwealth had confiscated, except when the
transfer had been made by sale ; but this act gave the royalists no
redress for other losses. For this reason the dissatisfied Cavaliers
called it " one of oblivion to the king's friends and indemnity to his
enemies," as many of them had been mulcted without mercy under the
Commonwealth, and many had been compelled to give up their estates
to meet the necessities of the government.
The Convention-Parliament abolished the last vestige of the Feudal
System — the tenure of lands by knight service, including the ward-
ships of minors and the marriage of heiresses ; which had been ade-
quate sources of revenue to the king, and instead of which he now
received a life-grant of one million two hundred thousand pounds.
The dissolution of the Convention-Parliament and a new election
resulted in the return of the Cavalier Parliament of 1661, which en-
deavored by successive acts to restore Episcopacy as the state religion
of England. The Solemn League and Covenant was ordered to be
burned by the public hangman. Charles II. himself became an Epis-
copalian, and declared that " Presbyterianism is no religion for a gen-
tleman."
The Corporation Act, passed by the Cavalier Parliament, required
all public officials to worship in accordance with the usages of the State
Church of England, to renounce the Covenant, and to take an oath
denying the right of a subject to resist the king under any circum-
stances whatever. A new Act of Uniformity, passed by the same
Parliament, required all the clergy to adopt the Book of Common
Prayer and to assent to all its contents, on penalty of ejection from
their livings. Two thousand Puritan clergymen were ejected from
their livings on the anniversary of the Massacre of St. Bartholomew
for refusing to comply with this Act of Uniformity.
The Conventicle Act, another measure of the Cavalier Parliament,
forbade the meeting of more than five persons at one place and time
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
for worship, except by the use of the liturgy ; and the Five Mile Act, Five Mile
also passed by this Parliament, forbade any dispossessed clergyman to
appear within five miles of any town or of his former parish, and ex-
cluded all such Nonconformist and Dissenting clergymen from the work
of instructing the young, dooming them to penury and even to starva-
tion and death. The penalties for violation of these statutes were
fines, imprisonment and banishment ; and English prisons were soon Bunyan's
filled with Puritan offenders, among whom was John Bunyan, who was "J^e^011
incarcerated for twelve years in Bedford jail, during which he wrote
Pilgrim's Progress.
The Cavalier Parliament also passed an act for the suppression of Persecu-
the Quakers, who were particularly odious on account of their refusal *lon °*
to bear arms or take oaths. Their founder, George Fox, suffered the Fox
most unrelenting persecution, his meetings being broken up and him-
self imprisoned. In the course of a few years twelve thousand Quakers
were in prison.
Although Charles II. had solemnly signed the Scotch Covenant at Attempt
Scone on New Year's Day, 1651, thus pledging himself to maintain ^ ^°'"
the Presbyterian religion in Scotland, he was no sooner securely estab- pacy on
lished on the thrones of England and Scotland than he not only turned Scotland'
Episcopalian himself, but also resolved to force his Scotch subjects to
accept Episcopacy. The Earl of Lauderdale was sent to Scotland as
Governor with unlimited powers to carry out the king's will, and he was
aided by a Privy Council ; while a body of troops, called the Life-
guard, was enlisted to maintain the royal authority and to sustain its
agents. /
The " Drunken Parliament " of Scotland far surpassed the Conven- The
tion and Cavalier Parliaments of England in its loyalty to King "e^^°^"
Charles II., annulling all the acts of preceding Scottish Parliaments liament"
for twent}r-eight years, and ordering the Marquis of Argyle and the
famous divine James Guthrie, the leaders of the Covenanters, to be
seized and executed in May, 1661. Episcopal bishops were appointed
for Scotland, and James Sharp was created Archbishop of St. Andrews
and Primate of Scotland.
In 1662 the Scotch Parliament passed an act requiring all officers of Dismissal
the crown in Scotland to sign a declaration that the Covenant was
an illegal oath, and therefore not binding. All clergymen in Scot- Preachers.
land were required to be reinstated in their livings by a bishop. Those
who refused were ordered to resign their churches and to remove with
their families from their parishes. Thereupon three hundred and fifty
Presbyterian ministers resigned, and were followed by their congrega-
tions into the open fields, where they held religious services in accord-
ance with the dictates of their consciences.
5—23
2876
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Cruel
Persecu-
tion of
Scotch
Cove-
nanters.
Brutal
Massa-
cres and
Tortures.
Out-
breaks
and In-
creased
Perse-
cutions.
Con-
stancy
and
Devotion
of the
Scotch
Cove-
nanters.
King
Charles
II. Not
a Perse-
cutor.
The Scotch Parliament enacted severe laws to force the Presbyterian
clergymen to discontinue their preaching and to compel the Coven-
anters to attend their parish churches, in which the Episcopal service
was now conducted. The arbitrary Court of High Commission was re-
vived, and a most cruel and unrelenting warfare was commenced against
all Scots who refused to conform to the standard of the Episcopal
State Church of England. Soldiers were posted at the various centers
in Scotland to compel the Covenanters to attend the worship of the
Established Church and to collect fines from non-attendants. The
royal troops attacked the " conventicles," as the open-air meetings of
the Covenanters were called by the Episcopalians, and hunted the
Covenanters through the country, cruelly torturing or executing them
when they captured them, sparing neither age nor sex in these relent-
less persecutions.
The faithful Covenanters, when driven from the open fields, armed
for self-defense and held secret meetings in the woods at midnight,
where they were sometimes surprised and mercilessly massacred by
English soldiers. Many an awful death by slow and cruel torture,
many a sad and lingering one in dark and dreary dungeons, occurred
in the sea-girt prison of Bass Rock and the gloomy walls of Dum-
barton Castle.
The cruelties of the royal troops caused several outbreaks of the
Covenanters. An impotent rising of the persecuted Covenanters in the
vicinity of Edinburgh in 1662 was seized upon as a pretext for the
most barbarous legislation against them on the part of the Scotch
Parliament. The unfortunate Covenanters became the victims of the
most dreadful cruelty, the thumb-screw and the " boot " being common
instruments of torture.
Thenceforth until the Revolution of 1688 the Scotch Covenanters
maintained their faith amidst persecutions and sufferings which shock
the mind. The prisons of Scotland were filled with Covenanters.
Archbishop Sharp was generally regarded as the one responsible for this
cruel persecution. The most formidable uprising of the Covenanters
was crushed in the battle of Pentland in 1666.
The persecutions of the Puritans of England and the Covenanters
of Scotland were the acts of the royalist Councils and the Parliaments
of the two kingdoms, as the careless nature of King Charles II. ren-
dered him unfit for a persecutor. So far as he was personally con-
cerned, the king was a Roman Catholic, if anything; and he some-
times insisted upon indulgence for Dissenters and Nonconformists, in
order to shield Catholic " Recusants." But the disgraceful licentious-
ness of his court alarmed and disgusted even his best friends and
staunchest adherents.
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
8877
In 1662 King Charles II. married Catharine of Braganza, a daugh-
ter of King Alfonso VI. of Portugal. Tangier, in the north-westem
corner of Africa, and Bombay, in Hindoostan, were ceded to England
by Portugal as the new queen's dowry. As Tangier was of no prac-
tical use it was soon abandoned, while Bombay was bestowed upon the
English East India Company.
The king's Portuguese marriage aroused popular dissatisfaction in
Eng^nd ; but the English people were aroused to the greatest indigna-
tion when Charles II. sold Dunkirk to France, thus parting with this
foreign acquisition of England in Cromwell's time, to replenish his
coffers, which were constantly exhausted notwithstanding the lavish
revenues which Parliament granted him. The English people regarded
the sale of Dunkirk to France by Charles II. as the greatest national
disgrace that had befallen them since the loss of Calais to the same
foreign power during the reign of " Bloody Mary " little more than
a century before.
The English people were also dissatisfied when King Charles II. in-
volved them in a useless naval war with Holland, in 166i. This war
was caused by the rivalry of the English and Dutch merchants seeking
a monopoly of the trade in ivory and gold-dust on the coast of Guinea^
in Western Africa. The principal English naval commanders in this
war were the king's brother James, Duke of York; Prince Rupert of
the Palatinate, so famous as a royalist general und°r Charles I. in the
Great Civil War ; and the Duke of Albemarle, formerly General Monk.
In 1664 an English fleet sent to America conquered the Dutch colony
of New Netherlands, taking its capital, New Amsterdam. King
Charles II. granted the conquered Dutch province to his brother James,
Duke of York, as a reward for his services in the war. The name of
New Amsterdam was then changed to New York, as was also the name
of the entire province of New Netherlands, while the name of Fort
Orange, on the Hudson, was changed to Albany. In 1665 an Eng-
lish fleet under the Duke of York won a signal victory over the Dutch
fleet under Opdam off Lowestoff, on the coast of Suffolk.
While the war with Holland was in progress London suffered two
great calamities. In the summer of 1665 the plague, which at that
period always was lurking in the suburbs and in the undrained and
narrow alleys, spread over the city and in six months destroyed the lives
of one hundred thousand of its inhabitants ; and grass grew in streets
that had been the busy marts of trade. Early in September, 1666, a
great fire which raged three days reduced two-thirds of the city to
ashes, destroying thirteen thousand dwellings and ninety churches, and
leaving two hundred thousand of the population utterly destitute.
This latter calamity was a blessing in disguise, as it destroyed the
Marriage
of Charles
II.
Sale of
Dunkirk
to France.
Second
Naval
War
•with the
Dutch
Republic.
English
Conquest
of New
Nether-
lands.
Great
Plague
and
Great
Fire in
London.
2878
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Licen-
tiousness
of King
Charles
II.
Franco-
Dutch
Alliance.
Battle of
North
Foreland.
Dutch
Fleet
in the
Thames.
Peace of
Breda.
Fall,
Disgrace
and Exile
of the
Earl of
Claren-
don.
filthy sections of the city still infected with the plague; and in time
well-drained streets and more commodious dwellings had taken the place
of narrow lanes and wretched hovels. Among the buildings destroyed
was St. Paul's Cathedral; and the rebuilding of this splendid edifice
was the work of the great architect, Sir Christopher Wren.
These awful calamities had no effect on the king, who all the time
was plunging deeper and deeper into luxury, extravagance and vice.
He misused the money which Parliament had granted him for the prose-
cution of the war with the Dutch Republic, lavishing it upon his
worthless favorites and his mistresses, thus leaving his ships to decay,
while their unpaid crews mutinied. Charles II. is charged with having
brought on this war for the sole purpose of obtaining money for his
vile pastimes.
In January, 1666, King Louis XIV. of France entered into an
alliance with Holland and declared war against England, sending six
thousand men to aid the Dutch, who also had the alliance of Den-
mark. The Dutch fleet defeated the English fleet in a severe battle of
four days off the North Foreland, June 11—14, 1666; but the English
navy afterward won a victory over the Dutch. During the progress
of the negotiations for peace in 1667 the Dutch fleet under De Ruyter,
taking advantage of the weakened condition of the English navy in
consequence of the misappropriation of the funds voted by Parlia-
ment, sailed boldly up the Thames and the Medway, burned many ships
at Chatham, bombarded and captured Sheerness and threatened Lon-
don, whose inhabitants heard the roar of foreign guns for the first
time.
Louis XIV. of France, who only wanted the two great maritime
powers to exhaust each other, now deserted the Dutch Republic ; and
peace was signed at Breda, in Holland, July 31, 1667, thus ending this
second naval war between England and Holland. By the Peace of
Breda, the English retained the provinces of New York and New
Jersey, in North America, which they had conquered from the Dutch ;
while the Dutch retained Surinam, or Dutch Guiana, in South America,
and the island of Polerone, in the Moluccas. The treaty also modified
the Navigation Act so far that all merchandise coming down the Rhine
was permitted to be imported into England in Dutch vessels — a measure
which gave the Dutch control of much of the commerce of Germany.
The English people held the Earl of Clarendon, their upright Prime
Minister, responsible for their humiliation and disgrace in consequence
of the disasters to their arms in the war with Holland ; and, though he
had been the faithful friend of Charles II. during the latter's exile,
he wearied his ungrateful king by his virtues as much as he did the
English people by his opposition to popular rights. Both court and
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
2879
Parliament therefore agreed that this great statesman should be the
victim of the popular displeasure. The Earl of Clarendon was ac-
cordingly disgraced and driven from office in 1667, and was impeached
by the Commons. He fled to France, where he passed the remainder of
his days in exile, during which he wrote his famous History of the Re-
bellion. His youngest daughter, Anne Hyde, married the king's
brother James, Duke of York, and was the mother of Mary and Anne,
afterward Queens of England.
After the disgrace of Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon, a new
Ministry was formed, known as the Cabal, from the initials of the
names of the five noblemen who composed it — Clifford, Ashley, Buck-
ingham, Arlington and Lauderdale. The word Cabal had previously
been used to signify a Cabinet; but so corrupt was this famous, or
infamous, Cabal of Charles II. that the word has ever since been ap-
plied to cliques of poetical tricksters. Ashley Cooper was the ablest
statesman of the Cabal Ministry. Sir Thomas Clifford and the Earls
of Arlington and Lauderdale were men of less ability. The Duke of
Buckingham, the " witty duke," was the king's vile associate in de-
bauchery.
The first action of the Cabal Ministry was honorable. Through
the mediation of Sir William Temple with De Witt, the Grand Pen-
sionary, or Prime Minister of the Dutch Republic, a Triple Alliance
was formed by England, Holland and Sweden in January, 1688, to
check the ambitious schemes of Louis XIV. of France, who had begun
a war against Spain for the purpose of extending the north-eastern
frontier of France to the Rhine by wresting the Spanish Netherlands
and Franche-Comte from the dominion of the feeble King Charles II.
of Spain. This Triple Alliance of England, Holland and Sweden
forced the King of France to relinquish his ambitious designs by the
Peace of Aix la Chapelle in 1668, contrary to the personal wishes of
the English king.
But King Charles II. of England and his Cabal Ministry soon de-
scended from the high position which they had assumed as the pro-
tectors and defenders of Charles II. of Spain against the grasping
ambition of Louis XIV. of France. The action which brands Charles
II. of England and the Cabal with the deepest infamy was a secret
treaty which they negotiated with Louis XIV. at Dover, May 22, 1670,
by which the English monarch agreed to become a Roman Catholic
and also the French king's ally in a war against Holland, in return for
an annual pension of three million francs. This disgraceful Treaty
of Dover stipulated that the King of England should announce his
adoption of Roman Catholicism as soon as it was prudent to do so,
and that Louis XIV. should furnish him with six thousand French
The
Cabal
Ministry.
Triple
Alliance
against
Louis
XIV. of
France.
Peace of
Aix la
Chapelle.
The Dis-
graceful
Treaty of
Dover.
2880
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
England's
Humilia-
tion.
Third
Naval
War
with the
Dutch
Republic.
Battle of
Solebay.
Declara-
tion of
Indul-
gence.
Test Act
troops in case his change of religion should cause any popular out-
break in England.
The Treaty of Dover placed England in the lowest depths of
humiliation. Under Queen Elizabeth she had been second only to
Spain, if to any of the great powers of Europe. With the accession
of the House of Stuar* in 1603 she descended to a secondary rank.
The eight years of Oliver Cromwell's vigorous administration raised
her again to a commanding position among the nations of the world;
and an English ambassador who resided at the French court, both
during the Commonwealth and during the reign of Charles II., asserted
that he was treated with far greater respect as the representative of
Cromwell than as the plenipotentiary of Charles II., though the latter
was the cousin of Louis XIV.
Conformably to the Treaty of Dover, Charles II. of England com-
menced hostilities against the Dutch Republic on the sea, in 1672, as
the ally of the French king. The principal English naval comman-
ders in this war were the famous Prince Rupert, Lord Sandwich and
the king's brother James, Duke of York. The Dutch navy gained sev-
eral victories over the combined fleets of England and France.
In the battle of Solebay, May 28, 1672, the Dutch fleet under De
Ruyter gained a brilliant victory over the united English and French
fleets. Lord Sandwich was blown up and perished with his entire
crew, and the Duke of York narrowly escaped a similar fate.
In 1672, just before the commencement of this last war with Hol-
land, King Charles II. had issued a Declaration of Indulgence, estab-
lishing the principle of religious toleration to all sects in England.
This royal edict liberated thousands of Puritans who had pined in
prison for many years. John Bunyan left the cell which he had occu-
pied in Bedford jail for twelve years. Twelve thousand Quakers were
among the liberated. The English people generally distrusted the
king's motives in issuing the Declaration of Indulgence, believing that
it was simply the initiative in a scheme to restore the Roman Catholics
to office and to reestablish Roman Catholicism as the state religion of
England. Parliament's persistent refusal to vote supplies forced
Charles II. to withdraw this edict of toleration during the same year,
1672.
Though Charles II. outwardly conformed to the Episcopal Church,
he was beMeved to be a Roman Catholic at heart ; and his brother James,
Duke of York, was an avowed Catholic. The more the Stuarts favored
Roman Catholicism, the more firmly did the English people and Par-
liament adhere to Protestantism ; and, almost as soon as the Declaration
of Indulgence had been recalled, the two Houses of Parliament fol-
lowed up their advantage by passing the Test Act early in 1673,
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
2881
requiring all civil and military officers in the English service to take
the Oath of Supremacy, which contained a denial of the doctrines of
the Roman Catholic Church and an affirmation of the doctrines of the
State Church of England.
In obedience to this act, the Duke of York resigned his commission
as Lord High Admiral ; and his resignation was followed by hundreds
of others in the military and naval service, thus showing to what an
extent Roman Catholics had already been appointed to office, and con-
firming the previous popular suspicions of the king's Roman Catholic
tendencies.
When the disgraceful Treaty of Dover became known, the people
of England felt themselves basely betrayed by their king. So unpop-
ular was this war in England that Parliament refused to vote supplies
to carry it on. The infamous Cabal Ministry was broken up in 1673 ;
and a new Cabinet under Sir Thomas Osborne, Earl of Danby, held
the reins of power until 1678; while Ashley Cooper, Earl of Shaftes-
bury, who had been dismissed from the office of Chancellor, became the
leader of the popular party.
The great opposition of the English people and Parliament forced
Charles II. to renounce his alliance with the King of France and to
make peace with Holland in February, 1674; but Charles II. still
maintained his secret treaty with Louis XIV. and still rendered him
such services as might entitle him to his annual pension, although the
English people were clamoring for war with France in the interest
of the Dutch Republic.
Widespread fear and distrust now prevailed throughout England.
The course of Charles II. had aroused a suspicion that he and Louis
XIV. of France had entered into a secret plot to ruin English freedom
and to make England a Catholic country. In this excited state of
public feeling, in 1678, when the English people were ready to credit
any wild tale, Titus Gates, an infamous impostor and adventurer,
spread rumors of a " Popish Plot " to assassinate King Charles II.,
burn London, massacre all the Protestants in England, and place the
Duke of York on the English throne on condition that he should hold
the kingdom as the Pope's vassal.
Titus Gates had been a Baptist preacher, a curate, a navy chaplain ;
and, after being left penniless by his infamous character, he sought
bread by becoming a Catholic, and was admitted into the Order of
Jesuits at Valladolid and St. Omer. While in Spain he heard of the
secret Jesuit meetings in London ; and after being expelled from the
order for misconduct he invented his story of the " Popish Plot," made
up of the basest falsehoods ; but the fears of the English people had
destroyed their power of judgment. Gates made affidavit of the truth
Resigna-
tioa of
Roman
Oath lie
Officials.
Anti-war
Feeling.
Earls of
Danby
and
Shaftes-
bury.
Peace
with
Holland.
Royal
Secret
Treaty.
Titus
Gates
and His
Story of a
" Popish
Plot."
Titus
Gates 's
Fabrica-
tions and
Perjuries.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
of his story before Sir Edmondsbury Godfrey, a London magistrate.
In the midst of this excitement, the correspondence of Edward Coleman,
secretary of the Duchess of York, was seized. The panic was height-
ened when Sir Edmondsbury Godfrey was found dead in a field near
London, and it was assumed th^t Jesuits had murdered him to silence
disclosures. A solemn funeral added to the public agitation.
Anti- The murder was like a spark in a powder magazine. All England
Panic^m was ^n a ^renzy °f excitement. Both Houses of Parliament ordered an
England, investigation, in which the Earl of Shaftesbury took the lead. Gates
made fresh depositions charging five Catholic Lords with complicity in
the plot, and these five accused Lords were committed to the Tower,
while two thousand suspected persons were hurried to prison. The
thirty thousand Catholics in London were ordered to leave the city.
The train-bands were called to arms, and patrols paraded the streets
of London to guard against a Catholic rising.
Exclusion The Earl of Shaftesbury caused a bill to be rushed through both
Houses of Parliament, in spite of the fierce opposition of the royalists,
excluding Catholics from membership in either House — an exclusion
which remained in force a century and a half. This exclusion had been
aimed at the Duke of York, but the Earl of Shaftesbury was defeated
by a proviso exempting the duke from its provisions.
William The offer of a reward for fresh testimony brought forward another
dOth r miscreant named William Bedloe, whose stories were more startling
Perjured than those of Titus Gates. Bedloe testified under oath that a Catholic
era"1" armj was about to land in England to massacre the Protestants. Gates
had the insolence to accuse even the queen, at the bar of the House of
Lords, with knowledge of the plot to murder her husband. These fresh
Another charges produced a fresh panic. The arrested Catholic Lords were
^ti" ordered to be impeached. The arrest of every Catholic in England
Panic. was ordered. Rewards promised for additional information brought
forward a multitude of equally infamous spies and informers, who vied
with each other in circulating some fresh rumor more exciting and
atrocious than the last.
Execution The trial and execution of James Coleman began a series of trials,
of Many convictions and executions which followed each other with indecent
Innocent
Roman haste — judicial murders which are remembered even now with horror.
Catholics, rpj^ perjure(j testimony of Gates and Bedloe sent many innocent
Catholics to the scaffold, all of whom died protesting their innocence
to the very last. The most eminent of the victims thus offered up to
satisfy the public demand for Catholic blood was Lord Stafford, in
December, 1680.
Oates's The villain Titus Gates became the most distinguished man in
Reward. England. He strutted about in lawn sleeves like those of a bishop,
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
2888
had a guard for his protection, and received an adequate pension.
Fresh informers were brought forward to swear to the existence of a
fresh plot. Gigantic torch-light processions paraded the streets of
London, and the effigy of the Pope was burned amid the wild outcry of
the excited populace.
The English ambassador at Paris, Edward Montague, returned home
upon quarreling with the Prime Minister, the Earl of Danby ; obtained
a seat in the House of Commons ; and, in spite of the seizure of his
papers, laid on the table of the House the dispatch which had been
sent to Louis XIV., demanding payment of the English king's services
to France during the late negotiations. The Commons were thunder-
struck. As the Earl of Danby's name was signed to the dispatch, he
was at once impeached on a charge of high treason. Charles II. was
at the Earl of Shaftesbury's mercy ; and, in order to prevent the dis-
closure of the secrets of his disgraceful foreign policy, the king agreed
to the Earl of Shaftesbury's demand for a dissolution of the Cavalier
Parliament and the election of a new Parliament, along with the dis-
missal of the Earl of Danby's Ministry and the appointment of a new
Cabinet, in consideration of which the Earl of Shaftesbury dropped
the impeachment proceedings against the Earl of Danby. Thus
ended the Cavalier Parliament, which had existed seventeen years, A.
D. 1661-1678.
The new Parliament, in which the popular party had a majority,
convened in March, 1679. The king then redeemed his pledge by dis-
missing the Earl of Danby and appointing a new Ministry from the
popular party with the Earl of Shaftesbury at its head.
This Parliament is famous for having passed the celebrated Habeas
Corpus Act, the third great statute in the progress of English consti-
tutional liberty, and which effectually prevents arbitrary or prolonged
imprisonments. By the provisions of the Habeas Corpus Act no per-
son can be lawfully detained in prison unless he is accused of a specified
offense for which he is legally subject to punishment, and it secures a
prompt trial of the accused. Every jailer, upon a writ of habeas
corpus, issued by the judge at the prisoner's demand, must produce
his prisoner in court and show the cause of his imprisonment. The
Habeas Corpus Act only reaffirms a recognized principle in English
law ever since the adoption of Magna Charta ; and it is enforced in
every country which has derived its ideas of law and justice from
England, being adopted in the United States, where it can be suspended
only in cases of rebellion or war.
This Parliament also took up an Exclusion Bill, designed to deprive
the king's brother James, Duke of York, of his right to succeed to the
English throne, and to settle the succession on James's daughter Mary,
Continued
Anti-
Catholic
Alarm.
Fall
of the
Earl of
Danby's
Ministry
and Dis-
solution
of the
Cavalier
Parlia-
ment.
Ministry
of the
Earl of
Shaftes-
bury.
Habeas
Corpus
Act.
Exclusion
Bill.
£884,
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Dissolu-
tion of
Parlia-
ment.
New
Parlia-
ment Pro-
rogued
and Dis-
solved.
Petition-
ers and
Abhor-
rers.
Whigs
and
Tories.
Result
of the
" Popish
Plot "
Story.
the wife of Prince WiEiam of Orange, the Stadtholder of the Dutch
Republic, whom she had married in 1677, and who afterward became
King William III. of England. This Exclusion Bill passed the House
of Commons in May, 1679, but King Charles II. dissolved Parliament
in order to prevent the measure from going to the House of Lords.
The election which followed returned a Parliament so unfavorable
to the king's wishes that Charles II. prorogued it on the very day when
it shouM have assembled. By repeating this prorogation, Charles II.
kept it from meeting for an entire year. When it was finally allowed
to convene, in October, 1680, it took up the Exclusion Bill, and was
also dissolved. The next Parliament was summoned at Oxford in
March, 1681, but it manifested the same spirit as its predecessors, and
was dissolved after a session of but seven days.
During these contests between Charles II. and Parliament the
English people became divided between two parties — the Petitioners
and the Abhorrers — the former resolutely demanding the meeting of
Parliament, and the latter expressing their abhorrence of any one who
would presume to dictate to the king. The popular party had pre-
viously been called the Country party, and the party sustaining the
king had been designated the Court party.
But the more permanent party names of Whig and Tory arose about
this time also, and these designations have continued almost to the
present day, having in recent years given place to the terms Liberal
and Conservative. The Whigs recognized the right to resist any in-
fringement of the liberties of the people on the part of the king;
while the Tories maintained the doctrine of absolute passive obedience,
denying the right of resistance to royal authority under any circum-
stances whatever. These names were at first applied by each of the
parties to its opponent as terms of reproach ; certain religious fanatics
in Scotland being called Whigs, and certain Catholic banditti in Ireland
being styled Tories. Altered circumstances have made some change in
the principles, as well as in the names, of the two great parties in
England during the last two centuries ; though the one advocates prog-
ress and reform, while the other clings with reverence to the traditions
of the past.
It had already been discovered that the entire story of a " Popish
Plot " was a pure fabrication. The execution of the innocent Lord
Stafford had changed the popular rage against the " Papists " into
pity and remorse, so that no more blood was shed in the " Popish Plot."
The entire crowd of base adventurers and informers, when they found
their infamous occupation gone, passed over to the opposite party,
and, by turning state's evidence, contributed to ruin those who had
employed them.
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
2885
The various real and pretended plots, along with the disreputable
course of the Earl of Shaftesbury and the violence of the popular
party in Parliament, produced a reaction in the public mind in favor
of the king; and the king's dissolution of Parliament and his appeal
to the justice of the nation were received with a general outburst of
loyalty, April, 16S2. The Church rallied to the king, and his royal
declaration was read from every pulpit in England; while the univer-
sities solemnly decided that " no religion, no law, no fault, no for-
feiture " could avail to bar the sacred right of hereditary succession.
The new strength of the crown was indicated by the arrest of the
Earl of. Shaftesbury on a charge of suborning false witnesses to the
" Popish Plot." London was still true, however, to the Earl of Shaftes-
bury. The Middlesex grand jury ignored the bill of his indictment,
and his discharge from the Tower was greeted in every street of the
city with bonfires and the ringing of bells. But the loyal enthusiasm
of the English people received a fresh impulse by the publication of
the disgraced Prime Minister's papers, which disclosed the scheme of
a secret association for the advancement of the exclusion of the Duke
of York, the members of which bound themselves to obey the orders of
Parliament even after its prorogation or dissolution by the crown.
Charles II. boldly pushed his advantages, while the Duke of York
returned in triumph to St. James's Palace. A daring breach of cus-
tom installed Tories in 1682 as sheriffs of the city of London, and the
packed juries which they selected placed every exclusionist at the
mercy of the crown. After vain plottings, the Earl of Shaftesbury
fled to Holland, where he scon afterward died, January, 1683.
But in 1633 a real Protestant plot was discovered. Several worthless
characters had conspired to waylay and shoot King Charles II. and
his brother, the Duke of York, as they rode past a certain place known
as the Rye House, on their way to the races at Newmarket; but the
ruffians were detected and executed. This conspiracy is known as the
Rye House Plot.
Six conspirators of high rank desired a change in the government,
though perhaps none of them intended any personal harm to the king.
These Avere the Duke of Monmouth, the king's son by a low-born mis-
tress ; Lord William Russell ; the Earl of Essex ; Lord Howard ; Alger-
non Sidney ; and John Hampden, grandson of the illustrious Parlia-
mentary leader in the struggle with Charles I. Russell desired simply
tlie exclusion of the Duke of York from the succession to the English
throne, and a return to just government under the reigning king and
the existing constitution. Sidney was a republican by principle, and
had opposed Cromwell's usurpation as well as the Stuart Restoration,
but he was no assassin.
Popular
Reaction
in Favor
of King
Charles
II.
Disgrace
of the
Earl of
Shaftes-
bury.
Persecu-
tion of
Exclu-
sionists.
Rye
House
Plot.
Six Whig
Leaders.
2886
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Their
Arrest
and Pun-
ishment.
Lord
William
Russell's
Martyr-
dom.
Algernon
Sidney's
Martyr-
dom.
The plans of these Whig leaders were probably unconnected with
the Rye House Plot; but they were arrested on the accusation of one
of the conspirators, and their designs were betrayed by one of their
number, Lord Howard. The Earl of Essex died in the Tower. Lord
William Russell and Algernon Sidney were beheaded. The Duke of
Monmouth, who had fled when the conspiracy was first disclosed, was
pardoned by his father, the king, and was allowed to appear at court ;
but he excited the disgust of all parties by his double dealing, and was
again exiled.
The juries which- tried and condemned Lord William Russell and
Algernon Sidney was packed. Concerning Russell, Hume says : " It
was proved that an insurrection had been deliberated on by the pris-
oner; the surprisal of the guards deliberated but not fully resolved
upon ; and that an assassination of the king had not once been mentioned
or imagined by him." The law was stretched to his condemnation, and
his blood was too eagerly desired by the tyrant Charles II. °.nd the
bigoted Duke of York to allow of the remission of the sentence of death.
He was beheaded in Lincoln's Inn Fields, July 21, 1683, in the forty-
second year of his age. His most bitter enemies have testified to his
character for sincerity, probity and private worth. His wife secured
the admiration of the world by the affectionate zeal and devotion with
which she aided her husband, and by the magnanimity with which she
bore her loss. She accompanied him into court upon his trial ; and
when he was refused counsel, and only permitted to have an amanuensis,
she assumed that character, thus exciting the sympathy and respect of
all who beheld her. Lord William Russell was an ancestor of the late
Lord John Russell, the famous English statesman.
Algernon Sidney was tried for high treason before the brutal Chief
Justice Jeffries. His confederate, Lord Howard, who had turned
state's evidence to save himself, was the only witness against him ; and,
as the law for high treason required two witnesses, the Attorney-General
had recourse to an expedient. In defiance of law and common sense,
the additional testimony was held to be supplied by extracts from some
discourses on government, discovered in manuscript in his closet, though
not proved to be his handwriting, which asserted the lawfulness of
resisting tyrants, and the preference of a free government to an arbi-
trary one. Notwithstanding a spirited defense he was pronounced
guilty, and was beheaded on Tower Hill, December 7, 1683. As he
was dragged on a sledge to the place of execution, one of the multitude
called to him : "You never sat on a a-eat so glorious !" Just before lay-
ing his head on the block he handed the sheriff a paper, maintaining the
injustice of his condemnation, and ending with a prayer for the "good
old cause." He met his sad fate with firmness and constancy, and his
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
288V
memory has ever since been cherished as that of a martyr tu the cause
of free government.
Whi'e avoiding an open or defiant disregard of the laws, Charles II-
procecdcd deliberately to make his power absolute, thus inaugurating
what has been termed the Second Stuart Tyranny, to distinguish it
from the First Stuart Tyranny under Charles I. from 1629 to 16iO,
v, lien there was no Parliament:. During the last two years of his reign,
A. D. 16S3-1685, Charles II. was as absolute a monarch as any in
Europe. The Test Act excluding Catholics from office was quietly
gnorcd, and the Duke of York was restored to his former position as
Lord LTiijh Admiral.
O
In the meantime blood had also flowed in Scotland. The severities of
the Earl of Lauderdale as governor of that counti-y had already driven
the Covenanters to desperation ; and some of them attacked James
Sharp, Archbishop of St. Andrews and Primate of Scotland, dragged
him from his coach and murdered him upon the public highway in the
presence- of his daughter, May 3, 1679. Of course this crime injured
the cause of the Covenanters more than persecution could have injured
it. Their religious meetings were broken up by soldiers ; and the
Covenanters assembled for worship only in the wildest recesses of the
hills, all the men being armed, and sentinels being posted to guard
against surprise. The principal stronghold of the Covenanters was
the hill country between Lanark and Ayr.
The most brutal of the king's officers in breaking up the meetings of
the Covenanters was John Graham of ClaveiMr.i.se, who massacred men,
women and children with the most atrocious cruelty. In Mav, 1679, he
was routed by a band of armed Covenanters whom he had disturbed at
their worship, and lost thirty of his troopers. At another time eight
thousand Covenanters seized the city of Glasgow ; but the king's
bastard ton, the Duke of Monmouth, with fifteen thousand royal troops,
defeated an army of Covenanters in the battle of Bothwell Bridge, in
June, 1679, taking twelve hundred of them prisoners, most of whom
were transported to the English colonies in North America, where they
ended their days.
King Charles II., who had formerly pleased his more extreme Protest-
ant subjects by the marriage of his eldest niece Mary to William,
Prince of Orange, the Stadtholder of the Dutch Republic, now took a
simi'ar ?tep by the espousal of her sister Anne to a brother of King
Christian V. of Denmark. These princesses were the only children of
the king's brother James, Duke of York, and were in the line of suc-
cession to the Enofish and Scottish thrones after their father. Their
mother was Anne Hyde, the daughter of the Earl of Clarendon, and the
first wife of the Duke of York, as already noticed. After her death the
VOL. 9—6
Second
Stuart
Tyranny.
Violent
Persecu-
tion cf
Scotch
Covenant-
ers.
Outbreak
and Ove;-
thiow of
Cove-
nanters.
Mar-
riages
of the
Daugh-
ters of
the Duke
of York.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Mis-
tresses
and
Bastards
of King
Charles
II.
Freedom
of the
Press.
New
English
Colonies
in North
America.
Progress
of
Science.
Royal
Society.
Art and
Archi-
tecture.
Duke of York married an Italian princess, Maria Beatrice of Este,
daughter of the Duke of Modena.
Charles II. had mistress after mistress, and the guilt of these disso-
lute women was emblazoned to the world by the gift of titles and
estates, so that royal bastards were set among the English nobility. The
Duke of Monmouth was the son whom Charles II. had with Lucy
Walters, and was the ancestor of the Dukes of Buccleugh. The Dukes
of Grafton are descended from Charles II. and Barbara Palmer, whom
the king created Duchess of Cleveland. The Dukes of St. Albans are
the posterity of Charles II. and Nell Gwynn. The Dukes of Richmond
are the descendants of the same king and Louise de Querouaille, a
French mistress, whom the king created Duchess of Portsmouth, and
whom the French court had sent to England to win Charles II. to its
interests.
The freedom of the press was secured during the reign of Charles II.
This result was accomplished by Parliament's refusal to renew the
license law by which a supervision of the press had been maintained.
During the reign of Charles II. the colonies of the Carolinas in North
America were settled by the English under a grant of that territory by
the king to the Earl of Clarendon and seven associates. The colonies
of New Jersey and Pennsylvania were also settled during this reign ;
the latter by Quakers under the auspices of William Penn, the son of
Admiral Penn, who conquered Jamaica from the Spaniards in 1665
during the period of the Commonwealth, as already noticed. William
Penn's justice and brothe --ly kindness to the natives saved Pennsylvania
from the perils and difficulties to which the other English colonies in
North America were subject.
England advanced steadily in industry and wealth during the reign
of Charles II., nothwithstanding the civil and political disorders which
distracted the kingdom. This reign was a great era in science in
England, being the period when Sir Isaac Newton discovered the
wondrous natural law which keeps the sun and the planets in their orbits ;
when Edmund Halley commenced his learned investigations of tides,
comets and the earth's magnetism ; when Robert Boyle improved the air-
pump, and by its aid studied the properties of the atmosphere ; when
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke discoursed of the human mind, its
laws and its relations to matter.
The Royal Society of Science was founded in the year of the Stuart
Restoration, and its members were the first Englishmen who engaged
in the really scientific study of minerals, plants, birds, fishes and quadru-
peds. During this period many foreign painters flourished at the
English court, and have left portraits of all its famous men and women.
The great fire of London in 1666 gave a new impulse to architecture by
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
2889
opening a field for the genius of Sir Christopher Wren, who designed
the present magnificent Cathedral of St. Paul's and many other
churches.
Coffee, tea and chocolate first came into England with the Stuart
Restoration, and coffee-houses were first established in London during
the reign of Charles II. These establishments became celebrated as
the places where political affairs were thoroughly discussed, and where
the opinions of wits were eagerly heard and repeated by multitudes of
listeners. Nobles and gentry living in the country frequently engaged
correspondents in London to inform them of current matters of interest
in government and society ; and by means of written or printed news-
letters the talk of the capital was repeated throughout the kingdom —
sometimes to the discomfort of His Majesty's Ministers, who made some
fruitless efforts to stop these currents of public opinion at their source.
It has been asserted that Charles I. would never have rushed to his
fate with such blind persistence if railways, telegraphs and newspapers
had existed in his time as they do in our own day. The king was utterly
ignorant of the temper of his subjects. The means of communication
were worse than they are in Turkey at the present time. Even at the
end of the seventeenth century, public roads in England could scarcly
be distinguished from the meadows and the marshes which they trav-
ersed. Six horses were required to draw a coach through the deep
mud, and all the public highways were infested by robbers.
The population of London at the time of the death of Charles II. is
estimated to have been a half million. The streets were narrow, dirty
and unpaved, and not lighted until the last year of that king's reign ;
and they were infested by ruffians and robbers, against whom the aged
and feeble watchmen were unable to afford any protection.
In spite of all his faults, King Charles II. was an easy-going, good-
natured sovereign, plodding quietly along in the path of his pleasures,
even when the most exciting events were in progress around him. His
excessive good nature and his sportive manners, and the freedom and
gayety of his court, have acquired for him the well-merited title of the
"Merry Monarch." One of his courtiers portrayed him thus in the
following epigram :
" Here lies our sovereign lord the king,
Whose word no man relies on;
Who never said a foolish thing,
And never did a wise one."
When this was shown to the king he retorted in his pleasant way:
"That may be very true ; for my words are my own, but my acts are my
Ministers*."
Coffee-
houses.
News-
letters.
Lack of
Means of
Commu-
nication.
Condition
of
London.
Good
Nature
of King
Charles
II.
2890
REVOLUTMNS IN ENGLAND.
His
Death.
James
II., A. D.
1685-
1688.
His
Acces-
sion.
Punish-
ment of
Titus
Dates.
Huguenot
Immi-
grants.
Popular
Disap-
point
ment in
James II.
His First
Arbitrary
Acts.
Early in 1685 Charles II. -as seized with an epileptic attack; and,
after lingering a few days, he died on February 6th of that year in the
fifty-fifth year of his age and the twenty-fifth of his reign. Although
ho made no public avowal of Roman Catholicism, he was at his cwu
request attended by a Roman Catholic priest in his dying moments.
As Charles II. died without, legitimate children, his brother, the Duke
of York, succeeded him as King of England, Scotland and Ireland
without immediate opposition, thus becoming JAMES II. of Eng'and
and JAMES VII. of Scotland, February, 1685. During his brothers
reign James had acquired considerable distinction as a naval com-
mander, and England had been proud of him as her sailor prince. All
efforts to exclude him from the English throne on account of his pro-
nounced Roman Catholicism had failed; and, in spite of the recent
agitations, the English people received with joyful confidence the
pledge which he had made in the presence of his Council, at its first
meeting after the death of Charles II., to uphold and maintain the
Established Church and to observe and execute the laws of the realm.
Titus Gates was now brought to trial for his perjuries; and upon
conviction he was sentenced to be whipped through the city during two
days, to stand in the pillory five times a year and to be imprisoned for
life.
In the first year of the reign of James II. thousands of French
Huguenots, who fled from their native land to escape the dreadful
persecution which King Louis XIV. inaugurated that year by the
Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, settled in England and her North
American colonies, establishing there those fine manufactures for which
the Huguenots were celebrated The many French names among the
silk-weavers of Spitalfields, near London, shows their descent from
the French exiles for conscience sake, who first introduced that in-
dustry into England. Among the famous names in England in our
own times are those of James and Harriet Martineau and Mr. La-
bouchere, whose ancestors were among these Huguenot exiles two cen-
turies ago.
The high expectations that the English people had formed of
James II. at his accession were soon doomed to the most profound
disappointment; and the popular enthusiasm gave way to gloom, and
gloom was finally succeeded by horror. James II. was not a simple
lover of ease and pleasure like Charles II. had been ; but he showed
that he was more indifferent to public sentiment, more defiant of the
law, more malignant toward men of other views.
Within three days after his accession, and in opposition to the advice
of his Council, he levied customs without the consent of Parliament.
The first elections during his reign were carried by fraud and violence
GOLD AND SILVER COINS OF CHARLES II
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
in the king's interest. The new Parliament, utterly subservient to
the royal will, approved the king's levy and voted him a life income
of two million pounds. This Parliament's action on the question of
religion was moulded to suit His Majesty's pleasure.
The Parliament of Scotland was as servile to the king as was that
of Eng'and, and it made the laws against the Covenanters more rigor-
ous. One of these severe laws authorized the soldiers to put to death
at once all Scots who refused to take the Oath of Abjuration, which
required them to repudiate all sympathy with the declarations issued
by the Covenanters in opposition to the royal authority. Among
the many who were put to death for refusing to take this oath were
two women — Margaret Maclauchlan and Margaret Wilson — who were
tied to stakes in Solway Frith and drowned by the rising tide. The
royal troops treated the Covenanters with the most shocking brutality,
while the Covenanters exhibited the most heroic courage and firmness
in their trials and sufferings. Another act of the Scottish Parlia-
ment at the beginning of this reign made attendance upon a con-
venticle a crime punishable with death.
During the same year, 1685, the Marquis of Argyle, the son of the
great Marquis of Argyle, the leader of the Covenanters, who was
executed in May, 1661, returned to Scotland from his exile and made
an ill-organized effort to rouse the clans to resistance to royal op-
pression. This revolt of the Marquis of Argyle in Scotland was in-
tended to be simultaneous with the rebellion of the Duke of Monmouth,
the illegitimate son of Charles II., in England ; but the assembled army
of the Scotch clans was dispersed without striking a blow ; and the
Marquis of Argyle was captured while attempting to escape, and was
beheaded at Edinburgh. The royal troops wasted the revolted sec-
tion with fire and sword, and many members of the rebellious clans were
cruelly mutilated and then transported to America, where they passed
their remaining days.
The rebellion of the Duke of Monmouth in England, equally as rash
as that of the Marquis of Argyle in Scotland, was undertaken for the
dethronement of James II. and for the assertion of the duke's own
title to the English crown ; but its results were more disastrous than
the attempted revolt in Scotland. The Duke of Monmouth had been
persuaded by his adherents to make his rash invasion of England ; and
he accused his royal uncle of being " a traitor, a tyrant, an assassin
and a Popish usurper," charging him with being the author of the
great fire in London and of the murder of Sir Edmondsbury Godfrey
and the Earl of Essex, and with having poisoned Charles II. The
Duke of Monmouth was so beloved by the English people that, though
he had only a hundred followers when he landed in England, he was
5—24
Persecu-
tion aad
Martyr-
dom of
Scotch
Cove-
nanters.
Rebellion,
Over-
throw
and
Execution
of the
Marquis
of Ar-
gyle in
Scotland.
Rebellion
of the
Duke of
Mon-
mouth in
England.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Battle of
Sedge-
moor.
Execution
of the
Duke of
Mon-
mouth.
Second
English
Reign of
Terror.
Jeffries's
Cam-
paign,
or the
Bloody
Assize.
"Kirke's
Lambs."
soon at the head of six thousand, and was obliged to dismiss many for
lack of arms.
The Duke of Monmouth was thoroughly defeated by the royal army
at Sedgemoor, near Bridgewater, in Somersetshire, July 6, 1685 — the
last battle fought in England. He was found lying in a ditch, ex-
hausted with hunger and fatigue. After many entreaties he was ad-
mitted to his royal uncle's presence; and, prostrating himself on his
knees, he piteously begged with bitter tears that his life might be
spared; but he refused to purchase his safety by betraying his par-
tisans. Summoning his courage, he faced death on the scaffold, and
his head fell by the stroke of the executioner's ax, July 15, 1685. His
deluded followers were hunted down like wild beasts.
These unfortunate attempts at rebellion in England and Scotland
only strengthened the royal power, as they kindled a new sentiment
of loyalty in the minds and hearts of the English people, while they
also furnished a plausible pretext for a large increase of the English
army. The most severe measures were adopted against the rebels, and
the Second Stuart Tyranny before long developed into the Second
English Reign of Terror.
James II. exacted a most bitter vengeance for the Duke of Mon-
mouth's misguided rebellion. A Circuit Court, under the presidency
of Lord Chief Justice Jeffries, was organized in the rebellious counties
of England ; and the brutal action of this tribunal was better suited to
the darkest of the Dark Ages than to the enlightenment of the seven-
teenth century. This court has been variously styled in history as
Jeffries's Campaign, the Bloody Assize and the Second English Reign
of Terror. The pages of history can be searched in vain for a name
that has descended to a more immortal infamy than has that of Judge
Jeffries. The mind recoils with the deepest horror from the merciless
judgments of this fiend against the innocent and the guilty, and from
his heartless levity in the midst of the sufferings which he inflicted.
Chief Justice Jeffries had a fit associate in his atrocious cruelties in
Colonel Kirke, who had learned his inhumanity from the Moors about
Tangier. At the head of a company of troopers as inhuman as him-
self and ironically called " Kirke's lambs," this brutal officer was
charged with the apprehension and execution of " Monmouth's rebels."
Wherever Colonel Kirke and his " lambs " appeared men were hurried
off to the gallows without even an inquiry as to their guilt or innocence,
and he is said to have insulted their death-agonies by rude jests.
It is said that " Kirke's lambs " were accustomed to entertaining
themselves during their drunken carousals by having their prisoners
hung on high gibbets in front of their windows, and having the drums
beat to furnish music to the dance of the quivering bodies. As in the
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
2893
Wars of the Roses, the heads and limbs of those executed were posted
in conspicuous places to strike terror into the hearts of the inhabitants.
Colonel Kirke's military executions were about as savage as Chief
Justice Jeffries's judicial murders.
The English historian, Charles Knight, in his excellent History of
England, gives the following account of the barbarities of Jeffries and
Kirke : " The pitchy cauldron was constantly boiling in the Assize
towns to preserve the heads and limbs from corruption that were to be
distributed through the beautiful Western Country. As the leaves
were dropping in that autumn of 1685, the great oak of many a
village green was decorated with a mangled quarter. On every tower
of the Somersetshire churches a ghastly head looked down upon those
who gathered together for the worship of the God of love. The direct-
ing-post for the traveler was elevated into a gibbet. The laborer,
returning home beneath the harvest-moon, hurried past the body sus-
pended in its creaking grimmaces (chains). The eloquent historian
of this reign of terror has attested from his own childish rccorections
that ' within the last forty years, peasants in some districts well knew
the accursed spots and passed them unwillingly after sunset.' '
Among the victims of Chief Justice Jeffries's cruelty were two noble
and generous women whose only crime was their womanly charity in
giving food and lodging to fleeing rebels. One was Lady Alice Lisle,
seventy years of age, the widow of one of the members of the High
Court of Justice which tried and condemned Charles I. She was
beheaded at Winchester. The other was Mrs. Elizabeth Gaunt, who
was burned to death at Tyburn.
Three hundred and fifty rebels were hanged in the " Bloody Circuit "
as Jeffries made his way through Dorsetshire and Somersetshire.
More than eight hundred were sold into slavery in the West Indies.
A larger number were whipped and imprisoned. Even the cold heart
of General Churchill, to whose energy the royal victory at Sedgemoor
had been largely due, was shocked at the ruthlessness with which the
king turned a deaf ear to all appeals for mercy. Said the general,
as he struck the chimney-piece on which he leaned : " This marble is
not harder than the king's heart."
Those who were spared bought their lives only with their entire
possessions ; and Chief Justice Jeffries returned to London enriched by
the pardons which he had sold, and boasted that he had " hanged more
for high treason than all the judges of England since William the
Conqueror." His royal master rewarded him for his cruelties by creat-
ing him Chancellor.
We are to'd that even the queen herself and her maids of honor made
merchandise of free-born English subjects, begging the lives of the
Knight's
Account.
Lady
Alice
Lisle
and Mrs.
Elizabeth
Gaunt.
The
" Bloody
Circuit."
General
Churchill
Shocked.
Boast of
Jeffries.
£894*
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Heartless
Conduct
of the
Queen
and Her
Maids of
Honor.
James II.
and His
Roman
Catholic
Reaction-
ary
Policy.
James II.
and Par-
liament.
James II.
and the
Courts.
M^nks
and
Jesuits.
condemned that they might increase their wealth by selling these un-
fortunates into slavery in the West Indies. Even the innocent and
thoughtless girls who had presented an embroidered banner to the Duke
of Monmouth when he entered their native town of Taunton would have
suffered a similar fate had they not been ransomed by the payment
of two thousand pounds to the maids of honor.
The ease with which the rebellion of the Duke of Monmouth had
been suppressed, and the evident loyalty of the English people toward
their king, encouraged James II. to execute the policy which he had
resolved upon from the very beginning of his reign — the reestablish-
ment of Roman Catholicism as the state religion of England. The
standing army having been increased from ten thousand to twenty
thousand men, the king filled the most important military offices with
Roman Catholics in utter defiance of the Test Act. He dismissed
Lord Halifax for refusing to consent to a plan for the repeal of that
statute.
James II. haughtily declared to Parliament in 1686 that his grant
of commissions to Catholics must not be questioned, whether legal or
not. He also made a demand on Parliament for supplies for his in-
creased army. Though both Houses of Parliament had large Tory
majorities, their alarm at popery and at a standing army was stronger
than their loyalty. The Commons, by a majority of a single vote,
refused the grant of supplies until the king granted a redress of griev-
ances, and demanded the recall of the illegal commissions to Roman
Catholics. The Lords assumed a bolder tone, and the eloquence of
Lord Halifax backed the protest of the bishops against any infringe-
ment of the Test Act. The king at once prorogued both Houses of
Parliament.
King James II. determined to obtain from the courts what he could
not obtain from Parliament. He packed the Court of King's Bench
with his own creatures, after dismissing four judges who refused to
lend themselves to his plans. The new judges decided in the case of
Sir Edward Hales, a Catholic officer in the royal army, that a royal
dispensation could be pleaded in bar of the Test Act. The principle
laid down by these judges asserted the right of the crown to override
the laws ; and King James II. applied this principle with a reckless im-
patience, admitting Catholics into all civil and military offices Avith-
out restraint, while four Catholic Lords were sworn in as members of
the Privy Council.
The laws which forbade the presence of Catholic priests in Eng-
land, or which forbade the open exercise of Catholic worship, were
ignored. A gorgeous chapel was opened in St. James's Palace for
the king's worship. Monks of the various orders attired in their
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
2895
respective garbs ostentatiously paraded the streets of London, and
even the Jesuits were permitted to establish a crowded school in the old
palace of the Savoy. In consequence of a riot on the establishment
of a new Catholic chapel in London, a camp of thirteen thousand
royal troops was established at Hounslow to overawe the capital.
King James II. also proceeded with vigor to stamp out Protestant-
ism in his other two kingdoms. In Scotland he acted as a pure despot,
placing the government of that country in the hands of two Catholic
lords, the Earls of Melfort and Perth, and putting a Catholic in com-
mand of Edinburgh Castle. Although the Scottish Parliament had
been the servile instrument of King Charles II., it boldly refused to
pass an act of toleration to Catholics, as recommended by James VII.
When the king tempted them to consent by offering them free trade
with England they indignantly replied: "Shall we sell our God?"
James VII. at once ordered the Scotch judges to treat all laws against
Catholics as null and void, and his orders were obeyed. The Earl of
Perth was the inventor of the steel thumb-screw, one of James's favorite
instruments of torture and conversion.
King James II. appointed Richard Talbot, Earl of Tyrconnel, a
Catholic lord, to the office of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. In that
country the king's policy threw off even the disguise of law, and by
his command Roman Catholics were admitted to the Council and to
civil offices. The new Lord Lieutenant reorganized the royal army
in Ireland by cashiering all its Protestant officers and by admitting
two thousand Catholic Irish into its ranks. As the determined foe of
the English and Scotch Protestant settlers in that country, the Earl
of Tyrconnel turned every Englishman and every Protestant out of
office in Ireland ; and in a very short time every Privy Councilor, every
judge, every mayor and every alderman is that dependent kingdom
was an Irishman and a Roman Catholic.
In the meantime King James II. had commenced a bold and sys-
tematic attack on the Protestant State Church of England. He
roughly set aside the statute which abolished the Court of High Com-
mission, which had been passed by the Long Parliament in 1640 and
confirmed by the Convention-Parliament which restored the monarchy
in 1660. In 1686 the king organized an Ecclesiastical Commission
of seven members headed by the infamous Jeffries, with full power over
religious affairs in England.
The king had forbidden the clergy to preach against popery, and
ordered Bishop Compton of London to suspend a vicar who set this
order at defiance. The bishop refused, and was punished for his
disobedience by suspension from office. But the pressure of the
Ecclesiastical Commission only drove the clergy to a bolder defiance
James II.
and
Scotland.
The Earl
of Tyr-
connel's
Reaction-
ary Pro-
ceedings
in
Ireland.
James II.
and the
Church of
England.
Defiant
Attitude
of the
English
Clergy.
2896
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
James II.
and the
Universi-
ties of
Cam-
bridge
and
Oxford.
Defiant
Attitude
of the
Fellows
of Mag-
dalen
College.
Violent
Action
against
Fellows.
Blind
Obstinacy
of
James II.
of the royal will. Sermons against superstition were preached from
every pulpit ; and the two most celebrated divines of the time — Tillot-
son and Stillingfleet — headed a host of controversialists, who scattered
pamphlets and tracts from the public press, which teemed with the
indignant protests of the English people.
King James II. next made an effort to place the great universities
of England under Catholic control. A monk presented himself at
Cambridge with royal letters recommending him for the degree of
Master of Arts, but was rejected on his refusal to sign the Articles
of Faith of the Church of England, and the Vice Chancellor was dis-
missed from office as a punishment for the rejection of the monk. The
Master of University College at Oxford, who professed conversion to
Catholicism, was authorized by the king to retain his post in defiance
of the law. The king also appointed Massey, a Roman Catholic, as
Dean of Christ Church College at Oxford.
In 1687 James II. recommended a Catholic of infamous life, named
Farmer, for the position of President of Magdalen College at Oxford,
although he was not even qualified by statute for the office. The
Fellows of the college remonstrated ; and when their remonstrance was
rejected they chose one of their own number, named Hough, as their
President. The Ecclesiastical Commission declared the election void;
and the king then recommended Bishop Parker of Oxford, a Catholic
at heart and the meanest of his courtiers, for the vacant Presidency
of Magdalen College. But the Fellows obstinately adhered to their
chosen President. The king at once visited Oxford and summoned
them to his presence, and lectured them as they knelt before him like
schoolboys. Said he : "I am king ; I will be obeyed ! Go to your
chapel this instant, and elect the bishop ! Let those who refuse look
to it, for they shall feel the whole weight of my hand!"
The Fellows calmly disregarded the king's threats; but a special
commission visited the university, pronounced Hough an intruder, set
aside his appeal to the law, burst open the door of the President's house
to install Parker in his place, and deprived the Fellows of their fellow-
ships upon their refusal to submit. The Demies were also expelled
when they refused to submit. Parker died immediately after his in-
stallation, and was succeeded by Bonaventure Giffard, a Catholic
bishop in partibus ; and twelve Catholics were admitted to fellowships
in one day.
All England was now in a ferment ; but King James II. possessed the
insane obstinacy of the Stuart race, and pressed swiftly forward to
his doom, turning a deaf ear to the entreaties of his Catholic friends,
and even to Pope Innocent XI., who warned the reckless king, through
the Papal Nuncio in England, not to do anything rashly and to govern
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688. 2897
England in accordance with her laws for the present. The king,
however, persisted in his policy ; and his course was as reckless in the
State as it was in the Church.
James II. silenced Parliament by repeated prorogations, and finally Reorgani-
dissolved it, so that he was left unchecked in his defiance of the law. of ^e
The members of the Ministry and the Privy Council who did not share Ministry
his religious views were removed to make way for Catholics. Among ^ouncU^
those thus removed were his two brothers-in-law, the sons of the great
Earl of Clarendon. One of these, Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon,
had been Lord Lieutenant of Ireland; and the other, Laurence Hyde,
Earl of Rochester, had been First Lord of the Treasury. Lord
Bellasys, a Catholic, became First Lord of the Treasury ; and Lord
Arundcll, another Catholic, became Lord Privy Seal. Petre, a Jesuit,
was called to the Privy Council. The Papal Nuncio was received
in state at Windsor.
Although the great Tory nobles were staunch adherents of the James II.
crown, they were as resolute Englishmen in their hatred of mere £>uke cf
tyranny as were the Whigs. The young Duke of Somerset, upon Somerset,
being ordered to introduce the Papal Nuncio into the Presence
Chamber, replied: " I am advised that I can not obey Your Majesty
without breaking the law." The king asked angrily : " Do you not
know that I am above the law ?" The duke retorted : " Your
Majesty may be, but I am not." The Duke of Somerset was dismissed
from office, but the spirit of resistance spread rapidly.
In spite of the king's letters, the governors of the Charter House, James II.
numbering among them some of the greatest English nobles, refused Declara-
to admit a Catholic to the benefits of this institution. The most de- tion of
voted Tories murmured when James II. required apostasy to the gence.
Protestant State Church of England as an evidence of their loyalty
to the king. In fact he was soon obliged to abandon all hope of
bringing the Church or the Tories over to his will. Following the
example of his brother, he published a Declaration of Indulgence in
1687, annulling the penal laws against Protestant Dissenters, or Non-
comformists, and Roman CathoMcs alike, and abrogating every statute
which imposed a test as a qualification for office in Church or State;
but most of the Noncomformists, following the example of their great
leaders — Baxter, Howe and Bunyan among them — fully understood
the king's motives, and remained true to the cause of freedom by re-
fusing to accept an Indulgence which could be purchased only by
the subversion of the law.
The failure of this Declaration of Indulgence only spurred James
II. to an effort to obtain the repeal of the Test Act from Parliament
itself. But he was very well aware that no free Parliament could be
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
He
Obtains
a Com-
pliant
House of
Lords.
Fails to
Procure
a Com-
pliant
House of
Commons.
New
Declara-
tion of
Indul-
gence.
Protest
of Arch-
bishop
Sancroft
and Six
Other
Bishops.
induced to consent to its repeal. True, the king could pack the House
of Lords by creating a sufficient number of new peers. Said his
Minister, Lord Sunderland, to General Churchill : " Your troop of
horse shall be called up into the House of Lords." It was, however,
not so easy to obtain a compliant House of Commons.
The king directed the Lord Lieutenants to bring about such a
" regulation " of the governing body in boroughs as would insure the
return of candidates to the House of Commons pledged to repeal the
Test Act, and to question every magistrate in their respective counties
concerning his vote. Half of them refused at once ; and many great
nobles — the Earls of Oxford, Shrewsbury, Dorset, Derby, Pembroke,
Rutland, Abergavenny, Thanet, Northampton and Abingdon — were
immediately dismissed from their Lord Lieutenancies. When the
justices were questioned they merely replied that they would vote ac-
cording to their consciences, and send members to Parliament who would
protect the Protestant religion. After repeated " regulations," it was
seen that it was impossible to organize a corporate body which would
return members to Parliament willing to obey the king. All thought
of a compliant Parliament had to be abandoned; and even the most
bigoted Catholic courtiers advised moderation on the king's part at
this evidence of the stubborn opposition which James II. must pre-
pare to encounter from the nobles, the gentry and the trading classes.
Finally an arbitrary act on the king's part for the first time aroused
the clergy of the Established Church, who had been preaching Sunday
after Sunday the doctrine of absolute passive obedience to the worst
of kings. On April 27, 1688, James II. issued a new Declaration of
Indulgence, abolishing all religious tests for office and all penal laws
against Protestant Dissenters, or Nonconformists, and Roman Cath-
olics. The king ordered every clergyman in England to read this
Declaration to his congregation during divine service on two successive
Sundays. With such unanimity did the English clergy refuse to be
the instruments of their own humiliation that only two hundred out of
ten thousand clergymen complied with the king's order. The Declara-
tion of Indulgence was read in but four of the London churches, and
in these the congregations rushed out of church when the reading
of it commenced. So determined were the English people to resist
the insane efforts of their bigoted king to overthrow Protestantism.
The bishops of the Church of England went with the rest of the
clergy in opposing the king's illegal measures. Several days before
the appointed Sunday, Dr. William Sancroft, Archbishop of Canter-
bury and Primate of Eng]and, called the bishops together; and the
archbishop and the six bishops who were able to appear at Lambeth
signed a mild protest to the king declining to publish an illegal
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688. ^899
Declaration of Indulgence. When Archbishop Bancroft presented the
paper to James II. the king exclaimed : " It is a standard of re-
bellion!"
James II. at once resolved to wreak his vengeance on the prelates Their
who signed the protest. He ordered the Ecclesiastical Commission to nJttai
dismiss them from their sees, but the Commission shrank from comply- to the
ing with the king's command in this matter. The Chancellor, Lord 0¥
Jeffries, advised a prosecution for libel as the easier method of punish-
ment ; and Archbishop Bancroft and the six bishops were committed
to the Tower upon their refusal to furnish bail. They went to
prison amid the applause of a vast multitude, while the sentinels
knelt for their blessing as they entered the gates of the Tower, and
the soldiers of the garrison drank their healths. One of these im-
prisoned prelates was Bishop Thomas Ken, the author of the familiar
Doxology : " Praise God, from Whom all Blessings Flow."
So menacing was the temper of the English nation that King James Their
II. was advised by his Ministers to give way ; but the danger only Acquittal,
increased the bigoted king's obstinacy. Said he : " Indulgence
ruined my father." The Primate and the six bishops were brought be-
fore the bar of the Court of King's Bench as criminals, June 29,
1688. Though the judges were the subservient instruments of the
crown, and though the jury had been packed to convict, judges and
jury alike were overawed by the indignation of the English people at
large; and Archbishop Sancroft and the six bishops were acquitted
the next day, June 30, 1688. As soon as the foreman of the jury
had pronounced the words " Not guilty," a deafening shout of ap-
plause burst forth from the overjoyed multitude; and horsemen
galloped along over every road to spread the glad tidings of the
acquittal throughout the kingdom.
The night of the day of acquittal, June 30, 1688, was a memorable
one in London. The populace vented their joy at the verdict of the
jury in the most enthusiastic demonstrations. The entire city was quence.
illuminated in honor of the Primate and the six bishops, while bells
were loudly rung from every belfry, bonfires blazed in every street,
rockets lighted up the heavens. The arffcy which James II. had
quartered at Hounslow to overawe the capital manifested its sympathy
with the people by joining in their acclamations. The king was at
Hounslow when he was informed of the acquittal of the seven prelates,
and as he rode from the camp to return to London he heard a great
shout behind him. The startled king asked: " What is that?" The
reply was : " It is nothing — only the soldiers are glad that the
bishops are acquitted." The king responded : " Do you call that
nothing?"
2900
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
James II.
deserted
by His
Army.
Subver-
sion of
Legal
Author-
ity.
The
King's
Obstinate
Persist-
General
Resist-
ance
to the
King's
The shout of the soldiers at Hounslow plainly told James II. that
he had lost the sympathy of the army, which had been his only hope;
and the king was now thoroughly conscious that he was left utterly
deserted in his realm. The nobility, the gentry, the bishops and the
clergy of the Church of England, the universities, every lawyer, every
merchant, every farmer, his very soldiers, had now forsaken him. His
most devoted Catholic friends urged him to give way before the senti-
ment of the Eng.ish nation so universally and resolutely manifested;
but to give way was to reverse every act which he had done as king,
and James II. was in no mood to reverse his acts.
The king's arbitrary acts and usurpations had subverted all legal
government in England. Sheriffs, mayors and magistrates appointed
by the crown in defiance of Parliamentary statute were no real officers
in the eyes of the law. Members returned to Parliament by such
illegal officers could constitute no legal Parliament. Scarcely a
Minister of the Crown or a Privy Councilor exercised any legal
authority. To such a pass had James II. brought things that the
rcestablishment of legal government meant the complete reversal of
all his acts during the three years of his reign.
The king was spurred on only to a more dogged pertinacity by
danger and remonstrance. Still undaunted, be broke up the camp at
Hounslow and dispersed the troops in distant cantonments. He dis-
missed the two judges who had favored the acquittal of the Primate
and the six accused bishops. He ordered the chancellor of each
diocese to report the names of the clergy who failed to read the Declara-
tion of Indulgence.
The king's will broke fruitlessly against the sullen resistance which
he encountered on all sides. Not a chancellor made any return to the
Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and the temper of the English nation
cowed the Commissioners into inaction. When the judges who had
shown their servility to the crown went on circuit the gentry refused
to meet them. But a still fiercer indignation was aroused by the king's
determination to rep'ace the English troops whose temper proved un-
serviceable for his purposes by soldiers from the Earl of Tyrconnel's
Catholic army in Ireland.* Even the English Roman Catholic Lords
at the Council-table protested against this measure; and six officers in
one regiment resigned their commissions rather than enroll the Irish
recruits among their English troops. The ballad of Lillibidlero, a
scurrilous attack on the Irish Roman Catholics, was sung throughout
all England.
For three years the people of England had borne patiently with
James II., as the king was old, and as his two daughters, Mary and
Anne, had been educated in the Church of England and were married
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
£901
to Protestant princes, the former to Prince William of Orange, the
Stadtho.der of the Dutch Republic, and the latter to Prince George
of Denmark ; but when the hopes of the English people for a release
from the yoke of popery were dispelled by the birth of a Prince of
Wales, June 10, 1688, they resolved upon the dethronement of James
II. Many of the most prominent men of all parties in England
entered into negotiations with his son-in-law, the Prince of Orange,
whom they resolved to place upon the English throne at an early day.
James II. little dreamed that many of the officers of the army of forty
thousand men which he assembled were in secret league with his son-
in-law. Among these officers was General John Churchill, afterward
so famous under the title of Duke of Marlborough.
The other event which hastened the crisis which hurled James II.
to his doom was the arrest and trial of Archbishop Sancroft and the
six accused bishops. On the very day of their acquittal seven of the
most prominent nobles of England sent an invitation to the Prince
of Orange to come to England to defend liberty and Protestantism.
Both parties joined in this invitation — the Tories under the leader-
ship of the Earl of Danby, and the Whigs under the Earl of Devon-
shire, Lord Cavendish. Bishop Compton represented the High
Churchmen. This invitation was carried secretly to Holland by Her-
bert, the most popular of English seamen, and who had been deprived
of his command because he had refused to vote against the Test Act.
The seven nobles who signed this call to William of Orange pledged
themselves to rise in arms when he landed in England.
William had seen his royal father-in-law become the pensioner of
Louis XIV. of France, the prince's most inveterate enemy. He had
diligently watched the persistent efforts of James II. to restore Roman
Catholicism as the state religion of England. He had observed
James's evident purpose to make Ireland a Roman Catholic state, to
become an asylum for English Roman Catholics and a possible refuge
for himself — a scheme which menaced the integrity of the dominions
of William's wife, who was the prospective heir to the English throne.
William's counsels and protests had been unheeded by his kingly
father-in-law ; and when the birth of a Prince of Wales was announced,
William shared the general belief that it was a supposititious child
to be foisted upon England in the interest of the Roman Catholic
Church. William's purpose was then formed, and he accepted the in-
vitation of the seven English nobles, saying to Dykvelt, the Dutch
ambassador at London : " It is now or never."
William was already, by descent and by circumstances, the champion
of Protestantism in Europe. As the brave defender of his native land
against the greedy ambition of Louis XIV., he the more willingly un-
Conse-
quence
ol the
Birth of a
Prince of
Wales.
Invitation
to
William
of Orange,
Stadt-
holder
of the
Dutch
Republic.
His Ac-
ceptance.
His
Position
and
Claims.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
dertook the defense of the Protestant Church of England against
his father-in-law, the cousin and co-religionist of the King of France.
Besides, he was, after his wife and her sister Anne, the next heir to the
throne of England, being, like them, the grandchild of Charles I.
His Prep- The English nation was ready to rise against its king upon the
arauons. ]an(jj:ng of tne Prince of Orange. William was gathering Dutch
troops and transports with wonderful rapidity and secrecy, while noble
after noble proceeded from England to Holland. The Earl of Shrews-
bury arrived at The Hague with an offer of twelve thousand pounds
toward defraying the expenses of the expedition. Edward Russell,
the brother of the ill-fated Lord William Russell, appeared at the
Dutch capital as the representative of the noble House of Bedford.
The representatives of the great Tory families, the sons of the Marquis
of Winchester, of the Earl of Danby, of the Earl of Peterborough,
then appeared there, as did also the High-Church Lord Macclesfield.
Silent At home the Earis of Danby and Devonshire — the former on the
Tns^n" Par^ °^ ^ie Tories, and the latter as the representative of the Whigs —
England, were making silent preparations with Lord Lumley for a rising in
the North of England. Notwithstanding the profound secrecy with
which this whole movement was conducted, the keen instinct of Lord
Sunderland, the Prime Minister of King James II., who had aposta-
tized to Roman Catholicism for the purpose of remaining in office, de-
tected the preparations of William of Orange. Conscious that his
sovereign's ruin was impending, Lord Sunderland revealed all the
king's secrets to William on the promise of a pardon for the crimes
to which he had lent himself.
Accord of King James II. alone remained obstinate and insensate as usual.
and^ouis He feared no revolt in England without the aid of the Prince of
XIV. Orange, and he felt confident that a threatened French invasion of
Holland would prevent William's landing in England. Kings James
II. and Louis XIV. were in perfect accord; and when William began
to collect ships and Dutch troops for an invasion of England, the
French king schemed to detain him on the Continent. But Louis XIV.
committed a great political blunder by hurling his forces against
Germany in September, 1688, instead of against Holland, thus render-
ing the latter country safe for the moment, and leaving Prince Wil-
liam of Orange safe to pursue his campaign in England. The States-
General of the Dutch Republic at once sanctioned their Stadtholder's
project, and the armament which William had prepared rapidly gath-
ered in the Scheldt.
Tardy As soon as the news reached England the king passed from obstinacy
sions of to panic. He had mustered an army of forty thousand men by drafts
James II. from Scotland and Ireland, but the temper of the troops was such
WILLIAM III LANDING AT TORBAY
From the Painting by T. Stothard
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1688.
that he could place no trust in them. He therefore became alarmed
for the safety of his throne and made many concessions. He dissolved
the Ecclesiastical Commission. He replaced the magistrates whom he
had driven from office. He restored the franchises of the towns ; and
the Chancellor, Lord Jeffries, carried back the Charter of London in
state into the city. The frightened king also dismissed Lord Sunder-
land from office, and produced before the Lords who were in London
proofs of the birth of his child, which was almost universally believed
to be a Catholic imposture.
But the king's concessions came too late ; as the English people had
already resolved that James II. should no longer reign ; and as Prince
William of Orange sailed from Holland with a fleet of six hundred
transports, escorted by fifty men-of-war, and carrying thirteen thou-
sand Dutch troops, and landed at Torbay, on the southern coast of
Devonshire, November 5, 1688. His army entered Exeter amid the
acclamations of its inhabitants. As his appearance had not been ex-
pected in the South-west of England, no great landowner joined him
for a week ; but the nobles and squires soon rallied to his standard, and
his rear was secured by the adhesion of Plymouth.
In the meantime the Earl of Danby gave the signal for a rising in
the North of England by dashing into York at the head of a hundred
horsemen. The militia returned his shout of " A free Parliament and
the Protestant religion !" The nobles and the gentry flocked to his
standard, and on his march to Nottingham he was joined by the forces
under the Earl of Devonshire, who had mustered at Derby the great
lords of the midland and eastern counties of England.
All England was now in revolt against James II., and the revolt was
triumphant in every part of the kingdom. The garrison of Hull de-
clared for a free Parliament. The Duke of Norfolk appeared in the
market-place of Norwich at the head of three hundred gentlemen.
Lord Lovelace was greeted at Oxford with vociferous acclamations by
townsmen and gownsmen. Bristol opened its gates to the Prince of
Orange, who advanced steadily on Salisbury, where his royal father-
in-law had mustered his forces. But the royal army retreated in
disorder. Its leaders were secretly pledged to William ; and Lord
Churchill's desertion was followed by that of so many other officers
that King James II. abandoned the struggle in despair.
The deserted king fled to London, where he was told that his younger
daughter Anne had left St. James's Palace to join the Earl of Danby
at Nottingham. The wretched king burst into tears, exclaiming:
" God help me, for my own children have forsaken me !** Hii spirit
was thoroughly broken, and he secretly determined on flight from
England in obedience to the advice of his queen and the priests;
you 9—7
Landing
of the
Prince of
Orange in
England.
Risings
of the
Earls of
Danby
and
Devon-
shire.
All
England
in Revolt
against
James II.
His
Flight
from
London.
2904
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Tempo-
rary Mob
Rule.
Escape of
James II.
to France.
Short
Inter-
regnum
and Con-
vention-
Parlia-
ment.
Action
of *he
Co? turns.
although he had promised to convene both Houses of Parliament, and
sent commissioners to Hungerford to treat with his triumphant son-
in-law on the basis of a free Parliament. He said to the few who had
not deserted him that Parliament would force upon him such con-
cessions as he could not endure. After sending his wife and infant son
to France, the fallen king cast the Great Seal into the Thames, and
secretly left London on the night of December 12, 1688, rowing
silently down the river to a ship which he had engaged to convey him
to France.
The government of England was thus dissolved by the king's own
act. The mob was master. Even the army which James II. had
collected to uphold his usurped authority was disbanded and let loose
upon the capital, and for several days there was a wild outburst of
panic and outrage ; but the orderly instinct of the Anglo-Saxon race
soon reasserted itself. In this momentous crisis the nobles and bishops
who were in London assumed the responsibility of government, issued
orders to the commanders of garrisons, the army and the navy, and
opened communication with the Prince of Orange.
The runaway king was arrested near the coast ; but this was un-
welcome news to the authorities in London and to the Prince of Orange,
who had promised his wife that her father should suffer no personal
injury. No one wanted to harm the fallen king, the English nation
having grown wiser since his father's execution. As it was only de-
sired that James II. should be safely out of the way, it was made
easy for him to escape. After waiting for some days for an invita-
tion to resume his throne, he fled from London a second time, and em-
barked for France unhindered, December 23, 1688. The fugitive
king arrived safely in France several days later, and proceeded to
St. Germains, near Paris, where he was honorably received by his
cousin, King Louis XIV., from whom the exiled monarch received a
pension during the rest of his life.
An interregnum of two months succeeded the flight of James II.
Upon William's arrival in London the House of Lords he^ a session
and requested him to assume the provisional government and to call
upon the electors of every town and county of England to send repre-
sentatives to a Convention-Parliament to settle the future government
of the nation. The Convention-Parliament assembled in January,
1689. Both Houses and both parties were averse to recalling the
exiled king, but the House of Commons with its Whig majority
differed with the House of Lords with its Tory majority on the tech-
nical question as to the right of the nation to depose its kincj.
The Commons voted that James II. " having endeavored to subvert
the Constitution of this kingdom by breaking the original contract
STUART RESTORATION AND REVOLUTION OF 1C88.
2905
between king and people, and by the advice of Jesuits and other wicked
persons having violated the fundamental laws, and having withdrawn
himse.f out of the kingdom, has abdicated the government, and the
throne is thereby vacant."
Spirited debates occurred in the House of Lords, where the Whig
minority, backed by the eloquence of Lord Halifax, warmly supported
the resolution of the Whig majority of the Commons. Archbishop
Sancroft and the High Tories contended that no crime could bring
about a forfeiture of the crown, and that James II. was still king,
but that his tyranny had given the English nation a right to deprive
him of the actual exercise of government and to confer its functions
upon a regency. The moderate Tories, under the Earl of Danby,
admitted that James II. had ceased to be king, but denied that the
throne could be vacant, and contended that from the moment of his
abdication the sovereignty was vested in his daughter Mary. The
Lords rejected the High Tory plan by a single vote, and adopted the
moderate and conservative Tory scheme of the Earl of Danby by a
large majority.
Both the Tory positions encountered a sudden obstacle in William.
He refused the regency, and told the Earl of Danby that he did not
intend to be his wife's gentleman-usher. Mary refused to accept the
crown unless her husband shared the royal honors. These two declara-
tions put an end to the question. Both Houses of the Convention-
Parliament then passed an Act of Settlement electing WILLIAM III.
and MARY II. as joint King and Queen of England, with the actual
administration in the hands of William, who was thenceforth the head
of both a monarchy and a republic, as he was still Stadtholder of
Holland.
Somers, a young lawyer who had just distinguished himself in the
trial of the bishops, and who afterward played a great part in Eng-
lish history, drew up a Declaration of Rights, which was presented to
William and Mary by the two Houses of Parliament in the banqueting-
room of Whitehall, February 13, 1689. This Declaration of Rights
recited the misgovernment of James II., his abdication, and the resolu-
tion of the Lords and Commons of England to assert the ancient rights
and liberties of English subjects.
The following were the most important provisions of the Declara-
tion of Rights: 1. The king cannot suspend the laws or their
execution. 2. He cannot levy money without the consent of Parlia-
ment. 3. The subjects have a right to petition the crown. 4. A
standing army cannot be kept in time of peace without the consent of
Parliament. 5. Elections and Parliamentary debates must be free, and
Parliaments must be frequently assembled.
Action
oi the
House of
Lords.
Act of
Settle-
ment.
Declara-
tion of
Eights.
Its Pro-
visions.
2906
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
William
and
Mary
Called
to the
Throne.
"Glorious
Revolu-
tion of
1688."
Its Grand
Results.
Restora-
tion of
English
Constitu-
tional
Liberty.
End of
" Divine
Right of
Kings."
In full faith that William and Mary would accept and maintain the
principles enunciated in this Declaration of Rights, the immortal docu-
ment ended with declaring the Prince and Princess of Orange joint
King and Queen of England. At the close of the document, Lord
Halifax, in the name of the Lords and Commons of England, prayed
William and Mary to accept the English crown. William accepted
the offer in his own name and his wife's, and declared that both intended
to maintain the laws and to govern by advice of Parliament.
Such was the Glorious Revolution of 1688, by which the English
people established their free constitution on a firm basis, after a cen-
tury of struggles with the royal House of Stuart; and ever since that
great event England has had a free constitutional government. Power
was transferred from the king to the House of Commons. The mon-
arch reigns as a mere figure-head, and " the king can do no wrong."
His Ministers being responsible for the government's policy, remain
in power so long only as they are supported by a majority in the
popular branch of Parliament.
A revolution which accomplished results so grand without the
shedding of a drop of blood may well be called glorious. Thence-
forth there was no more punishment in England except for crime.
Englishmen have never since pined in dreary dungeons, or died in
God's free air on a heap of blazing fagots, as martyrs to their con-
victions. Instruments of torture are now found only in museums, as
relics of a past age, exciting the beholder's wonder that any age,
especially any Christian age, could have been so barbarous.
King James II., as the subverter of the laws of the realm, and as
the usurper of powers which did not belong to a King of England,
was really the beginner of the revolution ; while the English people and
Parliament were the defenders of law as well as of the constitutional
liberties which had been their inherent birthrights. The English
monarchy was thus restored to the character which it had possessed
under the Plantagenets, and which it had lost under the Tudors and the
Stuarts. The right of the English people, through their representa-
tives in Parliament, to depose their king, to alter the line of succession,
to place on the throne whom they desired, was now asserted and fully
established. The election of William and Mary formally put an end
to all claim of the " divine right of kings," or all hereditary right
independent of law. Since their time no King or Queen of England
has been able to advance any claim to the crown except a claim rest-
ing on a particular clause in some Act of Parliament. William and
Mary, and Anne, were sovereigns simply by virtue of the Bill of
Rights. Their successors of the House of Brunswick have been
sovereigns solely by virtue of the Act of Settlement.
FIRST YEARS OF GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE.
2907
SECTION V.— ENGLAND'S FIRST YEARS OF GOVERN-
MENT BY THE PEOPLE (A. D. 1689-1714).
WILLIAM III. and MARY II. began to reign in 1689. England had
attained a free and settled government by the bloodless Revolution of
1688. As the will of the nation had been recognized in the choice
of William and Mary for its joint sovereigns, the Whig party very
naturally came into power, having a majority in the Convention-
Parliament. The " Glorious Revolution," as we have observed, made
the English government a government by the people, which it has been
ever since. Though the English throne is hereditary, the right of the
English people, through their representatives in Parliament, to de-
throne their reigning sovereign was clearly established by this great
and bloodless Revolution, so that even the English crown is " broad-
based upon the people's will."
The year 1689 was a memorable one in the constitutional history
of England. The Convention-Parliament during that year passed a
Bill of Rights embodying the principles enunciated in the Declaration
of Rights which William and Mary accepted upon coming to the
throne. William III. signed the Bill of Rights, which has been called
"The Third Great Charter of English Liberties." The Toleration
Act, also passed by the Convention-Parliament in 1689, established
complete freedom of worship.
The Act of Settlement provided " that whoever shall hereafter come
to the possession of this crown shall join in communion with the
Church of England as by law established." The Convention-Parlia-
ment asserted its absolute right over taxation by restricting the grant
of the royal revenue to four years. King William III. was very much
incensed by this provision. Said he : " The gentlemen of England
trusted King James, who was an enemy of their religion and their
laws, and they will not trust me, by whom their religion and their
laws have been preserved." But the only result of this outbreak of
royal anger was the resolution of Parliament to make the vote of sup-
plies thenceforth an annual one — a resolve that has been adhered to
ever since.
By the Mut'vny Act, Parliament granted disciplinary powers and
pay for the military force of the kingdom for but one year, in order
to guard against the establishment of a standing army. Like the
grant of supplies, the Mutiny Act has remained an annual one since
the Revolution of 1688.
King William III. was not personally as popular in England as
the cause which he represented; as he spoke English very badly, was
6—25
William
and Mary,
A D.
1689-
1702.
England's
Beginning
of Free,
Popular
Govern-
ment.
Bill of
Rights.
Tolera-
tion Act.
Conven-
tion-
Parlia-
ment and
William
III.
Mutiny
Act
2908
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
King
William's
First
Ministry.
England
Joins the
Grand
Alliance
against
Louis
XIV. Of
France.
Scot-
land's
Rise in
Favor of
William
III.
Conven-
tion-
Parlia-
ment of
Scotland
and the
Claim of
Right.
naturally cold and reserved in his manners, and lacked the easy grace
and the cultivated tastes of the Stuart kings, though he was an able
general and statesman. He chose his first Ministry from both parties ;
the Tory Earl of Danby being named Lord President; the Whig Earl
of Shrewsbury being appointed Secretary of State ; and Lord Halifax,
a trimmer between the two great parties, being selected for Lord Privy
Seal. The struggles between the Whigs and the Tories were very
bitter in Parliament. The Whigs proceeded to undo the wrongs which
the Tories had done during the reigns of Charles II. and James II.,
and clamored for the punishment of the Tories guilty of those wrongs.
The election of William of Orange to the throne of so powerful a
kingdom as England was a serious blow to his great enemy, Louis
XIV. of France; as it enabled William to bring the fleets and armies
of England into his struggle with the King of France, and as it
immensely increased his power and influence in Continental Europe.
WiJiam III., as King of England, became the acknowledged head of
the coalition of European powers formed to resist French aggression.
Without an ally, Louis XIV. was obliged to face the united power of
England, Holland, Germany and Spain. An English brigade was
sent to the assistance of the Dutch in the Spanish Netherlands, and
distinguished itself under General Churchill, who had been rewarded
for his services to William III. by the title of Earl of Mar borough.
But King Wil'iam III. himself was detained in England by the un-
settled condition of the government, particularly by the critical state
of affairs in Ireland.
In England, as we have seen, the Revolution of 1688 had been
peacefully accomplished, not a drop of blood having been shed, and not
a sword having been drawn for James II. That king's tyranny had
been greater in Scotland than in England ; and, as soon as he had
called his Scottish troops into England to resist William's invasion
from Holland, a revolt broke out in Edinburgh against his authority.
The peasants in the West of Scotland at once rose in arms and drove
the Episcopal clergy from their parishes, and the fall of James's
tyranny was as rapid and complete in the Lowlands of Scotland as it
was in England.
By the advice of the Scottish lords who were then in London, King
William III. summoned a Convention-Parliament in Scotland sim^ar
to the one in England, and on his own responsibility set aside the laws
which excluded Presbyterians from the Scottish Parliament. The
Convention-Parliament of Scotland resolved that James VII had for-
feited the Scottish crown by his misgovernment, and offered it to
William and Mary on condition of their acceptance of a Claim of
Right, similar to the Declaration of Rights by the English Conven-
FIRST YEARS OF GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE.
2909
tion-Parliament, and ending with a demand for the abolition of
Episcopacy in Scotland. William and Mary accepted the crown of
Scotland with the conditions imposed in the Claim of Right, and their
authority in that kingdom was strengthened by the arrival of the
Scotch regiments which William had brought from Holland when he
landed in England. The strength of the new government was roughly
tested in the Highlands, whose inhabitants were the deadly foes of
the celebrated and powerful clan of the Campbells headed by the noble
House of Argyle.
When James VII. was dethroned in Scotland, early in 1689, John
Graham of Claverhouse, who had been created Viscount Dundee as a
reward for his cruel persecution of the Covenanters, retired with a
few troopers into the Highlands, where he was joined by the clans of
the Macdonalds, the Macleans, the Camerons and others, who thought
that the Revo!ution meant the restoration of their old oppressors, the
Campbells, as represented by the House of Argyle. The Highlanders
were ready to fight the Campbells and the government which upheld
them, as they had fought under the banners of the Marquis of Mont-
rose in the same cause nearly half a century before.
As King William's Scotch regiments under General Mackay climbed
the rugged mountain pass of Killiecrankie, July 27, 1689, they were
charged and swept in headlong rout down the g'en by three thousand
Highland clansmen under the Viscount Dundee, who was killed in the
moment of victory. The loss of their leader broke the bond which
held the Highlanders together, and in a few weeks the authority of
William and Mary was undisputed in Scotland. In the summer of
1690 General Mackay erected the strong post of Fort William in the
Highlands, and his offers of money and amnesty brought about the
submission of the Highland clans.
Sir John Dalrymple, the Master of Stair, who had charge of the
new government in Scotland, had hoped that the Highland clans would
refuse to take the oath of allegiance to the new king and queen, and
thus give grounds for a war of extermination and free Scotland for-
ever from its terror of the barbarous Highlanders. He had provided
for the expected result by orders of most ruthless rigor, having written
to the officer in command in these words : " Your troops will destroy
entirely the country of Lochaber, Lochiel's lands, Keppoch's, Glen-
garry's and Glencoe's. Your powers shall be large enough. I hope
the soldiers will not trouble the government with prisoners." But his
hopes were disappointed by the readiness with which the Highland
clans accepted the government's offers of amnesty. All submitted in
good time and took the oath of allegiance to WiPiam and Mary, except
the clan of Macdonald of Glencoe, whose pride caused him to delay
Rise
of the
Scotch
High-
landers
against
William
and
Mary.
Battle of
Killie-
ciankie.
Sir John
Dal-
rymple's
Plot.
8910
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
His Cruel
Order.
Massacre
of
Glencoe.
King
William's
Part
Therein.
Restora-
tion
of the
Presby-
terian
Church in
Scotland.
Ireland's
Rise in
Favor of
James II.
taking the oath of allegiance until six days after the latest day fixed
by the proclamation of amnesty.
Thus thwarted in his hopes for the extermination of the High-
landers, Sir John Dalrymple eagerly seized on Macdonald's delay as
the pretext for a massacre of less dimensions. He therefore laid an
order " for the extirpation of that nest of robbers " before King
William, and this brutal order received the royal signature, though the
king afterward said that he neglected to read the order. After having
thus obtained the royal sanction, the Master of Stair wrote to Colonel
Hamilton, who undertook the execution of the order : " The work
must be secret and sudden."
Accordingly Colonel Hamilton with troops from the clan of the
Campbells, the deadly foes of the clansmen of the Macdonalds of
Glencoe, quartered peacefully among them for twelve days until all
suspicion of their bloody errand had disappeared. At dawn February
13, 1692, the Campbells fell upon the unsuspecting Macdonalds, and
in a few moments thirty of the unfortunate clan lay dead in the
snow. The rest escaped under cover of a storm to the mountains,
where most of them perished of cold and starvation. Upon hearing
the news of the Massacre of Glencoe, as this tragedy was called, Sir
John Dalrymple said : " The only thing I regret is that any got
away."
The Massacre of Glencoe has been severely and justly condemned
in later times, but very few except Sir John Dalrymple knew anything
about it at the time. But King William's consent to it — though ex-
cused on the plea of his neglect to read the order which he signed —
will always remain as a stain upon his name.
The pacification of the Highlands enabled the work of reorganiza-
tion to proceed quietly at Edinburgh. When King William accepted
the Claim of Right with its repudiation of Episcopacy he had prac-
tically restored the Presbyterian Church as the state religion in Scot-
land. The Westminster Confession was accordingly revived as the
standard of faith in Scotland, and the Scottish Parliament passed an
act abolishing lay patronage. The Scottish Parliament firmly re-
fused to pass a toleration act, as proposed by King William ; but the
king was just as firm in his purpose, declaring that there should be
no persecution for conscience sake during his reign. Said he : " We
never could be of that mind that violence was suited to the advancing
of true religion, nor do we intend that our authority shall ever be a
tool to the irregular passions of any party."
Ireland was the battle-ground of the last and most severe struggle
between King William III. and the fallen James II. The Earl of
Tyrconnel, as Lord Lieutenant, had accomplished his mission in that
FIRST YEARS OF GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE.
2911
dependent kingdom by bringing it completely under Catholic rule.
The Irish army had been reorganized by disbanding its Protestant
soldiers and by filling the ranks with native Catholics. The courts
in Ireland had also been " purified " by substituting Catholic for
Protestant judges. The town charters had been seized into the hands
of King James II., and Catholic mayors of cities and Catholic sheriffs
of counties filled the places formerly occupied by Protestants. In
every part of Ireland the half -savage natives had been let loose upon
Englishmen and Protestants. In the South of the island the panic-
stricken Protestants, pursued with fire and sword, fled from their homes
and sought refuge over-sea; while those of the North found shelter
under the walls of Londonderry and Enniskillen, which were the only
towns of Ireland that declared for William and Mary and made a stand
against the Catholic supporters of James II.
After intriguing with King William III. for two months in order
to gain time, and backed by fifty thousand native Irish soldiers, the
Earl of Tyrconnel boldly raised the standard of the fallen James II.
by flinging a flag to the breeze from the tower of Dublin Castle,
embroidered on its folds with the words : " Now or Never." In response
to this signal, every native Irish Catholic flew to arms. The infuriated
Irish plundered what their former English masters had left, and such
was the havoc that the French envoy told King Louis XIV. that it
would require years to repair what had been destroyed.
In the meantime King James II. had sailed from France for Ire-
land with a French fleet and army furnished by his cousin, King Louis
XIV., and landed at Kinsale. With half of the Earl of Tyrconnel's
disorderly army of fifty thousand Irishmen, chiefly armed with clubs,
James II. laid siege to Londonderry. The siege lasted one hundred
and five days, during which the brave little garrison of seven thousand
Englishmen made many gallant sallies and repulsed the assaults of
the besiegers. Multitudes of Protestants died of hunger in the streets
of the beleaguered town, but still the cry of the besieged was : " No
Surrender." When only two days' food remained in the city, an Eng-
lish ship broke through the boom stretched across the river Foyle, thus
bringing relief to the heroic garrison and the starving inhabitants,
July 28, 1689; whereupon the Irish army under James II. sullenly
raised the siege and retired.
On the same day the Protestant garrison of Enniskillen made a
sally from that town and routed the Irish force twice as large at
Newtown Butler, driving it in a panic which soon spread to the whole
of the Irish forces under the command of James's general, Hamilton.
The routed Irish troops retreated to Dublin, where James II. lay help-
less in the hands of the frenzied Catholics.
Dublin
Castle
Seired
by the
Irish
Rebel*.
Siege of
London-
derry.
Its
Relief.
Defense
of Ennis-
killen.
£912
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Ireland's
Parlia-
ment
and Its
Bill of
Attainder.
English
Invasion
of
Ireland.
James II .
and
William
III.
French
Aid to
the Irish
Rebels.
Battle
of the
Boyne.
In the Parliament of Ireland which the fallen Stuart king had
summoned at Dublin every member was an Irishman and a Roman
Catho.ic ; and this Parliament proceeded in its work of ruin to the
English settlers in Ireland, repea.ing the Act of Settlement on which
all title to property rested, and passed a Bill of Attainder against
three thousand Protestants. Notwithstanding the love for religious
freedom expressed by James II., the Protestant clergy were driven
from their parsonages ; Fellows and scholars were expelled from
Trinity College at Dublin ; and the French envoy, the Count of Avaux,
even proposed a general massacre of the Protestants who still lingered
in the districts which had submitted to James II. But James, to his
credit, shrank horror-struck from the proposal, saying: "I can not
be so cruel as to cut their throats while they live peaceably under my
government." The Count of Avaux coldly responded : " Mercy to
Protestants is cruelty to Catholics."
Thus far King Wi.liam III. was unable to come to the relief of his
Protestant subjects in Ireland, as the best English troops were in the
Spanish Netherlands, operating against the French ; but in the autumn
of the same year, 1689, the Duke of Schomberg, a refugee Huguenot,
who had entered King William's service, landed in Ireland with ten
thousand English troops, and took Carrickfergus after a short siege.
But this new invasion only roused Ireland to fresh enthusiasm, and the
ranks of the Irish army were again filled, thus enabling James II. to
lead a force of twenty thousand men to Drogheda to oppose King
William's general. Thereupon the Duke of Schomberg with his ten
thousand raw recruits intrenched himself at Dundalk, but a pestilence
in his camp soon carried off half his troops.
During the next six months of the campaign in Ireland, James II.
sought to replenish his treasury by the coinage of brass money, and
his troops subsisted by sheer plunder; while King WiKiam III. was
preparing in England to reduce Ireland to submission, so that he would
be free to devote his entire energies to his struggle with Louis XIV.
of France.
During the winter of 1689— '90 the English army in Ireland under
the Duke of Schomberg was reinforced, and by the spring of 1690
it numbered thirty thouand men. In the summer Louis XIV. sent
seven thousand French troops under the Count of Lauzun to reinforce
the Irish army under James II. About the very same time King Wil-
liam III. himself landed at Carrickfergus, and rapid^ marched south-
ward toward Dublin.
When King William III. caught sight of the Irish army under
James II., strongly posted behind the river Boyne, he exclaimed in
an outburst of delight : " I am glad to see you, gentlemen ; and if
FIRST YEARS OF GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE.
2913
you escape me now the fault will be mine." Early the next morning —
July 1, 1690, Old Style, but July 12th, New Style— the entire Eng-
lish army plunged into the river. Thereupon the Irish infantry broke
in a disgraceful panic ; but the Irish cavalry made a gal'ant charge,
in repulsing which the Duke of Schomberg lost his life. For the
time the English center was held in check ; but the arrival of King
William III. at the head of the English left wing decided the battle
against James II., whose last hope of recovering his lost dominions was
thus destroyed. The fal'en Stuart king at once fled to Dublin, and
embarked at Kinsale to return to France; while King William III.
entered Ireland's capital in triumph. The Orangemen, or Protestants
of Ireland, still observe the anniversary of the battle of the Boyne.
The cowardice of James excited the scorn of his own Irish followers.
An Irish officer replied to an Englishman's taunts about the panic at
the battle of the Boyne : " Change kings with us, change kings with
us, and we will fight you again." The Irish fought better afterward
without a king. The French auxiliaries deserted the routed Irish
army, which had fled to Limerick, where it was besieged. Said the
Count of Lauzun contemptuously, concerning the ramparts of
Limerick: "Do you call these ramparts? The English will need no
cannon. They may batter them down with roasted apples."
But twenty thousand Irish troops under the brave and skillful
Patrick Sarsfield, who had served in the English army, surprised the
English ammunition train, repulsed a desperate effort of the besiegers
to take Limerick by storm, and thus forced King William III. to raise
the siege of that town on the approach of winter.
After his failure in the siege of Limerick, King William III. re-
turned to England to devote his attention to the war with France on
the Continent, leaving the command in Ireland in the hands of the
Earl of Marlbcrough, General Churchill, who had been recalled from
the Spanish Netherlands, where he had been rapidly proving himself
a great miMtary genius. Cork with its garrison of five thousand Irish-
men surrendered in the fall of 1690, and Kinsale also fell into the
hands of the English a few days later.
During the winter of 1690— '91 a new French general, St. Ruth,
arrived in Ireland with arms and supplies, thus encouraging the Irish ;
but in the spring of 1691 the English under Ginkell, a Dutch general
in King William's service, siezcd Ath'one, thus forcing a battle with
the combined French and Irish forces at Aughrim, in which St. Ruth
was slain and his army utterly vanquished.
The surrender of Limerick by Sarsfield to Ginkell in October, 1691,
brought about the complete pacification of Ireland, and the whole
country acknowledged William and Mary. Two treaties were con-
Coward-
ice of
James II.
Siege of
Limerick.
San-
field's
Defense of
Limerick.
General
Churchill
Fall of
Cork and
Kinsale.
Battle of
Au'-hrim.
Fall of
Limerick
and
Pa cifi ra-
tion of
Ireland.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Green's
State-
ment.
Attitude
of Whigs
and
Tories.
King
William's
Stand
against
Proscrip-
tion.
The Oath
of Alle-
giance
and the
Non-
jurors.
eluded at Limerick between Ginkell and Sarsfield, the first promising
religious toleration to the Irish Roman Catholics, and the second per-
mitting Sarsfield and his ten thousand followers to go to France and
to enter the French service. The triumph of the English was com-
plete; and the severe laws that were enacted held Ireland in such
absolute subjection that the country ceased to be a cause of appre-
hension to England for a century, or until the French Revolution.
Says John Richard Green, the eminent English historian, in his
Short History of the English People: " By the military treaty, those
of Sarsfield's soldiers who would were suffered to follow him to France ;
and ten thousand men, the whole of his force, chose exile rather than
life in a land where all hope of national freedom was lost. When the
wild cry of the women who stood watching their departure was hushed,
the silence of death settled down upon Ireland. For a hundred years
the country remained at peace, but the peace was a peace of despair.
The most terrible legal tyranny under which a nation has ever groaned
avenged the rising under Tyrconnel. The conquered people, in
Swift's bitter words of contempt, became * hewers of wood and drawers
of water* to their conquerors; but till the very eve of the French
Revolution, Ireland ceased to be a source of terror and anxiety to Eng-
land."
On the great questions of civil and religious liberty Whigs and
Tories were now agreed, as the two parties had united in bringing
about the Revolution of 1688. But there their unanimity ended. The
Whigs proceeded to undo the wrongs upon their great leaders during
the last two reigns, and wanted to wreak vengeance on their opponents.
The attainder of Lord William Russell was reversed. The judgments
against Algernon Sidney, Lady Alice Lisle and others were annulled.
In spite of the opinion of the judges that the sentence of Titus Gates
had been illegal, the House of Lords refused to reverse it; but even
that infamous impostor and adventurer was pardoned and pensioned.
The Whigs clamored for the punishment of the Tories who had
shared in the illegal acts of Charles II. and James II., and refused
to pass the Bill of General Indemnity which King William III. laid
before them. The new king was resolved that no proscription should
follow the revolution which placed him upon the English throne, as
he was naturally opposed to persecution, and as the prosecution of the
war with France demanded all his energies and exertions.
Almost every parson in the Established Church of England resented
the requirement of an oath of allegiance to William and Mary as an
intolerable wrong. Archbishop Sancroft, with a few bishops and
many of the higher clergy, absolutely refused to take the oath, treated
all who took it as schismatics, and when deprived of their sees by Act
FIRST YEARS OP GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE.
of Parliament they regarded themselves and their adherents as the
only members of the true Church of England. The great majority
of the clergy bowed to necessity by taking the oath; but their bitter-
ness toward the new king and queen was fanned into a flame by the
expulsion of the Nonjurors, as those who refused to take the oath
were called.
During the year 1690 Admiral Herbert, who had been created Earl Popular
of Torrington as a reward for his services in the Revolution of 1688, j^payor
had engaged in an indecisive engagement with a French squadron in of
Bantry Bay. A French naval victory off the English coast would •'ar
have been pregnant with serious political consequences to King Wil-
liam III. ; as a popular reaction had begun in England in favor of the
deposed James II., on account of the expenses of the war with France,
the high taxation in consequence, the expulsion of the Nonjurors and
the consequent discontent of the clergy, the panic of the Tories at the
spirit of vengeance displayed by the triumphant Whigs, and the pres-
ence of James II. in Ireland. This reaction led to the formation of a
new party, called Jacobites, consisting of the Tory adherents of James The
II. ; and it was feared that a Jacobite rising would follow the appear- Jac°Dlte§-
ance of a French fleet on the English coast.
Under these circumstances, King William III., who perceived that if Act of
he yielded to the Whig thirst for vengeance his cause would be ruined, and°a
dissolved Parliament, proclaimed a general amnesty for all political Tory
offenses, under the title of an Act of Grace, and accepted the resigna- Mlnittry-
tions of his more violent Whig Ministers. A new Ministry under
the Earl of Danby, the oM Tory leader, was formed; and the new
Parliament summoned in 1690 had a Tory majority in the House of
Commons.
The combined English and Dutch fleets under Admiral Herbert, g^fT*1^
Earl of Torrington, were defeated by the French fleet under Admiral Beachy
Tourville off Beachy Head, on the coast of Sussey, June 30, 1690 Head-
(July llth, New Style), the day before the battle of the Boyne. The
fear of an invasion of England united the English people against
the Jacobites. The burning of Teignmouth by the French fleet and
the news of the battle of the Boyne gave the death-blow to the reaction
in favor of the exfed James II.
In the spring of 1691 King William III. appeared in person at the JjJjJJJj
head of an English army in the Spanish Netherlands, but was unable in Favor
to prevent the capture of Mons by the French. The result was j£ n
another Jacobite reaction in England, and such prominent Tories as
the Earl of Clarendon and Lord Dartmouth opened a correspondence
with the exiled James II. The Earl of Shrewsbury and other Whig
leaders, angered at what they considered King William's ingratitude,
2916
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Project
for the
Invasion
of
England.
Naval
Battles
off the
Isle of
Wight
and
Capo La
Eogue.
Land
Battles.
Corre-
spond-
ence with
James II.
Great
Constitu-
tional
Change.
did the very same thing. The Earl of Maryborough sought to bring
about a revolt which would drive William III. from the throne and
place James's daughter Anne upon it, hoping thus to get the real
direction of affairs in his own hands, as Anne had a great affection
for the Earl of Maryborough's wife.
Admiral Russell, the successor of the Earl of Torrington, was also
disloyal to King William III., but was too true an Englishman to
allow the French to invade Eng'and. In May, 1692, an army of
thirty thousand men — French troops and British exiles — was assembled
on the coast of Normandy to invade England and replace James II.
en his lost throne ; but Admiral Russell, at the head of the English
and Dutch fleets, defeated the French fleet under Admiral Tourville
cff the Isle of Wight, May 19, 1692, and in a still greater naval battle
off Cape La Hogue, on the coast of Normandy, May 23, 1692. James
II., who watched the battle from a neighboring eminence, could not
help expressing his admiration of the skill and bravery of the English
seamen, saying : " None but my brave English could have done this."
This great English naval victory defeated the project of an invasion
of England by the fallen James II., and established England's
supremacy on the seas.
The French army in the Spanish Netherlands defeated the allied
English and Dutch armies under King William III. in the great battles
cf Steinkirk, July 24, 1692, and Neerwinden, July 29, 1693.
William's expensive war with France aroused great dissatisfaction
in England, and his most trusted Ministers were ever ready to enter
into a correspondence with James II. whenever their own interests
seemed likely to be advanced thereby. Even the Princess Anne was
persuaded by her intimate friend, the Countess of Marlborough, to
write a penitent letter to her father, whom she had deserted during
the Revolution cf 1688, desiring peace and reconciliation.
The Revolution of 1688 and the Bill of Rights transferred the
political power in England from the king to the House of Commons.
Hitherto the Ministers of the Crown were but the king's servants,
being responsible to the king only. By impeachment the Commons
could sometimes force a king to remove a Minister who antagonized
them, but they had no constitutional power to put in his place a
Minister who represented their will. But the discontent of the Com-
mons with William's war policy and with his internal administration
led to a wonderful constitutional change in 1693, which has made
England virtua'ly a republic.
The credit of this great constitutional change belongs to Robert,
Earl of Sunde^and, who had been a Minister under Charles II. and
also under James II., and who secured pardon and protection from
FIRST YEARS OF GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE. 2917
William III. by having betrayed James II. when that king's doom Robert,
was impending, although he had held office under him by complying gunder-
with his tyranny and by a feigned conversion to the Roman Catholic land, and
faith. He had remained in retirement since the Revolution of 1688, "or aan
and now came forward to suggest his new plan to William III., which Respon-
was that the king should choose all his Ministers from the party which
had a majority in the House of Commons. By this plan the Ministers
of the Crown ceased to be the king's servants in all but in name, and
became simply an executive committee representing the majority of
the House of Commons, with which they must always be in accord on
questions of great national policy. Small factions were thus drawn
together into two great parties, which supported or opposed the
Ministry of the Crown — the party of the Government and that of the
Opposition.
Such was the origin of that system of popular representative gov- His View
ernment framed by Robert, Earl of Sunderland, which has ever since
prevailed in England. In spite of the temporary reaction, the Earl
of Sunderland believed that the Whigs were really the stronger party;
as they were the natural representatives of the principles of the Revolu-
tion of 1688, and as they were supporters of the war with France,
which the Tories opposed on account of the growth of taxation and the
ruin of English commerce by French privateers.
The Tory opposition to the war induced King William III. to New Par-
hearken to the Earl of Sunderland's advice by dissolving Parliament 1^naa
in 1695 and ordering the election of a new Parliament. The elections Whig
gave the Whigs a majority in the new House of Commons, whereupon s^'
the king dismissed his Tory Ministry and appointed a Whig Ministry
in accord with the new House of Commons. The ab.e Whig statesmen
known as the Junto were called to this new Ministry. Thus Admiral
Russell became Lord of the Admiralty ; the briliant Somers became
Lord Keeper; Montague became Chancellor of the Exchequer; and
the Earl of Shrewsbury became Secretary of State.
The Whig majority of the House of Commons moved quietly under Triennial
the direction of their leaders, the new Ministers of the Crown, thus ^ct *n^
Freedom
giving a new tone to that branch of Parliament; and great financial of th;
and constitutional measures passed rapidly through Parliament. By
the passage of the Triennial Act, in 1695, the duration of a House of
Commons was limited to three years. The refusal of the Commons
to renew the bill for the censorship of the press, in 1695, established
the freedom of the press ; whereupon a multitude of public prints ap-
peared. Concerning the action of the Commons in this matter,
Macaulay says : " This act has done more for liberty and civiliza-
tion than the Great Charter or the Bill of Rights."
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Bank of
England
Founded.
National
Debt
Queen
Mary's
Death.
Capture
Of Namur
Peace of
Ryswick.
Partition
Treaty
and the
Spanish
Succes-
sion.
Popular
Reaction
against
William
III. and
the Whig
Party.
To meet the financial strain of the war with France, Montague, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, established the Bank of England in 1694
by adopting the plan suggested by Paterson, a Scotch adventurer ; the
subscribers to a loan being formed into a company without exclusive
privileges and prohibited by law from lending money to the crown
without the consent of Parliament. The growth of the national wealth
had been so great that the list of subscribers was filled in ten days.
The discovery of the resources afforded by the national credit revealed
a new source of power. The rapid growth of the National Debt gave
a new security against the restoration of the Stuarts, who would have
repudiated it. Montague also carried out another financial reform in
purifying the coinage of England, which had been greatly debased.
Queen Mary died near the end of 1694, and thus William III.
reigned alone during the few remaining years of his life. William
III. never recovered from the sadness caused him by the death of his
wife, to whom he was tenderly and devotedly attached.
The power of the new Whig Ministry, the evidence of the public
credit, strengthened King William III. at home and abroad. In 1695
the Grand Alliance against France won its first great victory over the
French arms by the capture of Namur, in the Spanish Netherlands.
The war was finally ended by the Peace of Ryswick, September 30,
1697; by which Louis XIV. relinquished all his conquests except
Alsace, recognized William III. as King of England, Scotland and
Ireland, and abandoned the cause of James II.
William III. and Louis XIV. soon afterward entered into a treaty
for the partition of the Spanish dominions, October, 1698. The
Spanish branch of the Hapsburgs, which had occupied the throne of
Spain for two centuries, was about to end with the death of the childless
Charles II. ; and three heirs of Spanish princesses who had married
into French and Austrian families claimed the Spanish succession.
The death of the nearest heir, the Elector of Bavaria, in 1699, an-
nulled the First Partition Treaty between the Kings of England and
France. Europe was threatened with another general war, and the
popular feeling in England left William III. without the means of
backing his policy by force of arms. The suffering caused to the
merchant class by the last war, and the burden of debt and taxation
which it entailed, were daily arousing the resentment of the English
people; and the general popular discontent avenged itself on King
William III. and the Whig party, which had sustained his policy.
The king's lavish grants of crown-lands to his Dutch favorites, his cold
and sullen demeanor, with his endeavor to maintain a standing army,
had lost him all popularity. The Whig Junto lost its hold on the
Commons. Montague was driven from his post. Somers was at-
FIHST YEAKfc 01' GOVERNMENT BY IHli PEOPLE
2919
tacked without scruple. Even the boldest Whigs were afraid to
accept office. In spite of the king's entreaties, Par iament sent his
Dutch guards out of the country, reduced the army from ten thousand
men to seven thousand, and the navy from forty thousand to eight
thousand.
By a Second Partition Treaty between the Kings of England and
France, in 1700, the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany was required to
cede his Spanish claims to his second son, the Archduke Charles ; while
Louis XIV. conferred his claims on Spain upon his grandson, Duke
Philip of Anjou, who renounced his hereditary claims on France.
But, upon the death of Charles II. of Spain, in 1700, Louis XIV. dis-
regarded the Second Treaty of Partition by accepting the will of
Charles II. bequeathing the whole Spanish inheritance to Philip of
Anjou, garrisoned the Spanish Netherlands with French troops, and
haughtily refused to comply with Ki^g William's demand for their
withdrawal.
The new Parliament in England with its Tory majority was op-
posed to war, and in 1701 William III. was obliged to appoint a Tory
Ministry under Lord Godolphin, which forced William III. to recog-
nize Philip of Anjou as King of Spain. As Holland did this, William
could not refuse. But both parties in England were agreed in oppos-
ing a French occupation of the Spanish Netherlands, and a French
attack on the Protestant succession in England as settled by the Revo-
lution of 1688. When Holland appealed to England for aid against
a French invasion, the enraged Tory party in Parliament saw that
they were silently drifting into war, and impeached the leading mem-
bers of the Whig Junto for their share in the Partition Treaties.
They insulted William III. and delayed the supplies. But the dis-
closure of the French king's designs and fresh Jacobite plots in-
duced even the Tory Parliament to increase the army to ten thousand
men and the navy to thirty thousand.
Finally, when Louis XIV., upon the death of James II., in 1701,
recognized his son as King of England, Scotland and Ireland, all
England was aroused to intense indignation, regarding the French
king's action as a national insult ; and King William III. found his
Tory Parliament very willing to second all his efforts.
A new Act of Settlement, passed in 1701, excluded Roman Catholics
forever from the throne of England ; making Anne, the second daugh-
ter of James II., the prospective heiress to the English crown ; and
extending the right of succession to the Protestant heirs of James I.,
on the impending failure of Protestant heirs of James II. ; thus con-
ferring the crown upon the Princess Sophia, the granddaughter of
James I. and the wife of the Elector of Hanover.
voi» 9 — 9
Second
Partition
Treaty.
New Tory
Parlia-
ment
and Its
Anti-war
Attitude.
Impru-
dent Act
of Louis
XIV.
New Act
of Settle*
ment.
2920
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Second
Grand
Alliance.
Acci-
dental
Death of
William
III.
His
Abilities
and Char-
acter.
Rights of
Accused.
Popular
Liberty
and
Royal
Prerog-
ative
Defined.
In 1702 a Second Grand Alliance was concluded against Louis XIV.
of France by England, Holland and the German Empire. The Parlia-
ment summoned by William III. in 1702 with its Tory majority voted
forty thousand troops for the War of the Spanish Succession, which
now broke out. In the midst of his preparations for war, King Wil-
liam III. died at Hampton Court, March 8, 1702, from the effects of
a fall from his horse, which broke his collar-bone and aggravated the
disease from which he for some time had been suffering. He was
fifty-one years of age at the time of his death, and had reigned over
England thirteen years. His successor ANNE, second daughter of
James II., carried out his policy.
William III. for some time had been suffering from ill health, but
to the last his fiery soul within showed itself in his eagle eye and in
his firmly-compressed lips. As the House of Orange had lain pros-
trate in his early youth, he was trained in the sad school of adversity.
So he had learned to be watchful of public events, and also to be
reserved in expressing his views. As his family was restored to power
when he was reaching manhood, he brought to the public service wis-
dom and prudence remarkable in one so young. He disp'aycd his
genius to the best advantage in great emergencies. He was never so
cool as when on the battlefield, and was always most dangerous after
a defeat. He was personally unpopular during his lifetime, on ac-
count of his silent, unsocial habits, and his manifest partiality for his
own countrymen. But his patience, constancy and patriotism, and
the wisdom of his far-seeing policy, which secured to the English
people prosperity at home, and which gave them an influence abroad
which they had not possessed since Cromwell's time, have caused the
name of William III. to be honored in every English household.
Statutes enacted by Parliament during the reign of William III.
secured to persons accused of crime the right of counsel and a copy
of the charges, and secured to those who were condemned protection
from excessive fines and from cruel and unusual punishments.
The reign of Wrilliam III. embraces an era in constitutional govern-
ment in England, not only because it gave rise to new laws in the
interest of liberty, but also because it gave vitality to old laws. Before
his reign there were a sufficient number of charters and statutes, if they
had been executed, to have made the English people thoroughly free;
but public sentiment was not sufficiently educated and expressed, and
the royal prerogative was not adequately limited and defncd, to render
the rule of a tyrant impossible. During the reign of Wil'iam III. the
rights and liberties of the English people and the prerogatives of the
crown were clearly defined, so that ever since that period the sovereign
as well as the subject bows before the majesty of the law.
FIRST YEARS OF GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE.
2921
The one principle established in the reign of William III. that has
made popular government in England secure is the principle that the
Ministers of the Crown must be in accord with the majority in the
House of Commons. If in any matter of importance, or in any
matter in which the rival parties are at issue, the Commons refuse by
their vote to sustain the policy of the Ministry in power, the Ministry
either resigns to make way for a Ministry of the opposing party or
it dissolves Parliament and orders an election fcr a new House of
Commons ; and if the new election sustains the Ministerial policy by
returning a majority in its favor the Ministry remains in power; but
if an adverse majority is returned the Ministry resigns, and a Ministry
of the opposite party comes into power. Thus the House of Com-
mons— the popular, or republican branch of the English Parliament — •
can dictate the governmental policy, and is the chief ruling power in
England.
Since that time the sovereign of England has reigned without gov-
erning ; and as his Prime Minister, as the real executive of the English
government, is not responsible to the monarch, but to the English
people, through their representatives in the House of Commons, and
as the sovereign is shorn of all power in the government, the king or
queen is not responsible for any act of government, therefore no royal
abuses of political power can result from the maxim of English law
that " the king can do no wrong," thus giving truth and practical
force to that maxim, the king or queen not being able to do wrong
as a sovereign, as he or she is deprived of the power of doing so.
One peculiar and interesting fact in connection with the English
Constitution is that it is not embraced in a single enactment or in the
enactments of any single reign. It includes all the great charters
and statutes that have been enacted at various times since King John's
reign, with such customs and precedents as have been sanctioned by
long usage. The English Constitution, although lacking the individ-
uality of the United States Constitution, commands our reverence and
our admiration ; as it is the slow and steady growth of ages, and as it
is the product of the wisdom and patriotism of the best English minds,
standing the tests of time and an advancing civi ization. In fact the
American Constitution is simp'y an epitome and collection of the
various charters of freedom which mark the entire course of English
history.
The term Mother Country is significant to Americans, not only as
indicating the English origin of most of the people of the United
States, and of our early colonial governments, but also the English
origin of American liberties and American laws. Almost all of those
great principles of government which Americans so dearly cherish
Principle
of Minis-
terial
Respon-
sibility
Estab-
lisLed.
Develop
ment
of the
British
Constilu-
lion
The
Ko' her
Country
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Greatness
of tlie
An^lo-
Sa::on
Race.
English
Freedom
in
America.
Anne,
A. D.
1702-
1714.
Two
Great
Events.
War
of the
Spanish
Succes-
sion.
were conceived in English hearts and wrought out by English hands.
The inalienable rights of man — life, liberty, and the pursuit of hap^
piness — dawned in Magna Charta and the Bill of Rights long before
they shone resplendent in the Declaration of Independence and the Con-
stitution of the United States.
The great Anglo-Saxon branch of the Germanic race — which was
planted on the soil of Britain fourteen centuries ago — grew under ex-
ceptionally favoring influences to be the admiration and wonder of the
world. The history of the long series of popular conquests, which
were nobly won and firmly held — from Magna Charta to the Bill of
Rights, which were the preludes to our own Declaration of Independ-
ence and our National Constitution — contains a fund of political
wisdom which is the priceless inheritance of our own nation as well
as of the Mother Country. The spirit of American institutions can-
not be understood without some knowledge of the circumstances in
England which led to the development of the great principles of Eng-
lish freedom upon which our own institutions are built. The great
English statesmen who laid the foundations of English and American
freedom in England centuries before our Republic was born deserve
our lasting gratitude. The names of Stephen Langton, of Simon
de Montfort, of John Hampden and the men who founded the English
Commonwealth, should be cherished as much as Americans as by Eng-
lishmen.
Thus it is English freedom — the slow and steady growth of many
centuries — that the people of our Republic enjoy. This new slip was
severed from the parent tree a century ago, only that it might extend
new roots and new branches in a broader field and under yet freer
heavens, thus giving fuller development to the great principles of
human liberty which constitute the rich inheritance transmitted to us
from an illustrious ancestry.
As we have seen, ANNE, second daughter of James II., succeeded
William III. on the thrones of England and Scotland. The two great
events of English history during Queen Anne's reign were the War of
the Spanish Succession and the Parliamentary or Constitutional Union
of Eng'and and Scotland. These will now be noticed.
Nearly the whole of Anne's reign of twelve years (A. D. 1702-
1714) was occupied with the War of the Spanish Succession, which
will be briefly noted here and more fully described in our account of the
French history of this period. The allied English, Dutch and Ger-
man imperial armies under the English Duke of Mar'borough and
the German imperial general, Prince Eugene of Savoy, a French-
man by birth, won great victories over the French armies on the Con-
tinent— namely at Blenheim, in Bavaria, August 13, 1704, and in the
FIRST /EARS OF GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE.
2923
Spanish Netherlands, at Ramillies, May 23, 1706 ; at Oudenarde, July
11, 1708, and at Maiplaquet, September 11, 1709; while the English
fleet under Admiral Sir George Hooke captured the rocky stronghold
of Gibraltar from the Spaniards, August 4, 1704, and that strongest
fortress of the world and key to the Mediterranean has ever since been
in England's possession. The English under the Earl of Peter-
borough took Barcelona, in Spain, in 1705, but the allies were beaten
by the French in Spain in the great battle of Almanza, April 25, 1707.
John Churchi.l, created Earl of Marlborough in 1639 and Duke
of Marlborough in 1702, was the most distinguished political leader in
England during Queen Anne's reign, being the great upholder of Eng-
land's war policy during the War of the Spanish Succession. At first
both parties in England supported the war — the Whigs because it was
in the interest of their party policy, and the Tories because it was con-
ducted by a Tory general.
The victory of Blenheim produced great political consequences in
England. The Tories in the meantime had slowly drifted back into
their antipathy to a " Whig war." The Duke of Marlborough sought
to bind the Tories to his war po'icy in 1702 and 1703, by supporting
a bill against occasional conformity, excluding the Nonconformists
still more rigidly from all municipal rights, and by allowing the queen
to set aside the tithes and first fruits hitherto paid by the clergy to the
crown as a fund for the augmentation of small benefices. This fund
is still called Queen Anne's Bounty. But the Lords steadily resisted
the bill against occasional conformity, and the efforts of the Duke of
Marlborough to bind the Tory Ministers to a support of the war were
daily becoming more fruitless.
The higher Tories, under the leadership of the Earl of Nottingham,
had thrown every obstacle in the way of the prosecution of the war,
and finally resigned office in 1704 ; whereupon the Duke of Marl-
borough had a new Ministry appointed, consisting of the more
moderate Tories who were still in favor of the war. Thus Robert
Harley became Secretary of State, and the tainted Henry St. John
became Secretary of War. The Duke of Marlborough's march into
Germany imbittered the political strife in England. The Tories and
Jacobites threatened to bring the duke's head to the block if he failed
in his campaign, and he was saved 'rom political ruin only by the
victory of BVnheim.
The Duke of Marlborough slowly and reluctantly drifted from the
Tory party, which opposed the war, to the Whi »s, who really sup-
ported his war policy. He took advantage of the victory of Blen-
heim to dissolve Parliament; and, according to his hopes, the elections
of 1705 returned a majority in favor of the prosecution of the war.
5—26
Victories
of the
Duke of
Marl-
borough.
Capture of
Gibraltar.
The Duke
o- Marl-
borough
and t.ie
War Sen-
timent in
England.
Political
Conse-
quences
cf tbe
Victory
cf
Blenheim,
The
Tories
and tlie
Dul;e cf
Marl-
borough.
The
DnVe of
Marl-
borough
and the
2924.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Parlia-
mentary
Union of
England
and
Scotland.
Act of
Settle-
ment
by the
Scotch
Parlia-
ment.
Act of
Union
and the
Kingdom
of Great
Britain.
His efforts brought about a coalition of the Whig Junto and the
moderate Tories who still supported him, thus foiling the hostile
attacks of the extreme Tories, or peace party. The Duke of Marl-
borough secured the support of the Whigs by making the Whig
William Cowper Lord Keeper and by sending Lord Sunderland as
envoy to Vienna. But the duke encountered bitter disappointment
abroad in the refusal of the German imperial and Dutch armies to
join him in the campaign of 1705.
The year 1707 was rendered memorable by the Constitutional or
Parliamentary Union of England and Scotland. For a long time the
policy of uniting England and Scotland into one kingdom had been
seriously considered by leading statesmen in the two kingdoms, but the
project was long delayed by religious differences and commercial
jealousies. Scotland would not bear any portion of the English
national debt. England refused to yield any part of her monopoly
of trade with her colonies. The English Churchmen longed for the
restoration of Episcopacy in Scotland, while the Scotch Presbyterians
refused to listen even to the legal toleration of Episcopalians.
The passage of an Act of Settlement by the Scotch Parliament in
1703 warned English statesmen of the danger of further delay. In
this measure the Scotch Whigs, who cared only for the independence
of their country, united with the Scotch Jacobites, who cared only for
the interests of the Pretender, the son of the Tl-fatcd James II. The
Scotch Jacobites excluded the name of the Princess Sophia of Hanover
from their Act of Settlement ; while the Scotch Whigs introduced
a provision that no sovereign of England should be recognized as
sovereign of Scotland except upon condition of giving security to
the religion, freedom and trade of the Scots.
The danger of the Scotch Act of Settlement was great, as it indi-
cated a recognition of the Pretender in Scotland on the death of Queen
Anne, and a consequent war between England and Scotland. But
this danger was averted three years later by the wisdom and resolution
of Lord Somers in bringing the question to an issue. By his firmness
the jealousies and differences on both sides were put by; and an Act of
Union was finally passed by the EngMsh Parliament in 1707, providing
that England and Scotland should be united into one kingdom under
the name of Great Britain, and that the succession to the crown of this
United Kingdom should be governed by the provisions of the English
Act of Settlement. The Scotch Church and the Scotch laws were left
undisturbed ; but all rights of trade were made common to both coun-
tries, and a uniform system of coinage was adopted. A single Parlia-
ment was thenceforth to represent the United Kingdom at Westminster,
and thus forty-five Scotch members were added to the five hundred
FIRST YEARS OF GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE.
2925
and thirteen members of the English House of Commons, while sixteen
Scotch representative peers were added to the one hundred and eight
members of the English House of Lords.
In Scot. and the opposition to the Act was bitter and almost uni-
versal. The terrors of the Presbyterians were allayed by an Act of
Security which became a part of the Treaty of Union, and which
required every sovereign on his accession to take an oath to support
the Presbyterian Church ; but the enthusiastic Whig patriots and the
fanatical Jacobites of Scotland would not be satisfied with any securi-
ties. The Scotch Jacobites sought the aid of French troops and
plotted for a Stuart restoration. The Scotch national party
threatened to secede from the Presbyterian Assembly which voted for
the Union, and to establish a rival Parliament.
But in the end the good sense of the Scotch people, and the loyalty
of the trading classes of Scotland to the cause of the Protestant suc-
cession, prevailed over all jealousies and opposition; and the Act of
Union was adopted by the Scottish Parliament during the same year,
1707, when the Treaty of Union became a Parliamentary Act, which
was signed by Queen Anne, who gave her assent in these noble
words: "I desire and expect from my subjects of both nations
that henceforth they act with all possible respect and kindness to one
another, that so it may appear to all the world they have hearts dis-
posed to become one people."
Time has answered all of Queen Anne's hopes. The two nations
hitherto so hostile have remained one ever since the Treaty of Union in
1707 brought them together. The Union was soon acquiesced in
as the best policy for both countries, and so it has indeed proved.
England was thus freed from a constant danger of treason and war,
and the Union has been of the greatest advantage to Scotland.
Says John Richard Green, in his Short History of the English People,
concerning Queen Anne's expressed hopes : " Time has more than
answered these hopes. The two nations whom the Union brought
together have ever since remained one. England gained in the removal
of a constant danger of treason and war. To Scotland the Union
opened up new avenues of wealth which the energy of its people turned
to wonderful account. The farms of Lothian have become models of
agricultural skill. A fishing town on the Clyde has grown into the
rich and populous G'asgow. Peace and culture have changed the wild
cknsmen of the Highlands into herdsmen and farmers. Nor was the
change followed by any loss of national spirit. The world has hardly
seen a mightier and more rapid development of national energy than
that of Scotland after the Union. All that passed away was the
jealousy which had parted since the days of Edward the First two
Scotch
uon
anu the
Act of
Security.
Act of
Union
Accepted
by the
Scotch
Parlia-
ment.
Its
Benefit
to Both
Countries.
Green's
State-
ment.
2926
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
French
Aid to
the Pre-
tender
Foiled.
The Duke
of Mail-
borough
and the
Attitude
of the
Two
Parties.
Queen
Anne
and the
Duk of
Marl-
borough.
The
Duke's
Waning
Influence.
peoples whom a common blood and common speech proc!aimed to be
one. The Union between Scotland and England has been real and
stable simply because it was the legislative acknowledgment and en-
forcement of a national fact."
The Constitutional Union of England and Scotland in 1707 excited
some disturbances in Scotland, and the French king took advantage
thereof by sending a fleet and five thousand men to escort the Pre-
tender to the Frith of Forth. The French monarch's design was
frustrated by the English fleet under Admiral Byng.
The Duke of Maryborough had been rewarded with the royal manor
of Woodstock, where the palace of Blenheim was afterward erected.
It was the wise policy of the duke to govern England by holding the
balance of power between the rival political parties. His victory at
Ramillies made him strong enough to force Queen Anne to admit Lord
Sunderland, the most ultra leader of the Whigs, to office, notwith-
standing her hatred of the Whig party. The Tories were daily,
becoming more opposed to the war, and the Duke of Marlborough was
obliged to rely upon the Whigs for support. They made him pay a
dear price for their aid. They were the only party that supported
the war to which the Duke of Marlborough was pledged ; and he was
powerless to oppose the measures of the Whigs, as he could not com-
mand the support of the Tories.
Not only was the Tory party opposed to the Duke of Marlborough,
but Queen Anne's Tory principles caused her to lose faith in the great
duke. She bitterly resented the appointment of Lord Sunderland to
office, which the Duke of Marlborough had wrung from her by
threatening to resign his command. The Whigs were resolved to drive
the moderate Tories from office ; and, as the Duke of Marlborough was
powerless to oppose them, he was obliged to comply with their demands,
against his own judgment. This compliance increased the queen's
hatred towards the duke, and the haughty temper of the duke's wife
won for her the dislike of her former royal friend. The Whigs were
now supreme in England.
Great expectations had been formed in England, which the results
of the campaign of 1707 so miserafry disappointed. In consequence
Lord Godolphin and the Duke of Marlborough lost much of their
popularity, and they were opposed even by members of the Cabinet.
Though they persuaded Queen Anne to dismiss Secretary Harley and
Mr. St. John, they perceived that their influence with Her Majesty
and their power in Parliament had been considerably diminished, A.
D. 1708.
The great victories of the Duke of Marlborough and Prince Eugene
of Savoy in the Spanish Netherlands, at Oudenarde, July 11, 1708,
FIRST YEARS OF GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE.
2927
and Malplaquet, September 11, 1709, did not restore the former's
declining prestige among his own countrymen, and the great loss of
the allies in the battle of Malplaquet caused the Tory enemies of the
Duke of Marlborough to raise the cry of a " deluge of blood " in order
to make him unpopular in his own country. Eng.and was flooded with
pamphlets and other publications against the great duke, who was
abused, ridiculed, accused of prolonging the war for his own gratifica-
tion and profit; and even the courage of this greatest of England's
generals was questioned. The efforts of his Tory enemies succeeded,
and the English people were induced to consider the greatest English-
man of the time as his country's worst enemy. His bri.liant services
in so nobly sustaining the glory of England abroad were simply re-
garded by the English populace as evidences of a criminal ambition.
A change of opinion with regard to the war had taken place in
England, which resulted in the expulsion of the Whigs from office and
the accession to power of the Tories, who opposed the war. The Eng-
lish people by this time had become weary of a struggle in which they
bore the chief burdens and reaped few advantages. Queen Anne, a
woman of feeble mind, had long been under the influence of the Duchess
of Marlborough, who did not always use her power with discretion,
but behaved toward the queen in a haughty and insolent manner.
A new favorite, Mrs. Masham, now supplanted the Duchess of Marl-
borough in the queen's favor, and was influenced by Secretary Harley
and Mr. St. John to induce Her Majesty to make a complete change
in the administration. This would not have been possible had the
Whigs continued to enjoy the confidence of the English people, but
many circumstances contributed to diminish their popularity.
The burden of taxation which the expenses of the war occasioned
began to excite general dissatisfaction when frequent but useless
victories ceased to excite joy, especially as the allies contrived that
" Eng^nd should fight for all and pay for all." The English people
regarded the rejection of the French king's peace proposals, through
the influence of the avaricious Duke of Marlborough and the vindic-
tive Prince Eugene, as the triumph of private interest and private
ambition over public policy. The Duke of Marlborough had incurred
the hatred of the people by his avarice, having greatly enriched him-
self by his share in army contracts.
In the midst of the general discontent of the English nation with the
rule of the Whigs, the Tories raised the cry that the Church was in
danger, because of the favor which the Whig party showed to the
Dissenters, or Nonconformists. Instead of allowing this imputation to
refute itself, the Whigs unwisely endeavored to silence the clamor by
force./ Dr. Henry Sacheverell preached a sermon before the Lord
Rapid
Loss of
His Popu-
larity.
Political
Change.
Queen
.Anne
and the
Ducliess
of Marl-
borough.
Queen
Anne
and Mrs.
Masham.
The
English
People
and the
Duke of
Marl-
borough.
Sachev-
ereTs
Sermon
2928
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
His
Impeach-
ment.
New Tory
Ministry.
Disgrace
and Re-
tirement
of the
Duke of
Marl-
borough.
Hie
Abilities
and Char-
acter.
Mayor of London in St. Paul's Cathedral severely censuring the Dis-
senters and advocating the exploded doctrines of absolute passive
obedience and non-resistance.
Though Sacheverell's sermon was a poor and contemptible produc-
tion, the violence of party spirit caused it to be printed and forty
thousand copies of it to be sold in one week. It probably would have
been forgotten in another week had not Lord Godolphin, who was
personally assailed in the House of Commons, persuaded his partisans
to subject the preacher to a Parliamentary impeachment. The com-
mon sense of the English nation revolted from such an absurd pro-
ceeding. The generous feeling of the nation was enlisted on the side
of Dr. Sacheverell, and this sympathy was soon transferred to his
cause. During his trial the populace manifested the most lively zeal
in his behalf ; and when he was convicted, the House of Lords, dreading
popular tumults, passed a sentence so lenient that the Tories hailed it
as a triumph for their party.
The persecution of Sacheverell led to the expulsion of the Whig
party from power. Aware of their unpopularity, Queen Anne dis-
missed all her Ministers except the Duke of Marlborough, and formed
a Tory Cabinet in which Messrs. Harley and St. John were the leading
members. Mr. Harley was soon created Earl of Oxford, and Mr. St.
John became Viscount Bolingbroke. Parliament was dissolved, and
the elections returned a Parliament with an overwhelming Tory ma-
jority, A. D. 1711. The new Tory Ministry, however, for the time
adhered to the war policy of their Whig predecessors ; and the new
Tory House of Commons voted adequate supplies for the prosecution
of the war.
The Duke of Marlborough fought his last campaign in 1711,
during which he stormed and carried the intrenched camp of Marshal
Villars at Arleux and captured the strongly-fortified town of Bouchain ;
but while he was winning these successes on the frontier of France and
the Spanish Netherlands the malice of his Tory enemies in England
was too strong for him ; and, being charged with avarice and corrup-
tion in enriching himse^ in army contracts, he was condemned by a
vote of the House of Commons and deprived of his command and all
his civil offices, and was succeeded in his command by the Duke of
Ormond, who had secret orders not to fight. The Duke of Marl-
borough at once left England, being then sixty-one years of age.
Such was the treatment accorded by his own countrymen to the
general who, in an unbroken career of good fortune, took every
fortress which he besieged and won every battle which he fought. He
was one of the greatest statesmen, and unquestionably the ablest
general, that England ever produced. He was remarkably handsome,
FIRST YEARS OF GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE.
2929
and was gifted with a serenity which few things could ruffle. He
possessed unshaken courage, an ardent and venturesome nature, which
was held in check by a cool, clear judgment, which was never in-
fluenced by personal feelings. He had an extraordinary capacity for
enduring fatigue, and he sometimes passed fifteen hours on horse-
back. His manners were perfect, and a striking trait of his character
was his courtesy to every one.
The great duke was passionately fond of his wife, and his love for
her was the only strong feeling of his otherwise purely intellectual
nature. He was absolutely without feeling in everything else, hating
no one, loving none, regretting nothing. The passions which usually
swayed others, whether noble or ignoble, were simply regarded by him
as elements in an intellectual problem that required patience for its
solution. He was insensible to the finer feelings of human nature ; and,
although he was a man of real greatness, he loved money simply for
money's sake, and stained his great fame by his avarice and pecula-
tion.
In the disgrace of the Duke of Marlborough — whom political cir-
cumstances had gradually drawn from the Tory party until he had
become the most influential leader of the Whig party — the chief sup-
porter of the war policy lost his influence in public affairs in England;
and before the close of the campaign of 1711 the new Tory Ministry
of England was secretly negotiating with France for peace, and a
preMminary treaty was signed between England and France at London
in October, 1711.
As early as January, 1712, conferences for peace were opened at
Utrecht, in Holland, through the influence of England under her Tory
Ministers, who, after many disgraceful intrigues, sacrificed the interests
of their country to party purposes. Eighty plenipotentiaries of the
allied powers met three envoys on the part of the King of France.
Owing to the opposition of the Dutch and German imperial am-
bassadors, negotiations progressed very slowly.
After a year's negotiation, the Peace of Utrecht, April 11, 1713,
between England, Holland, Portugal, Spain and France — followed by
the Peace of Rastadt, between France and Austria, March 7, 1714,
and the Peace of Baden, between France and the German Empire, in
September, 1714 — ended the War of the Spanish Succession ; the
French claiment, Philip of Anjou, being recognized as Kinqr of
Spain ; while England obtained Gibraltar and Minorca from Spain,
and Nova Scotia and the Hudson's Bay Territory from France.
The conduct of the Tory Ministry of the Earl of Oxford and Lord
Bolingbroke in concluding the Peace of Utrecht aroused fierce party
contests in England. The Whigs denounced the treaty as an absolute
His
Insensi-
bility and
Avarice.
Anti-war
Sentiment
in
England.
Prelimi-
nary
Treaty.
Peace
Confer-
ences at
Utrecht.
Peace of
Utrecht.
Party
Contests
in
England.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
surrender of the fruits of English victories and a wanton sacrifice of
the advantages which England might have claimed from the success
of her arms. The Tories reproached the Whigs for continuing the
war unnecessarily after all its reasonable objects had been gained.
The English people generally disliked the treaty, and the House of
Commons rejected the commercial treaty with France by a majority of
nine votes.
Lord The removal of the Earl of Oxford from the head of the Ministry
broke" through the influence of the Jacobites, and the formation of a more
and the ultra Tory Cabinet under Lord Bolingbroke, who was favorably dis-
Pre- posed toward the House of Stuart, gave ground for popular appre-
tender. hensions, especially as the Jacobites openly demanded that the Pre-
tender, the son of James II., be declared the heir to the English throne.
Lord Bolingbroke would have brought about such a result could he
have induced the young Stuart to become a Protestant. The Whigs
accordingly raised the cry that the Protestant succession was in danger,
and the alarm which they thus spread throughout the kingdom re-
covered for their party a very large share of its former favor and
popularity.
Queen In the midst of these violent party contests in England, Queen Anne
Anne's
Death. died of apoplexy, August 1, 1714. The reign of " Good Queen
Anne " has not only been distinguished for the great military triumphs
of the Duke of Marlborough, and for the Parliamentary or Constitu-
tional Union between England and Scotland in 1707, but also for the
brilliant galaxy of writers who have made the period of her reign
Augustan memorable as the Augustan Age of Engl'sh Literature, while the reign
English °f her great contemporary, Louis XIV., had also become distinguished
Litera- as the Augustan Age of French Literature, as already noticed. The
great literary lights of this Augustan Age of English Literature were
the great poet Alexander Pope, the political writers Joseph Addison,
Sir Richard Steele, Jonathan Swift and Lord Bolingbroke, and Daniel
Defoe, the author of Robinson Crusoe.
House of Queen Anne's death ended the Stuart dynasty. Her husband,
Bruns- Prince George of Denmark, had died several years before her. As all
Hanover, her nineteen children had died before her, she was succeeded on the
or Guelf. throne of Great Britain and Ireland by the Elector George of Han-
George I. over, the son of the Princess Sophia, the granddaughter of James I.
Thus, in accordance with the Act of Set^ement, passed by the Eng-
lish Parliament in 1701, the German House of Hanover, or Bruns-
wick— the Guelfs, or descendants of the famous Henry the Lion, Duke
of Bavaria and Saxony, the great rival of the chivalrous German
Emperor Frederick Barbarossa — ascended the British throne, which
they have ever since occupied.
ENGLAND'S NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES.
2931
SECTION VI.— ENGLAND'S NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES
( A. D. 1607-1776).
THE English founded all their claims to North America upon
Cabot's discoveries. As" we have already stated, during Queen Eliza-
beth's reign, the distinguished Sir Walter Raleigh made several un-
successful efforts to colonize North America; and Queen Elizabeth,
in consideration of her unmarried state, named the territory Virginia.
In 1606 King James I. of England granted the territory between
the Potomac and Cape Fear rivers, under the name of South Virginia,
to an association in London, known as the London Company. At the
same time the king granted the territory now known as New England,
under the name of North Virginia, to a company in the West of Eng-
land, called the Plymouth Company.
In 1607 one hundred and five English emigrants, under Captain
Christopher Newport, sailed up the beautiful river which they named
James, in honor of their king; and on the bank of that stream they
began a settlement which they named Jamestown. This was the first
permanent English settlement in America. The settlers suffered
greatly from co'd, hunger and the hostilities of the natives, until the
famous Captain John Smith assumed the direction of affairs, and,
by his skillful management, restored confidence.
Captain Smith exp'ored the country northward to the interior of
the present Pennsylvania. According to the well-known story now
generally discredited, Smith was taken prisoner by the Indians, whose
ruler, Powhatan, determined to put him to death ; but Pocahontas, the
daughter of Powhatan, interceded for the prisoner and saved his life ;
whereupon Smith was released and permitted to return to Jamestown.
When Captain Smith returned to England, in 1609, the colony at
Jamestown ceased to prosper, and was soon reduced by famine from
five hundred persons to sixty. The winter and spring of 1610 was
long known as " The Starving Time." The remaining settlers were
about to leave Virginia, when, in 1611, Lord Delaware, who had been
appointed governor of the colony, arrived from England, with immi-
grants and provisions, and the colonists resolved to remain. In 1613
the Indian maiden, Pocahontas, was married to a young Englishman
named John Rolfe. She was then taken to England and presented
at court.
In 1619 representative government was established in Virginia; and,
on the 28th of June of that year, the first legislative assembly in
America convened at Jamestown. In 1620 one hundred and fifty
white women were brought to Jamestown, and sold to the planters
English
Claims.
Virginia.
London
and
Plymouth
Compa-
nies.
Settle-
ment of
James-
town.
Captain
John
Smith.
Legend of
Captain
Smith
and Poca-
hontas.
"The
Starving
Time."
Lord
Dela-
ware's
Arrival.
Virginia
Assem-
bly.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Introduc-
tion of
Slavery.
House
of Bur-
gesses.
Indian
War of
1622.
Virginia,
a Royal
Province.
Governor
Berkeley.
Indian
War of
1644.
Governor
Berke-
ley's
Tyranny.
Bacon's
Rebellion.
for wives, at the cost of their passage. During the same year (1620)
a Dutch vessel loaded with negroes ascended the James river, and sold
twenty of them for slaves to the planters at Jamestown. This was
the beginning of negro-slavery within the domain of the present United
States.
Sir Francis Wyatt, who became governor of the colony in 1621,
gave the Virginians a written constitution which allowed them a
popular legislative assembly. This was the beginning of the cele-
brated Virginia House of Burgesses. The constitution vested the
appointment of governor and council in the London Company. In
1622 the Indians, under the leadership of Opechancanough, Pow-
hatan's brother and successor, massacred three hundred and fifty of the
Virginia colonists, and reduced eighty plantations to eight. The
whites began a terrible war of revenge against the savages, slaughtered
many of them most unmercifully, and drove the remainder into the
wilderness.
In 1624 King James I., by an act of high-handed usurpation, dis-
solved the London company, and, taking away its charter, made
Virginia a royal province ; but he wisely abstained from interference
with the House of Burgesses. In 1641 the staunch royalist, Sir Wil-
liam Berkeley, was appointed governor of Virginia by King Charles
I. ; and during his administration of nearly forty years the colony
rapidly advanced in prosperity. In 1644 another war broke out with
the Indians, still governed by Opechancanough ; and, after a struggle
of two years, the power of the savages was broken, and they ceded large
tracts of land to the Virginians.
The Virginians, although democratic, sympathized with the king
during the civil war in England. When monarchy was restored in
England, in 1660, full power was given to Governor Berkeley to
restrict the liberties of the Virginians. Berkeley's tyranny produced
a popular rebellion in 1676, headed by the staunch republican,-
Nathaniel Bacon, who assumed command of five hundred men without
the permission of Berkeley, who proclaimed the popular leader a traitor.
Bacon drove Berkeley from Jamestown and set the place on fire, and
the first town founded by the English in America was reduced to ashes.
Soon afterward Bacon died, and with his death ended the rebellion.
The rebels were severely punished; and fines, imprisonments, and con-
fiscations of property disgraced the remainder of Berkeley's admin-
istration, William Drummond and others being hanged. King
Charles II. said of Berkeley : " That old fool has hanged more men
in that naked colony than I did here for the murder of my father."
Governor Berkeley was opposed to popular enlightenment. Said he
to the commissioners sent from England to Virginia in 1671 :
ENGLAND'S NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES.
" Thank God, there are no free schools nor printing-press ; and I hope
we shall not have these hundred years ; for learning has brought dis-
obedience and heresy and sects into the world, and printing has
divulged these and libels against the best government." When At-
torney-General Seymour was asked for aid to found a college in Vir-
ginia to prepare the clergy for their work " in the salvation of souls,"
he replied : " Damn your souls. Grow tobacco."
From 1680 to 1684- Virginia was a proprietary colony under Lord
Culpepper, who owned extensive lands in the province, but after this
short period it again became a royal province in IGSi. From the
time of the English Revolution of 1688 Virginia was a prosperous
and flourishing colony.
In 1602 Bartholomew Gosnold, Raleigh's friend, explored the coast
of Massachusetts bay, and discovered and named Cape Cod. He also
discovered the islands of Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard, and a
group which he named the Elizabeth Islands, in honor of his queen.
In 1603 and 1606 Martin Pring visited the coast of North. Virgin!;',.
In 1614 the intrepid Captain John Smith explored the country between
Cape Cod and the Pcnobscot, and named the region Xetc England.
In 1620 the Plymouth Company was dissolved, and a new company
was formed, which was called The Council of Plymouth, and to which
was granted the territory called New England. A few years previous
to this a company of English Puritans, who had suffered persecution
in their native land, because they did not conform to the established
Anglican Church, settled in Holland. They were led by the pious RL'V.
John Robinson. Failing to become reconciled to the customs and
habits of the Dutch, these humble Puritans, who felt that they were
only pilgrims in this world, resolved to emigrate to the wilds of
America, where they might worship God in their own way.
These Puritans in Holland formed a partnership with some London
merchants, who furnished them with capital for their enterprise.
They returned to England; and in September, 1620, one hundred and
one of these pious men and women sailed for New England in a vessel
called the Mayflower. These Pilgrim Fathers, as they are called,
landed on a rock on the coast of Massachusetts bay, on the 21.-t rf
December, 1620. They named the place of landing Plymouth, and
the town which they founded is the oldest in New England. In the
cabin of the Mayflower, just before landing, the}' had adopted ,-i
written constitution of government, and chosen John Carver for then*
governor. Several months after their landing (March 21, 1621)
Governor Carver made a treaty of friendship with Massnsoit. the
sachem of the Wampanoag Indians. A few days after this treaty
Governor Carver died, and William Bradford became governor of the
Remarks
oi
Governor
Berkeley
and
Attorney-
Geaeial
Seymour.
Virginia
alier
1680.
Bartholo-
mew
Gosnold'3
Discov-
eries.
Captain
Smith
in New
England.
Council of
Ply-
mouth.
Rev. John
Kobiusoa
and His
Puritan
Band
The
Pilgrim
Fathers
in the
May-
flower.
Their
Settle-
ment of
Plymouth
in New
England.
2934
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
John
Endicott
and the
Settle-
ment of
Salem.
John
Winthrop
and the
Settle-
ment of
Boston.
Puritan
Intoler-
ance.
Banish-
ment of
Roger
Williams
and
Others.
United
Colo:ies
of New
England.
Persecu-
tion of
Quakers.
A Royal
Commis-
sion.
colony. Captain Miles Standish was the military leader and hero of
the settlement, who protected it against savage foes and performed
some bold exploits. Many settlers had died during the winter. Other
immigrants came. In 1627 the Plymouth colonists purchased the in-
terests of the London merchants, and became the sole proprietors of
the country in which they had established themselves ; and in 1634
they abolished their pure democracy, and adopted the more convenient
form of representative government.
In 1628 John Endicott and one hundred Puritan emigrants founded
Salem. They had been sent from England by a company which the
following year (1629) was incorporated The Governor and Company
of Massachusetts Bay in New England. In the same year the Com-
pany assigned the charter and government to the colonists. During
1629 other immigrants arrived and settled Charlestown.
In 1630 a large number of Puritans from England arrived at
Salem, with John Winthrop as governor. Some of them made settle-
ments at Dorchester, Roxbury, Watertown, • Cambridge and Lynn ;
while Winthrop and others settled Boston, which became the capital of
the Massachusetts Bay colony and the future metropolis of New Eng-
land. In 1634 representative government was established in the
colony of Massachusetts Bay.
The Puritans, who had just suffered so much persecution in Eng-
land for their religious opinions, were no sooner settled in New Eng-
land than they became persecutors themselves, and allowed no tolera-
tion for difference of opinion in religious or civil matters. In 1635
Roger Williams, a Puritan minister of the gospel, was banished from
the Massachusetts Bay colony, because he advocated toleration for all
religious beliefs. Williams founded the colony of Rhode Island the
next year, 1636. Religious dissensions still disturbed the Mas-
sachusetts Bay colony; and in 1637 Mrs. Ann Hutchinson and the
Rev. John Wheelwright, supporters of Williams, were banished.
In 1643 the New England colonies of Plymouth, Massachusetts
Bay, Connecticut and New Haven united in a confederacy for mutual
protection against the French, the Dutch and the Indians. This
union, called The United Colonies of New England, lasted more than
forty years, when mutual jealousies caused its dissolution.
The year 1656 is noted in the history of the Massachusetts Bay
colony for a most cruel persecution of Quakers who sought an asylum
in that colony. Some were whipped, others were imprisoned, and
many were put to death. Finally a milder spirit prevailed, and
persecution ceased.
The New Englanders, unlike the Virginians, sympathized with the
enemies of the king during the civil war in England. When monarchy
OS <•>
d ^
0. "o
«
ttl -g
1 2
H £
ft. u
O -5
c
O .g"
P ^
ENGLAND'S NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES.
was restored in the Mother Country, in 1660, an effort was made to re-
strict the liberties of the people of New England ; and a royal commis-
sion was appointed to govern the colony of Massachusetts Bay ; but this
attempt at usurpation encountered so much popular resistance that it
was relinquished, and republicanism was triumphant.
In the meantime there were missionary efforts to convert the Indians
of New England to Christianity. As early as 1643 Thomas May-
hew labored for the conversion of the Indians of Martha's Vineyard
Island, and a Narragansett sachem to whom he applied for permission
to preach to his tribe replied : " Go make the English good first."
His son, Thomas Mayhew, Jr., was a more active missionary, but after
ten years' labor for the conversion of the Indians he perished on a sea
voyage to Eng'and in 1657. The greatest of all the English mis-
sionaries among the Indians of New England was the famous .John
Eliot, who for about twenty years preached to the Indians in their own
language after learning it, traveling and preaching and founding
churches among the Indians of Massachusetts, from the Merrimac to
Cape Cod, and finally translating the Catechism and the Bible into the
Indian language, in 1661—1663.
In 1675 the Wampanoag prince, Metacomet, commonly known as
King Philip, the son and successor of the good Massasoit, commenced
a war of extermination against the white people of New England.
Philip's first attack was made at Swanzey, on Sunday, July 4, 1675,
and many of the whites were massacred. The whites were soon aroused,
and seized their arms, while the savages desolated the English settle-
ments on the Connecticut river. King Philip was repulsed in an at-
tack upon Hatfield,'in October, 1675; after which he was sheltered
by the Narragansetts of Rhode Island. A force of fifteen hundred
New Englanders resented the hostile conduct of the Narragansetts by
applying the torch to their wigwams ; and hundreds of Indian men,
women and children perished in the flames, and a thousand of their
warriors were killed or captured. The following year (1676) the
Indians were subjugated; and their great leader, King Philip, was
shot by an Indian who was friendly to the whites. Captain Church
cut off his head, and his little son was sold as a bond-slave in the
West Indies. Thus ended King Philip's War.
After James II. became King of England, in 1685, he annulled
the charter of the Massachusetts Bay colony, and appointed the in-
famous Sir Edmund Andros to rule all New England as Governor-
General. Andros governed tyrannically for two years; but when, in
1689, news reached Boston of the Revolution in England which drove
King James II. from the throne, the Bostonians seized and imprisoned
Andros, and sent him to England on a just charge of maladminis-
roi. 9—9
Mission-
aries
to the
Indians.
The
Mayhews
and John
Eliot.
King
Philip's
War.
Tyranny
and
Over-
throw of
oovernor
A.ndros.
$936
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Salem
Witch-
craft.
Massa-
chusetts,
a Royal
Province.
King
William's
War.
Attacks
on Dover
and Sche-
nectady.
New
England
Expedi-
tions
against
the
French.
Queen
Anne's
War.
tration in office; and the New England colonies immediate!} resumed
their charters.
In 1692 the people of Massachusetts Bay were afflicted with a great
delusion, known as the Salem Witchcraft. A general belief in sorcery
prevailed; many unfortunate persons were accused of practicing
witchcraft; and, during a period of six months, about twenty persons
were put to death, and many others were imprisoned. This frightful
delusion passed away as suddenly as it had appeared. Even the most
learned in those times believed in witchcraft. The great English
divine, Richard Baxter, pronounced a disbeliever in witchcraft " an
obdurate Sadducee." Sir Matthew Hale, as Judge, tried and con-
demned those accused of witchcraft. A century later Sir William
Blackstone, the eminent legal authority, declared that to deny the
existence of witchcraft is to deny divine revelation.
In 1692 King William III. of England united the colonies of
Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay, and the English settlements in
Maine and New Brunswick, as one royal province under the name of
Massachusetts, and appointed Sir William Phipps governor.
The war that broke out between England and France in 1689 ex-
tended to the English and French colonies in North America, and is
known in American history as King William's War, because it occurred
during the reign of William III. in England. The Indians of Canada
and Acadia aided the French, while the Five Nations, of New York,
assisted the English. In July, 1689, the town of Dover, in New
Hampshire, was attacked by the French and their Indian allies ; and
in February, 1690, Schenectady, in New York, was burned and sixty
of its inhabitants were atrociously massacred by the French and the
Indians.
In May, 1690, the New England colonies sent a naval expedition
under Sir William Phipps, which plundered the French colony of
Acadia. The same year a New England land expedition under a
son of Governor Winthrop, of Connecticut, proceeded to attack
Montreal ; while a naval force under Sir William Phipps was sent
against Quebec. Both expeditions were failures. The people of New
England suffered terribly from the attacks of the French and their
savage allies, until the Peace of Ryswick was concluded between Eng-
land and France, in 1697.
In 1702 a war broke out between England and France, which ex-
tended to the colonies of those nations in North America. This war,
called in Europe the War of the Spanish Succession, is known in
American history as Queen Anne's War, so called because it happened
during the reign of Queen Anne in England. The French and In-
dians again spread desolation among the English settlements. Dser-
ENGLAND'S NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES,
2937
field, in Massachusetts, was burned, and its inhabitants were massacred
by the savages and their French allies.
In 1710 a fleet from England, aided by a land force from New
England, captured Port Royal, in Acadia. Port Royal was named
Annapolis, after Queen Anne; and Acadia became an English province,
under the name of Xora Scotia, or New Scotland. In 1711 a fleet,
and army from England under Sir Hovenden Walker, assisted by New
Englanders, the whole expedition consisting of five thousand men,
proceeded against Quebec. The vessels were wrecked at the mouth
of the St. Lawrence river, and one thousand men perished. The
expedition was abandoned, and the Peace of Utrecht was concluded
between England and France in 1713.
In 1744 another war began between England and France, known
in Europe as the War of the Austrian Succession, and in American
history as King George's War, because it took place while George II.
was King of Great Britain. The principal event of this war in
America was the capture of the French fortress of Louisburg, on the
island of Cape Breton, by the English. In April, 1745, Governor
Shirley, of Massachusetts, sent an army under General William Pep-
perell against this fortress, called the Gibraltar of America, on account
of its strength. The New England army, in conjunction with a
British fleet under Admiral Warren, laid siege to the fortress late in
Ma}*, and on the 28th of June (1745) Louisburg and the island of
Cape Breton were surrendered to the English.
In 1746 the French sent a powerful fleet under the Duke d' Anville
to retake Louisburg. The greater part of this fleet was destroyed by
storms, and the enterprise was abandoned. The Peace of Aix la
Chapclle, concluded between England and France in 1748, put an end
to the war.
In 1622 the territory between the Mcrrimac and Kcnnebec rivers
was granted to Sir. Ferdinand Gorges and John Mason, under the
name of Laconia. The proprietors sent out emigrants to settle in
Laconia, and as early as 1622 fishing stations were established on the
sites of Portsmouth and Dover. In 1629 the good Rev. John Wheel-
wright and others founded the town of Exeter.
In 1629 John Mason became sole proprietor of Laconia, and named
the region New Hampshire, after Hampshire county in England.
Mason settled at Portsmouth ; and other settlements were made as far
as Machias, in Maine. In 1641 New Hampshire was united with the
Massachusetts Bay colony ; but the two colonies were again separated
in 1679, when New Hampshire became a royal province. In 1699
New Hampshire was reunited with Massachusetts under the same gov-
ernor, but a final separation took place in 1741.
Deerfield
Burned.
English
Conquest
of Acadia.
Expedi-
tions
against
Quebec.
King
George's
War.
English
Capture
of Louis-
burg.
French
Attempt
to
Recover
Louis-
burg.
Laconia
Grai t and
Settle-
ment.
Laconia,
or New
Hamp-
shire.
29S8
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND,
Provi-
dence
Founded
by R ger
V uliams.
Settle-
ment of
Rhode
Island.
Rhode
Island
and
Provi-
dence
Planta-
tions.
Its
Charter
from
King
Charles
II.
Adrian
Block.
Connect-
icut
Grant.
Settle-
ments in
Connect-
icut.
Vsquod
War.
The first settlement in Rhode Island was made on the Pawtucket
river by William Blackstone, a Puritan minister. When Roger Wil-
liams was banished from the colony of Massachusetts Bay, in 1635,
he traveled through the wilderness in the midst of winter; and in 1636
he founded a settlement on Narraganset bay, which, with pious feel-
ings, he named Providence. This was the beginning of the Rhode
Island colony, which became an asylum for persecuted Christians of
all sects.
In 1638 William Coddington, a Nonconformist minister, and others
who were banished from the colony of Massachusetts Bay, founded
Portsmouth, on the island which they named Rhode Island; and in
1639 the settlement of Newport was commenced,
In 1644 Roger Williams, who had gone to England for that pur-
pose, obtained from the Long Parliament a liberal charter, under which
The Rhode Island and Providence Plantations were united as one
province; and in 1647 a colonial convention, assembled at Portsmouth,
adopted a democratic form of government and established the prin-
ciples of perfect religious freedom in Rhode Island.
In 1663 King Charles II. of England granted to the Rhode Island
and Providence Plantations a charter which left the colonists in the
full enjoyment of perfect civil and religious freedom. This charter
was suspended by the tyrant Andros in 1687 ; but when he was im-
prisoned in Boston, in 1689, it was resumed, and remained in full
force as the instrument of government of the commonwealth until
1842, when a State constitution was adopted.
In 1614 Adrian Block, a Dutch navigator, discovered the Con-
necticut river, and sailed up that stream as far as the site of Hartford.
In 1630 the Council of Plymouth granted the soil of Connecticut to
the Earl of Warwick, who, the following year, granted it to Lord
Say and Seal, Lord Brooke and others.
In 1633 the Dutch erected a fort at the site of Hartford, and in
the same year the English under Captain Holmes established a trading-
house at the site of Windsor. In 1635 emigrants from Boston settled
Windsor and Wethersfield; and in 1636 other emigrants from the
colony of Massachusetts Bay, led by the good Rev. Thomas Hooker,
founded Hartford. In 1635 John Winthrop, son of the governor of
the Massachusetts Bay colony, led a company of emigrants to the
mouth of the Connecticut river, where they formed a settlement, which,
in honor of Lord Say and Seal and Lord Brooke, they named Say-
brook.
In 1637 a frightful war broke out between the Connecticut settlers
and the Pequod Indians, the Mohegan and Narraganset tribes uniting
with the whites ; and in a furious battle at the Mystic river the savages
< u
ENGLAND'S NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES.
£939
were defeated by Captain John Mason, after their fort had been set
on fire, and the tribe of the Pequods was exterminated, and their chief,
Sassacus, fled to the Mohawks, who put him to death. In 1638 New
Haven was founded by emigrants from EfTgland, led by the pious Rev.
John Davenport and Theophilus Eaton; and they resolved to be
governed in civil matters according to the rules and principles of the
Bible.
In 1639 the settlers at Hartford, Windsor and Wethersfield adopted
a liberal constitution of government for the Connecticut colony. In
1644 the Saybrook settlement was united with Connecticut; and in
1665 the Connecticut and New Haven colonies were united into one
colony, called Connecticut, under a charter granted to the colonists
by King Charles II. three years before.
In 1675 Sir Edmund Andros, then governor of New York, at-
tempted to extend his authority over Connecticut ; and for this pur-
pose he went to Saybrook with -a small naval force; but he was so
firmly resisted that he relinquished the attempt.
In 1687 Andros, as Governor-General of all New England, suc-
ceeded in depriving all the New England colonies, excepting Con-
necticut, of their charters. He went to Hartford to sieze the Con-
necticut charter; and while the assembly was in session in the evening
the charter was laid on the table; but just as Andros attempted to
take it the lights were suddenly extinguished, and Captain Wadsworth
carried away the charter and hid it in the hollow of an oak tree, which
thenceforth was called the Charter Oak. Andros, however, governed
Connecticut until he was imprisoned in Boston, in 1689, when the
Connecticut charter was taken from its hiding-place, and was resumed
by the colonists as their instrument of government.
In 1693 Governor Fletcher of New York attempted to bring Con-
necticut under his jurisdiction, and for that purpose he went to Hart-
ford, where he assembled the Connecticut militia. When Fletcher pro-
ceeded to read his commission, Captain Wadsworth, the commander of
the militia, commanded the drums to be beaten. " Silence," shouted
Fletcher, whereupon Wadsworth stepped up and said : " Sir ! if they
are interrupted again, I will make the sun shine through you in a
moment!" Fletcher returned to New York in great anger. From
this time Connecticut was a prosperous colony.
Thus there were finally four New England colonies — New Hamp-
shire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut. Plymouth and
Maine had been united with Massachusetts, and New Haven had been
united with Connecticut. Settlements eventually spread west of the
upper part of the Connecticut river — in the region afterwards called
Vermont, a French name meaning Green Mountain. The first settle-
6-27
New
Haven
Founded.
Connect-
icut
Charter.
Governor
Andros.
Andros
and the
Connect-
icut
Charter.
The
Charter
Oak.
Governor
Fletcher
and
Captain
Wais-
worth.
Four New
England
Colonies.
2940
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Henry
Hudson's
Discov-
eries.
His
Fate.
Dutch
West
India
Company
and New
Nether-
lands.
Settle-
ment of
New Am-
sterdam.
Governor
Kieft's
Misrule
and
Result.
Governor
Stuy-
vesant.
His
Conn nest
of New
Sweden.
ment within this region was made by Massachusetts colonists at Fort
Dummer, on the site of Brattleboro', in 1724.
In 1609 Henry Hudson, an English navigator, then in the service
of the Dutch East India Company, explored the American coast from
Chesapeake bay to Long Island Sound, and sailed up the beautiful
river which bears his name, as far as the site of Albany. On this
account, the Dutch claimed the territory drained by that stream. On
a subsequent voyage Hudson discovered the large bay which bears his
name, in northern Canada ; and, while on his home voyage, his crew
became mutinous and sent Hudson and his son in a boat adrift on the
ice, and they were heard of no more.
In 1614 the Dutch erected huts on Manhattan Island, and in the
same year they also built a fort near the site of Albany. In 1621
the States-General of Hol'and granted great privileges of coloniza-
tion to a company of Amsterdam merchants who were incorporated the
Dutch West India Company. This company claimed the territory
between Cape Henlopen and the Connecticut river, and named it New
Netherlands.
In 1623 permanent Dutch settlements were made at New Amster-
dam, on Manhattan Island, and at Fort Orange, on the site of Albany.
Immigrants from Holland came over into the colony in large numbers.
The first governor of New Netherlands was Peter Minuit (1626-1633),
and the second was Wouter Van Twiller (1633-1638).
The third governor of New Netherlands was the haughty, rapacious
and despotic Sir William Kieft, who vainly tried to suppress the
growth of democracy among the New Netherlanders, and whose turbu-
lent spirit soon involved him in trouble with the Swedes on the Dela-
ware, the English on the Connecticut, the Indians all around him and
the colonists at his door. With cruel treachery, Kieft attacked the
Indians at Hoboken ; and hostilities were carried on with the greatest
ferocity for two years, when the Indians were subdued, and their power
and spirit were broken. In 1647 the quarrelsome Kieft was recalled;
and on his way to Europe his vessel was wrecked, and the infamous
governor perished.
The fourth and last governor of New Netherlands was the firm and
energetic Peter Stuyvesant, who endeavored, as much as prudence
would permit, to check the growing spirit of republicanism among the
New Netherlands people, who grew bolder by degrees, and who final'y
denied the right of taxation without representation, and showed an in-
clination to bear English rule for the sake of enjoying English liberty.
In 1655 Governor Stuyvesant conquered the Swedish settlements on
the Delaware, and formally and forcibly annexed New Sweden to New
Netherlands.
ENGLAND'S NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES.
2941
In 1664 King Charles II. of England granted to his brother James,
Duke of York and Albany, all the territory embraced by the Dutch
colony of New Netherlands. The Duke sent a small naval force under
Colonel Richard Nicolls to take possession of New Netherlands, which
was done in September of the same year, 1664?. The people of New
Amsterdam, tired of Stuyvestant's rigor, and hoping to enjoy greater
political freedom under English rule, made no resistance ; and Stuy-
vesant was obliged to surrender the place to Nicolls. The name New
York was given to New Amsterdam, as well as to the province of New
Netherlands ; and Fort Orange was named Albany.
Colonel Nicolls was the first governor of the English province of
New York. The Dutch colonists were disappointed in their hopes of
enjoying greater political liberty under English rule; as Nicolls and
his successor, Francis Lovelace, governed most despotically. In 1673,
during a war between England and Holland, a Dutch squadron cap-
tured the city of New York; but it was restored to the English by a
treaty of peace the next year (1674), and Andros became governor.
In 1683 the Duke of York granted the people of New York a
Charter of Liberties, allowing them a popular assembly; but when he
became King of England, in 1685, with the title of James II., he
revoked the privileges which he had granted, and made the tyrant
Andros governor of New York a second time. When news reached
New York of the dethronement of James II. in England and the im-
prisonment of Andros in Boston, Jacob Leisler, a leading merchant,
with the sanction of the people of New York, assumed the office of
governor, until the arrival of Colonel Henry Sloughter, the new royal
governor, in 1691, when Leister and his son-in-law Milburne were tried
and executed for high treason.
From the time of Leister's death the people of New York resisted
the oppression of the royal governors sent to rule them, and republican-
ism constantly gained strength. In 1734 William Cosby, then gov-
ernor of the province, caused John Peter Zenger, the editor of the
democratic newspaper in New York, to be arrested on a charge of libel.
Zenger was tried and acquitted by a jury; and the magistrates of
New York city made a present to his counsel, Andrew Hamilton, of
Philade^hia, for his noble vindication of the freedom of the press.
In 1622 William Clayborne erected a trading-house on Kent Island.
King Charles I. of England granted the territory on both sides of
Chesapeake bay, under the name of Mart/land, to Cecil Calvert, Lord
Baltimore, an English Roman Catholic nobleman, who desired to find
a refuge in America for persecuted Roman Catties. In 1634 nearly
two hundred English Roman Catholics, with Leonard Calvert, Cecil's
brother, as their governor, formed a settlement at St. Mary's, near the
English
Conquest
of New
Nether-
lands.
New
York
City and
Colony.
English
Tyranny.
Capture
and
Restora-
tion of
New
York.
Charter
of
Liberties.
Execu-
tion of
Leisler
and
Milborne.
Zenger's
Trial
and Ac-
quittal.
Lord
Baltimore
and the
Maryland
Grant.
Settle-
ment
of St.
Mary's.
3943
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Clay-
borne's
Two Re-
bellions.
Tolera-
tion Act.
Protest-
ant
Influx
and
Catholic
Disfran-
chise-
meut.
Civil
War.
Maryland,
a Royal
Province.
Proprie-
tary Gov-
ernme- 1
Restored.
Settle-
ment of
New
Sweden.
Dutch
Conquest
of New
Sweden.
New
Sweden
as Part
of Penn-
sylvania.
mouth of the Potomac river. The assembly met at St. Mary's in 1635,
and adopted a liberal form of government for the Maryland colony.
In 1635 William Clayborne, who refused to recognize Lord Balti-
more's authority, commenced a rebellion against the governor of Mary-
land ; but he was defeated and compelled to flee from the province.
In 1645 Clayborne returned and began another rebellion; and for a
time the rebels held the reins of power, and Governor Calvert was
obliged to flee to Virginia; but the rebellion was suppressed in 1646,
and the governor returned to Maryland and resumed his authority.
In 1649 the Maryland assembly passed the Toleration Act, which
granted religious freedom to all sects in Maryland ; and this induced
many Protestants who were persecuted elsewhere to settle in this Roman
Catholic province. At length the influx of Protestants was so great
that they outnumbered the Catholics; and after obtaining a majority
in the assembly they questioned the rights of the proprietor, and, with
the meanest ingratitude, they disfranchised the Catholics and declared
them not entitled to the protection of the laws. This outrageous pro-
ceeding led to a civil war in Maryland between the Catholics and the
Protestants, which ended in the defeat of the Catholics and the over-
throw of the proprietary government; but when monarchy was re-
stored in England, in 1660, Lord Baltimore recovered his rights.
The Maryland colony now prospered until 1689, when a Protestant
insurrection overthrew the proprietary government. In 1691 King
William III. of England deprived Lord Baltimore of his rights, made
Maryland a royal province, and established the Church of England in
the colony; and Roman Catholics were disfranchised in a province
which they had founded. In 1716 Maryland was restored to the heirs
of Lord Baltimore, and it remained a proprietary province until the
Revolution of 1775.
Under the auspices of the Swedish West India Company, a company
of Swedish emigrants, under Peter Minuit, the first governor of New
Netherland, made a settlement on Christiana Creek, near the site of
Wilmington, in the present State of Delaware, in 1638, and named
the territory New Sweden. Swedish settlements were also made on
the Delaware and Schuylkill rivers, in the present Pennsylvania.
The Dutch at New Amsterdam claimed the territory of New Sweden ;
and in 1655 Governor Stuyvesant of New Netherlands conquered the
Swedish settlements on the Delaware, and annexed New Sweden to New
Netherlands. The domain of New Sweden was granted to William
Penn in 1682, and it became a part of Pennsylvania. The territory
now known as Delaware became a separate province in 1702, with a
legislature of its own ; but it was united with Pennsylvania under one
governor until 1776, when Delaware became an independent State.
ENGLAND'S NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES.
294,3
The Dutch established a trading-post at Bergen in 1618, and
another at Fort Nassau, below the site of Camden, in 1623. The
Swedes and Finns also made settlements on the Delaware. In 1664,
when New Netherlands was conquered by the English, King Charles
II. of England granted the territory between the Hudson and Dela-
ware rivers to Lord Berkeley and Sir George Carteret, and named
the province New Jersey; and in the same year (1664) some English
Puritans settled Elizabeth. Philip Carteret, brother of Sir George,
was made governor; and representative government was established.
When, in 1670, the proprietors of New Jersey demanded the payment
of quit-rents the colonists rose in rebellion and drove the governor
from the colony.
In 1674 Lord Berkeley sold his interest in New Jersey to some
Quakers, who founded Salem; and in 1676 the province was divided,
the Quakers obtaining West Jersey, and Carteret receiving East
Jersey. In 1682 William Penn and other Quakers purchased East
Jersey from Carteret's heirs, and made Robert Barclay governor.
In 1688 King James II. made the tyrant Andros governor of the
Jerseys, from which time great confusion prevailed until 1702, when
East and West Jersey were united as one royal province, being placed
under the governor of New York, but having its own legislature. In
1738 New Jersey was entirely separated from New York, and Lewis
Morris became governor.
In 1643 the Swedes made a settlement on Tinicum Island, below
the site of Philadelphia. In 1677 Swedish settlements were made on
the Delaware and Schuylkill rivers. In 1681 King Charles II. of
England granted a vast region west of the Delaware to William Penn,
a Quaker, son of Admiral Sir William Penn, as a home for his
persecuted Quaker brethren. The province was named Pennsylvania,
which signifies " Penn's woods." In 1682 the territory of the present
State of Delaware was added to Penn's grant. In 1682 a large
company of Quakers from England arrived in Pennsylvania, founded
the town of Chester, the oldest English settlement in the colony, and
organized a liberal form of government.
In the fall of 1682 William Penn arrived in Pennsylvania, having
come over in the ship Welcome, and was joyfully received by the
Swedes and the English Quakers. He met the assembly of Penn-
sylvania at Chester, when he established a permanent government for
the colony. Under a large elm tree, at the Indian town of Shack-
amaxon, on the site of Philadelphia, Penn made a treaty of friendship
with the Indians, who were treated with the greatest kindness by the
Quakers. The Indians who were present exclaimed : " We will live
in peace with William Penn and his children as long as the sun
Dutch
on the
e aware-
New
GranT
English
East
^ West
New
York.
William
sylvania
Grant-
Settle-
William
**e
vania.
His
-*
Indians.
2944
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Founding
of Phila-
delphia.
Charter of
Liberties.
German
and
Swiss
Menno-
nites.
Settle-
ment of
German-
town.
Penn's
Loss and
Recovery
of His
Province.
His
Heirs.
Penn's
Peace
Policy
and
Land
Pur-
chases.
John
Harris
and His
Son.
the moon shall endure ! " They were true to their word. Not a
drop of Quaker blood was ever shed by an Indian. This treaty was
never sworn to and never broken.
The same year (1682) Penn laid out a capital for his new province
between the Delaware and Schuylkill rivers, and named the place
Philadelphia, a name which means " brotherly love." Within a year
a hundred houses were built. In 1683 the colonial assembly met at
Philadelphia and adopted a Charter of Liberties.
Before coming to Pennsylvania, William Penn had visited Con-
tinental Europe to encourage persecuted sects, such as the French
Huguenots and the German and Swiss Mennonites who had settled in
the Palatinate of the Rhine and in Holland, to emigrate to Penn-
sylvania. He very much desired the Mennonites as colonists, as their
doctrines of simplicity of dress and manners and of aversion to oaths,
to the use of law and to war were similar to those of the Quakers. A
party of these German Mennonites under the learned Francis Daniel
Pastorius founded Germantown in 1683, the first German settlement in
America.
In 1684 William Penn returned to England; and in 1689 he was
deprived of his province by King William III., who suspected Penn
of being dis.oyal to his government. Penn's province was restored to
him in 1694, and in 1699 he visited Pennsylvania a second time. He
granted the colonists greater privileges, and allowed Delaware to have
a separate legislature. Both colonies had the same governor until
the American Revolution. William Penn died in London in 1718.
His province was inherited by his sons, John, Thomas and Richard
Penn, who administered the provincial government either themselves
or by deputy governors as long as Pennsylvania was in the possession
of the Penn heirs.
Penn's just and humane policy toward the Indians secured their
love and esteem, and kept the colony free from Indian wars for
three-quarters of a century. At various times, from 1682 to 1784,
large sections of the domain of the province were purchased from the
Indian tribes, such as the Delawares, the Susquehannocks, the Shaw-
anese, the Six Nations and others.
Among the early Quaker pioneers and Indian traders of Pennsyl-
vania was John Harris, who located at Harris's Ferry, the site of
Harrisburg, as early in 1704, and whom some drunken Indians
threatened to burn alive because he refused to give them rum, tying
him to a mulberry-tree for that purpose, when he was finally released
by friendly Indians who came to his rescue. At his request he was
buried under the shadow of that mulberry-tree, after his death in 1748,
the spot being in the family burial-ground. His son, Colonel John
ENGLAND'S NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES.
£945
Harris an American Revolutionary soldier, founded Harrisburg in
1785.
In 1723 a number of German settlers migrated from Schoharie
county, New York, to Pennsylvania, locating on the Swatara and
Tulpehocken creeks. At various times during the colonial period there
were large immigrations of German and Swiss into Pennsylvania, and
the descendants of these early settlers still retain the prominent char-
acteristics of their thrifty ancestors. These German and Swiss immi-
grants were of various religious sects and denominations — Lutheran,
German Reformed, Moravian, and the plain, non-resistant sects of
the Mennonites, the Amish, the Schwenkfeldcrs and the German
Baptist Brethren, or Dunkers. The Mennonites had suffered m;my
years of persecution in Switzerland and the Palatinate of the Rhine
before their emigration to America, whither they had been induced to
come by the exertions of William Penn.
The Pennsylvania Germans had some noted men. The first of these
was Francis Daniel Pastorius, the leader of the Mennonites who
founded Germantown in 1683 and who signed the first protest against
slavery in America, which protest formed the subject of Whittier's
Pennsylvania Pilgrim. He was a scholar, author, teacher, lawyer,
bailiff and Assemblyman. He was born in German}' in 1651 and died
in Germantown in 1719.
Among the notable Pennsylvania Germans of the first half of the
eighteenth century was the Rev. Heinrich Melchior Muhlenberg, the
patriarch and founder of the Lutheran Church in America, and the.
father of three distinguished sons: John Peter Gabriel Muhlenberg,
an American Revolutionary general; Frederick Augustus Conrad Muh-
lenberg, the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the First and
Third Congresses; and the Rev. Gotthilf Heinrich Ernest Muhlenberg,
distinguished as a divine and a botanist. Other distinguished Penn-
sylvania Germans of the first half of the eighteenth century were
Conrad Wciser, the famous Indian interpreter and a Pennsylvania
colonel in the French and Indian War; and the Rev. Michael Schlatter,
the leader and organizer of the German Reformed Church in America.
A peculiar Pennsylvania German settlement was the monastic com-
munity of the Seventh Day Baptists at Ephrata, whose members lived
like the monks and nuns of the Roman Catholic Church, the males
in a brothers' house and the females in a sisters' house ; who observed
Saturday, the seventh day of the week, as the Sabbath, whence- their
name; and who founded the first Sabbath-school in the world, though
not the first Sunday-school. They had a printing-house, a school-
house, a bake-house, a paper-mill and other buildings, one with a
town-clock. They printed German religious books, Fox's Book of
German
and
Swiss
Colonists
in Penn-
sylvania.
Pastorius
and Ger-
mantown.
Muhlen-
Lerg,
Wciser
and
Schlatter.
Seventh
Day
Baptist
Commu-
nity.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Zinzen-
dorf and
Moravian
Com-
munities
and
Mission-
aries.
Baron
Stiegel.
Martyrs and others, and the sisters' rooms were decorated with ink
paintings, many of them with scriptural texts.
The Moravian sect, under their distinguished leader, Nicholas Louis
Count Zinzendorf, founded the communistic settlements of Bethlehem,
Nazareth and Lititz, at which places they established educational in-
stitutions which still exist. Three worthy Moravian missionaries
labored for the Christianization of the Indians. The first of these
was Count Zinzendorf, who passed the middle part of the eighteenth
century in Pennsylvania and preached to the Indians of the Wyoming
Valley. The other two were David Zeisberger and John Heckewelder,
who passed the last half of the eighteenth century in missionary labors
among the Indians of Pennsylvania and the wild West.
Another peculiar German settlement was that of Baron Heinrich
Wilhelm Stiegel, named Manheim, in honor of his native city in Ger-
many. After being a baron in Germany, he was an iron master and a
glass manufacturer, a preacher and a teacher, rich and poor, at liberty
and imprisoned, in Pennsylvania, where he ended his life as a school-
master.
"Baron Stiegel ist der mann
Der die (Efen gieszen kann"
" Baron Stiegel is the man
Who can cast stoves."
Scotch-
Irish,
Welsh
and
Huguenot
French.
Bound-
ary
Disputes
with
Mary-
land.
During the first half of the" eighteenth century large numbers of
Scotch-Irish Presbyterians, from the North of Ireland, settled in Penn-
sylvania, occupying the frontier sections, where their hardy character
and rugged disposition rendered them very efficient guards and pro-
tectors for the settlements of the peaceable and non-resistant Germans
and Quaker English against hostile Indian attacks during the French
and Indian War. The posterity of these Scotch-Irish settlers in-
clude a very substantial part of the present population of Pennsyl-
vania. Welsh Episcopalians and Huguenot French were also among
the Pennsylvania colonists, and have left a respected posterity.
The Lords Baltimore claimed all of Southern Pennsylvania as far
north as the present Columbia as a part of Maryland, and between
1730 and 1738 many collisions occurred between Pennsylvania and
Maryland settlers and militia and officials of the two colonies in what
is now York county, Pennsylvania, during Cresap's War; so named
from Colonel Thomas Cresap, the leader of the Maryland border
raiders. Arrests and imprisonments were made on both sides, Cresap
being taken to the Philadelphia jail, and Pennsylvanians being im-
prisoned at Baltimore and Annapolis, Maryland. Marylanders were
also jailed at Lancaster, but were forcibly released by other Maryland
ENGLAND'S NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES.
2947
raiders who broke open the Lancaster jail. Finally, the boundary
line between Pennsylvania and Maryland, which so long had been a
subject of dispute, was settled as at present, in 1767, by Charles
Mason and Jeremiah Dixon, surveyors appointed for the purpose by
the British government ; and the line established by them has ever
since been called Mason and Dixon's Line, being celebrated during the
ante-Civil War period of the United States as the line between free-
dom and slavery.
The south-western part of Pennsylvania as far north as Pittsburg
and the Ohio river was claimed by Virginia, and in 1774 occurred
Lord Dunmore's War, brought about by the action of Lord Dunmore,
the royal governor of Virginia, who attempted to forcibly seize that
region, employing for that purpose Dr. John Connelly, a renegade
Pennsylvanian ; but this pliant tool was arrested by Arthur St. Clair,
a Pennsylvania magistrate and subsequent American Revolutionary
general, but Connelly was still defiant. Finally, in 1779, during the
American Revolution, Virginia and Pennsylvania settled their boundary
dispute by establishing the lines which now separate Pennsylvania
from West Virginia.
The north-eastern part of Pennsylvania was claimed by Connecticut,
whose charter extended the domain of that colony westward to the
Pacific Ocean. In 1762 a party of Connecticut settlers occupied the
Wyoming Valley, and the next year they founded Wilkes-Barre, Kings-
ton, Plymouth and Hanover, but in October of the same year, 1763,
occurred the First Massacre of Wyoming, in which about twenty of
these Connecticut settlers were slaughtered by the Delaware Indians.
Pennsylvania settlers entered the Wyoming Valley in 1768, and fresh
Connecticut settlers came in 1769, thus giving rise to the Pennamlte
and Yankee War. The Connecticut settlers were led by Zebulon
Butler, and forty of them built the Forty Fort, but were arrested and
jailed at Easton. Forts and blockhouses were erected, and many sieges
and skirmishes followed. Both parties imprisoned men, drove away
women and children, and committed other outrages. The American
Revolution ended this colonial civil war for a time, but in 1782 the
trouble was renewed, and only settled in 1799, the Connecticut settlers
being left in possession of their lands on condition of acknowledging
the jurisdiction of Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania was owned by the Penn heirs until 1776, when their
claims and interests were purchased by the colonists and the province
became an independent commonweaHh.
Between the years 1640 and 1650 emigrants from Virginia settled
near the mouth of the Chowan river. In 1663 King Charles II. of
England granted to the Earl of Clarendon and seven associates the
Mason
and
Dixon's
Line.
Boundary
Dispute
with
Virginia.
Adjust-
ment.
Dispute
with
Connect-
icut
Settlers.
Adjust-
ment.
End of
Proprie-
tary
Pennsyl-
vania.
The
Carolina
Grant.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Albe-
marle
County
Colony
Claren-
don
County
Colony.
Funda-
mental
Constitu-
tions, or
Grand
Model.
Rebellion.
Governor
Seth
Scthel.
Governor
John
Archdale.
War
with the
Tusca-
rora
Indians.
Carteret
County
Colony.
Charles-
ton
Founded.
extensive region between Virginia and Florida, under the general name
of Carolina.
In 1663 a number of emigrants from Virginia, with William Drum-
mond as governor, founded Edenton, on the Chowan river. This
settlement was the Albemarle County Colony. A representative gov-
ernment was adopted, and the first legislative assembly in Carolina
convened at Edenton in 1668. In 1665 some planters from the Bar-
badoes Islands, with Sir John Yeamans as governor, established on the
Cape Fear River a settlement known as the Clarendon County Colony.
This colony was broken up several years afterward.
Ashley Cooper, Earl of Shaftesbury, and the philosopher John
Locke prepared a constitution of government for the Carolinas. This
instrument, known as the Fundamental Constitutions, or the Grand
Model, was extremely aristocratic in spirit, and utterly repugnant to
the wishes of the freedom-loving settlers of the Carolinas. It could
never be enforced, as every attempt to do so produced a rebellion ; and,
after a struggle of a quarter of a century between the colonists and the
proprietors, this absurd scheme of government was finally abandoned
by the proprietors in 1695, and the cause of republicanism was
triumphant in Carolina.
The attempt to enforce the Fundamental Constitutions in the Albe-
marle Colony (North Carolina) produced a rebellion, which resulted
in the imprisonment of the governor, and the temporary subversion of
the proprietary government. In 1683 Seth Sothel, one of the pro-
prietors, became governor of North Carolina ; but, after a tyrannical
and corrupt administration of five years, he was banished from the
colony. In 1695 the good Quaker, John Archdale, became governor
of both the Carolinas; and under his administration both colonies
greatly prospered.
Quakers, Huguenots and German Protestants settled in North Caro-
lina. In 1711 a frightful war broke out between the North Carolina
settlers and the Tuscarora Indians. The Indians massacred many of
the German settlers, but the Tuscaroras were finally subdued. Twelve
hundred of them were captured; and the remainder joined the Five
Nations in New York, thus forming the powerful Indian league of the
Six Nations.
In 1670 a company of emigrants from England, with William
Sayle as their governor, settled Old Charleston, on the Ashley river.
This is known as the Carteret County Colony; so called in honor of
Sir George Carteret, one of the proprietors of the Carolinas. In 1680
the inhabitants of Old Charleston removed to a point between the
Ashley and Cooper rivers, where they laid the foundations of the
present city of Charleston. A representative government was estab-
o
UJ
ENGLAND'S NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES
£9*9
lished, and the first legislative assembly in the Carteret Colony con-
vened at Charleston in 1682.
Dutch emigrants, Puritans and Huguenots settled in the Carteret
Colony (South Carolina). An effort to enforce the Fundamental Con-
stitutions led to a rebellion in South Carolina, which resulted in the
banishment of the governor, James Colleton. In 1690 the famous
Seth Sothel came to South Carolina, of which colony he became gov-
ernor; but, after oppressing and plundering the colonists for two
years, he was banished. Under the wise administration of John Arch-
dale prosperity attended the colony.
In 1702 hostilities commenced between the South Carolinians and the
Spaniards of Florida. South Carolina sent an unsuccessful expedi-
tion against the Spaniards; but the Apalachian Indians, the allies
of the Spaniards, were subjugated; eight hundred of the Apalachians
being captured, and their country taken possession of. In 1706 a
combined French and Spanish fleet failed in an attack upon Charleston.
In 1715 the South Carolina colonists became involved in a dangerous
war with the Yamasee Indians. Governor Craven with twelve hun-
dred men subdued the Yamasees, and drove them into Florida.
In 1719 the people of South Carolina rebelled against the pro-
prietary government ; and in 1729 the proprietors, wearied of the per-
petual opposition, surrendered their claims to the crown, whereupon
North and South Carolina became distinct royal provinces, and so
remained until the great Revolution of 1775, which swept away
feudalism and royalty.
Georgia was not settled until the eighteenth century. In 1743 King
George II. of England granted to the philanthropic James Edward
Oglethorpe, a member of the English Parliament, and other benevolent
individuals, " in trust for the poor," all the territory between the
Savannah and Altamaha rivers. Oglethorpe's plan was to offer an
asylum in America to virtuous persons imprisoned for debt, and to
other poor. Near the close of 1732 one hundred and twenty of these
unfortunate persons sailed from England, with Oglethorpe as their
governor; and in February, 1733, they arrived in America and founded
the city of Savannah. Oglethorpe met fifty Indian chiefs, with the
Creek sachem, Tomochichi, at their head, and concluded a friendly
treaty with them, obtaining a large tract of territory, which was
named Georgia, in honor of King George II.
In 1739 a war broke out between England and Spain; and in 1740
Oglethorpe, with two thousand Georgians, invaded the Spanish
province of Florida ; but after an unsuccessful siege of St. Augustine
he returned to Georgia. In 1742 the Spaniards invaded Georgia, but
they were defeated and driven back. Oglethorpe left Georgia forever
Rebellion.
Governor
Seth
Sothel.
Governor
John
Archdale.
War
with the
Span-
iards of
Florida.
War
with the
Yamasee
Indians.
North and
South
Carolina,
Royal
Prov-
inces.
James
Edward
Ogle-
thorpe
and the
Georgia
Grant.
Savannah
Founded.
Indian
Treaty.
War
with the
Span-
iards of
Florida.
REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Georgia,
a Royal
Province.
Nation-
alities
in the
Anglo-
Ameiican
Colonies.
Religioaa
Classifi-
cation
of the
Colonists
Educa-
tion
in the
Colonies.
Forms of
Colonial
Govern-
ments.
in 1743; and in 1752 the trustees of the colony, wearied of their
troublesome charge, sold their interests to the crown, whereupon
Georgia became a royal province, and so continued until 1776, when
it became an independent State.
England's thirteen colonies on the Atlantic coast of North America
rapidly increased in population. The great body of the colonists
were of English descent, though there was a mixture of different Euro-
pean nationalities. The New England colonies and Maryland and
Virginia were wholly English. The people of New York and New
Jersey were English and Dutch ; those of Pennsylvania, English,
Scotch-Irish, Welsh, Germans and Swiss ; those of Delaware, English
and Swedish; those of the Carolinas, English, Dutch, Germans and
Scotch-Irish; and those of Georgia, English and Scotch-Irish.
Most of the colonists of New England, Pennsylvania, New Jersey,
Delaware, Maryland, and many in the Carolinas, as we have seen, were
religious exiles, who settled in the New World to seek a refuge from
religious persecution. The Puritans of Massachusetts, who sought
refuge in America against religious persecution, themselves persecuted
those who did not agree with them. They were remarkable for their
austerity. Their laws and customs were rigid, and frivolous amuse-
ments were not tolerated; while education was fostered, and habits
of reading were encouraged. The people of New England were Puri-
tans; the Church of England prevailed in New York, Marj'land,
Virginia, the Carolinas and Georgia ; the Quakers were chiefly found in
New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Delaware; and the Roman Catholics
were most numerous in Maryland.
Education received early and special attention in the colonies,
especially in New England. As early as 1621 schools for the educa-
tion of both white and Indian children were established in Virginia ;
and in 1692 William and Mary College, named after King William
III. and his wife Mary II., was established at Williamsburg, Virginia.
The Dutch Reformed Church established a school at New Amsterdam
in 1633. Harvard College, at Cambridge, Massachusetts, was founded
in 1637, and named after the Rev. John Harvard. Yale College, in
Connecticut, was established at Saybrook in 1701, and was named
after Elihu Yale, President of the English East India Company, one
of its most liberal benefactors ; and in 1717 it was removed to New
Haven. The College of New Jersey, at Princeton, was incorporated
in 1738 ; and its third president was the distinguished divine and meta-
physician, Jonathan Edwards.
Three forms of government prevailed among the Anglo-American
colonists — charter, proprietary and royal. The charter governments
gave the supreme power to the people, who elected their governors, as
COLONIAL GOVERNORS AND PROPRIETORS
ENGLAND'S NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES.
£951
well as their legislative assemblies. The proprietary colonies were
owned by individuals or companies, who appointed the governors, but
allowed the people to elect their legislative assemblies. The royal
provinces were owned and controlled wholly by the king, who appointed
the governors, but allowed the people to choose their own legislative
assemblies. It will thus be seen that all the colonies had their popular
legislative assemblies. At the opening of the American Revolution, in
1775, the charter governments existed in Rhode Island and Con-
necticut ; the proprietary colonies were Pennsylvania, Delaware and
Maryland ; and the rest of the colonies were royal provinces.
Most of the colonies had to contend against Indian hostilities, and
most of the colonists in all the provinces resisted every royal and
proprietary encroachment upon their rights. Religious and civil dis-
sensions at times disturbed some of them; as in the case of Massa-
chusetts, Maryland, Virginia and the Carolinas. New England and
New York had to contend against the hostilities of the French from
Canada, while the Carolinas and Georgia had to confront the Spaniards
of Florida.
Though the colonists were of different European nationalities, a
common bond of interest knit all the colonies together ; their democratic
institutions tended to educate them for self-government; the colonists
were actuated by a common desire for the greatest civil, political and
religious freedom; and all the colonies were semi-republican and semi-
independent from the beginning. Negro-slavery became fixed in the
Southern colonies. The colonists, whose pursuits were chiefly agri-
cultural, prospered wonderfully ; and when the American Revolution
broke out, in 1775, the Anglo-American colonies had a population of
three millions.
The early English colonists named the towns and counties in America
after their home counties and cities in England, using such names as
Hampshire, Kent, Essex, Sussex, Middlesex, Gloucester, Bucks, Berks,
Reading, Chester, Lancaster, York, Bedford, Somerset, Huntingdon,
Carlisle, Cumberland, Northumberland, Westmoreland, Northampton,
Southampton, Portsmouth, Plymouth, Worcester, Bath, Newcastle,
Exeter, Manchester, Boston, Barnstable, Norfolk, Suffolk, Rochester,
Winchester, Richmond, Shrewsbury, Dover, Portland, Falmouth, New
Haven, Cambridge, Oxford, Nottingham, Salisbury, Bristol, Ru^and,
Bradford, Birmingham, Berwick, Windsor, Warwick and many other
such English county and city names.
The whites generally assigned the Indian names to mountains and
rivers, creeks and lakes, as Adirondack, Allegheny, Connecticut,
Merrimac, Penobscot, Kennebec, Androscoggin, Hoosatonic, Mohawk,
Lehigh, Schuylkill, Susquehanna, Conestoga, Potomac, Roanoke, Ohio,
VOL, 9—10
Internal
and
External
Difficul-
ties
of the
Colonies.
Bond of
Union
among
the
Colonists.
Their
Progress.
English
County
and City
Names.
Indian
Names
for
Mount-
ains,
Lakes,
Streams,
Etc.
£952 REVOLUTIONS IN ENGLAND.
Mississippi, Missouri, Illinois, Wabash, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa,
Kentucky, Tennessee, Miami, Kanawha, Muskingum, Kansas,
Arkansas, Nebraska, Sioux, Alabama, Tombigbee, Altamaha, Ogeechee,
Chattahoochee, Savannah, Combahee, Ocmulgee, Cheraw, Tippecanoe,
Athabasca, Maumee, Ontario, Erie, Huron, Michigan, Oneida, Onon-
daga, Cayuga, Canandaigua, Winnipiseogee, Winnipeg and many
others.
20 West 15
FROM THE THIRTY YEARS'WAR
TO THE FBENCH KEVOLLT10S
(A. D.1S49- '783 ,
By I.S.Clara.
SCALE OF MILES
CHAPTER XXXV.
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV,
SECTION I.— FIRST TWO BOURBONS AND CARDINAL
RICHELIEU (A. D. 1598-1642).
AFTER freeing Franco from civil and foreign war, Henry IV. was
enabled to devote his energies to the task of arranging the internal
affairs of the kingdom upon a secure basis. The finances were in a
deplorable condition. The national debt exceeded three hundred
million francs — a sum equivalent to about one hundred and sixty
million dollars in United States money. The Farmers-General — the
officials who collected this revenue — defrauded the government to such
an extent that only thirty million francs reached the national treasury
out of the two hundred million which the French people paid annually
as taxes.
In 1698 Henry IV. assigned the management of the finances to
Maximilian de Bethune, Baron dc Rosny, whom he had created Duke
of Sully. This Minister was one of the ablest statesmen that France
ever produced, and was a man of the most sterling integrity. His
vigorous measures soon redounded to the financial benefit of France.
The frauds which had deprived the government of the greater part of
its revenue were sternly checked, and the levying of arbitrary taxes
was stopped, while unnecessary and expensive offices and titles were
abolished. There was a reduction in taxation to twenty-six million
francs per annum, twenty million of which were paid into the national
treasury. The national debt was reduced almost one-half, and a re-
serve fund of more than twenty-six million livres was accumulated.
Henry IV. gave a cordial and unswerving support to his great
Minister, and the kingdom soon felt the good results of the new policy.
The king and the Minister encouraged agriculture, commerce, manu-
factures and all branches of industry. Commercial treaties were nego-
tiated with England, Holland, Spain and Turkey ; and French colonies
were planted in America, where De Monts founded Acadia, afterward
Nova Scotia, in 1605, and where Samuel Champlain founded the city
2953
Henry IV.
and the
French
Finances.
The
Duke of
Sully'3
Able
Adminis-
tration.
French
Industry
artfl
Material
Great-
ness.
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Modera-
tion of
Henry IV.
France's
Great-
ness.
Domestic
Troubles
of Henry
IV.
Divorce
and
Second
Marriage
of Henry
IV.
Plot of
the Duke
of Savoy
against
Henry IV.
of Quebec in 1608. Marshei were drained; roads, bridges and canals
were constructed; and measures were adopted for the preservation of
the forests of France. Everything connected with the welfare and
prosperity of the kingdom received the personal care and attention of
Henry IV. and the Duke of Sully ; and the unrivaled fame of the
French for the production of fine and curious ^abrics dates from this
reign.
In his own dress and equipage, Henry IV. presented an example
of moderation ; and the French nobles were recommended to live upon
their estates, in order to avoid the extravagance and frivolous rivalries
of a court. At the close of the sixteenth century France was the
greatest, wealthiest and most populous state of Europe; and Paris
was the largest European capital, excepting Moscow.
Although Henry IV. was so successful in his public life, he was
very unfortunate in his family affairs. The unmitigated vices of his
wife, Margaret of Valois, had led to his separation from her many
years previously ; and, as he had no legitimate heir, he nOw seriously
thought of procuring a divorce from his dissolute wife in order to
marry his mistress, Gabrielle d'Estrees, with whom he had several
children, and whom he had created Duchess of Beaufort. Many of
the leading nobles of France favored the proposed marriage, but the
Duke of Sully prevented it. The duchess unwisely demanded that the
king should disgrace his great Minister, but Henry IV. bluntly replied
that if it were necessary to part with either herself or the Duke of
Sully he would stand by the Minister. This decisive blow to her
hopes threw her into a violent illness which ended her life in April,
1599.
At the request of Henry IV., Pope Clement VIII. granted him a
divorce from Margaret of Valois in December, 1599. The king now
gave a written promise to his new mistress, the beautiful Henriette
d'Entragues, whom he created Marchioness of Verneuil. When this
paper was shown to the Duke of Sully the great Minister tore it to
pieces, and exerted himself to find a suitable partner for the king.
Henry IV. chose Mary de Medici, daughter of the late Grand Duke
of Tuscany, and the marriage took place in October, 1600. The fruit
of bhis marriage were several children, the eldest of whom was born
September 27, 1601, and was the immediate and prospective heir to his
father's throne.
The Peace of Vervins in 1598 required the Duke of Savoy to cede
the marquisate of Saluces to France; but that prince retained that
small territory in violation of the treaty, and in 1600 he proceeded to
Paris to negotiate with King Henry IV. concerning it. The Duke of
Savoy embraced the opportunity afforded by this visit to organize a
FIRST TWO BOURBONS AND CARDINAL RICHELIEU.
£955
conspiracy against the French king, and induced many of the old
members of the Catholic League to join in the plot.
The most prominent conspirator was Marshal de Biron, the king's
old comrade in arms, and whom Henry IV. had esteemed as his most
devoted friend. But Biron was ambitious and exceedingly vain. As
Charles Emmanuel, Duke of Savoy, was satisfied with his work he re-
turned to his duchy and refused to surrender the territory required by
treaty. He hoped that the plot which he had instigated in Paris, and
which aimed at the dismemberment of the French kingdom into feudal
states under the suzerainty of King Philip III. of Spain, was in a fair
way to become successful ; and he was also anxious for war.
Unconscious of the conspiracy at home, Henry IV. declared war
against the Duke of Savoy, invaded his territory with an army in
which Marshal de Biron held an important command, quickly overran
the duchy of Savoy, and occupied Chamberry, its capital, August
21, 1600. Duke Charles Emmanuel was obliged to solicit peace,
which he obtained only by surrendering the district of La Bresse,
between Lyons and Geneva, in return for Saluces.
Upon his return to France, Henry IV. was informed of the con-
spiracy against him, and of Biron's share in the plot; and Biron,
struck with dismay, made a full confession of his treason. The king
generously pardoned him, and sent him on a diplomatic mission to
England. But Biron failed to profit by the king's magnanimity, and
renewed his treasonable designs and his intrigues with the enemies of
France. His plots were discovered; and the king offered him an
opportunity to confess his guilt, with the intention of granting him a
pardon if he manifested any remorse; but Biron haughtily refused to
acknowledge his treason, and was tried, convicted and sentenced by
the Parliament of Paris, and beheaded July 31, 1602. This measure
was as wise as it was severe, as it put an end to the plots against
Henry IV., and secured the internal tranquillity of France. Henry
IV. devoted the three years of unbroken peace which ensued to the
improvement of his kingdom.
By his recall of the Jesuits in 1603, and by his manifest desire to
stand well with the Pope, Henry IV. alienated the Huguenots, whose
leader, the Duke of Bouillon, even made overtures to King Philip III.
of Spain. Thereupon that nobleman's capital, Sedan, was seized by
the royal forces, which occupied it for four years; after which Henry
IV. pardoned him and reinstated him in all his offices and honors, either
through his natural leniency or through fear of offending the
Protestant princes of Germany.
A favorite scheme of Henry IV. was the union of all the states of
Christendom into a great Christian confederacy, in which the Lutheran,
6-28
His Hope
and
Desire.
French
Invasion
of Savoy
and Its
Result.
Marshal
de Biron's
Plots
against
Henry IV.
His Exe-
cution.
Treason
and
Pardon
of the
Duke of
Bouillon.
2956
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Scheme
of Henry
IV. lor a
Christian
Union.
The
States
of this
Union.
Its Effect
on the
Spanish
and
Austrian
Haps-
burgs.
Efforts of
Henry IV.
against
the
Haps-
burgs.
Alliance
of Henry
IV.
with the
German
Protest-
ants.
Calvinistic and Catholic faiths should be tolerated and stand upon a
footing of perfect equality, all disputes to be settled by arbitration
in a diet or federal council in which all the states of the league would
be represented, while commerce was to be freed from the restrictions
which then paralyzed enterprise in the southern countries of Europe.
Each of the states comprising the league was to be guaranteed the
free and full enjoyment of its own political institutions.
This great Christian confederation was to consist of fifteen states,
classified in three groups — six elective monarchies, embracing the
Germano-Roman Empire, the Papal States, Venice, Bohemia, Hungary
and Poland; six hereditary monarchies, comprising France, Spain,
England with Scotland, Denmark with Norway, Sweden, and Savoy
with Milan ; and three federal republics, namely, the Dutch Republic,
Switzerland, and a confederation of Italian republics consisting of
Genoa, Lucca and the other small Italian states. The Czar of Russia
was regarded as the ruler of a state more Asiatic than European, but
was to be admitted to the league on his own application.
An equilibrium between the great powers of Europe would have
been established by the acceptance of this scheme, which would have
weakened both branches of the princely House of Hapsburg — that of
Spain by the loss of the Netherlands, Franche-Comte and Lombardy,
and that of Austria by the loss of Bohemia, Hungary and the Tyrol;
thus carrying out the desire of Henry IV. for weakening Spain and
humbling Austria, both of which powers were too strong for the
welfare of Europe. Henry IV. also hoped thus to put an end to the
religious wars and disputes, and to establish a system of international
law which should be binding upon all Europe. This grand scheme
was cut short by its author's assassination, as we shall soon see.
As a preliminary part of his design, Henry IV. sought the humilia-
tion of both branches of the House of Hapsburg. It was with this
view that he aided the Protestants of Germany and Holland, and
recommended the Pope to annex Naples and Sicily to the Papal States,
thus severing Southern Italy from the dominion of the King of Spain.
He also renounced the French claims upon Italy, thus seeking to de-
liver that country from all foreign dominion. He also intrigued with
the oppressed Moriscoes of Spain ; but the edict of King Philip III.,
expelling those Christianized Moors from Spain, frustrated the French
king's efforts in their behalf.
For the purpose of humbling the Austrian House of Hapsburg,
Henry IV. interfered in a dispute which broke out in Germany between
the Protestant Union and the Catholic League in 1609. The death
of Duke William of Cleves, Berg and Ju'lich in that year without
heirs was followed by the seizure of those duchies by the Elector of
FIRST TWO BOURBOXS AND CARDINAL RICHELIEU.
2957
Bradenburg and the Count Palatine of Neuburg. By the Treaty of
Hal'e, in January, 1610, Henry IV. agreed to support them with a
French army of ten thousand men, thus arraying himself distinctly
as the enemy of the Austrian Hapsburg, as the Emperor Rudolf II.
claimed the hereditary territorial estates of the deceased Duke William
as a lapsed fief.
Henry IV. commenced his military preparations on a vast scale. He
collected an army of thirty thousand men for the invasion of Ger-
many, one of fourteen thousand men to join the Duke of Savoy and
attack Lombardy, and one of twenty-five thousand men along the
Pyrenees to invade Spain. Henry IV. postponed his departure for
the seat of war, in order to celebrate the coronation of his queen, Mary
de Medici, whom he had already appointed regent during his absence
from Paris. She was crowned with great splendor at St. Denis, May
13, 1610.
In the midst of the festivities which enlivened Paris on the occasion
of his queen's coronation, King Henry IV. wore a countenance of de-
jection, and seemed to take no pleasure in the festivities, his mind being
distracted by the most gloomy forebodings, in fearful anticipation of
a sudden and violent death.
The next day the good king's apprehensions were fatally realized.
In reply to an expression of affection from one of his attendants, he
said : " You do not know me now ; but when you have lost me you
will know my worth, and the difference between me and other men."
Bassompierre then said to him : " Sire, will you never cease afflicting
us by saying that you will soon die? You will live, if it p'ease God,
long and happy years. There is no felicity in the world equal to
yours. You are in the flower of your age ; in perfect health and
strength of body, full of honor beyond any other mortal; in the
tranquil enjoyment of the most flourishing kingdom, adored by your
subjects, possessed of wealth, of fine, beautiful palaces, a handsome
wife and fine chfdren. What can you desire more?" The king only
sighed, and said in reply : " All these I must quit ! "
In the afternoon of that day, May 14, 1610, he was driven in his
coach in company with six noblemen to visit the Duke of Sully, who
was then ill at his residence, the arsenal. While the coach became
entangled in a crowd, a Jesuit named Fra^ois Ravaillac jumped upon
one of the hind wheels of the vehicle, reached over and stabbed the good
king twice in the breast while he was reading a letter. The coach was
driven back to the Louvre, to which it might be tracked all the way by
the blood which flowed from it. The wounded monarch was at once
laid upon a bed, surrounded by weeping officers, and soon breathed
his last, dying in the fifty-eighth year of his age and the twenty-first
Hia
Projected
Invasion
of
Germany
and
Spain.
Hia
Gloomy
Fore-
bodings.
His
Conver-
sation
with
Bassom-
pierre.
Assassi-
nation of
Henry
IV. by
Francois
Ravail-
lac
2958
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Grief
of the
French
People.
Good
Character
of Henry
IV. '
Good
Rule of
Henry
17. and
the Duke
of Sully.
Louis
XIII.,
A. D.
1610-
1643.
The
Regency.
of his reign. His widowed queen, Mary de Medici, was proclaimed
regent for his little son and successor, Louis XIII.
The consternation and the public grief were universal throughout
France, and never was the death of any other king so lamented by his
subjects. The French poeple almost went wild with sorrow and mourn-
ing. The assassin Ravaillac was put to the torture to make him re-
veal his motives for the regicide and the names of his accomplices.
But he made no revelations, and was executed with the most shocking
cruelties, amid the curses of the enraged and excited populace, May
27, 1610.
Henry IV. was one of the greatest and best of France's kings. He
was a brilliant and successful warrior, a profound statesman and a
wise and vigorous ruler. France was rapidly, increasing in power and
prosperity under his enlightened and firm rule, and his death was a
great misfortune to his kingdom. His memory as a sovereign has been
justly hallowed by the admiration of posterity, and among all the
Kings of France there is none whose name is so cherished to this day
as that of Henry IV. His reign, like those of St. Louis and Louis
XII., might serve as a model to all monarchs who love their subjects.
He will always be honored for the clemency which he showed to his
inveterate foes, the wisdom with which he tranquillized a kingdom dis-
tracted by civil wars for thirty-six years, and the enlightened tolera-
tion of which he gave a bright example himself and recommended the
practice to his successors.
Though much of the glory of the public works of Henry IV. un-
doubtedly belongs to the Duke of Sully, the good king deserves praise
for selecting so good and great a statesman for his Minister, and for
patiently bearing the reproofs which the Duke of Sully so frequently
administered to him with almost republican boldness. The king was
happy in having such a Minister, and the Minister was happy in having
such a king; while the French nation was still more fortunate in en-
joying so rare a combination as a wise and good sovereign and an
able and patriotic administration of the government. The virtues of
Henry IV. as a sovereign have caused posterity to throw the mantle
of charity over the few serious vices and follies which marred his
private character.
As Louis XIII. was only eight years of age at the time of the
assassination of his father, Henry IV., in 1610, the Dukes of Sully
and Epernon at once took measures to secure the regency to the
widowed queen, Mary de Medici, during the minority of her son. This
action was not strictly lawful, but all parties in France acquiesced in
it, as the necessity for a peaceful adjustment of the government was
urgent.
FIRST TWO BOURBONS AND CARDINAL RICHELIEU.
2959
The queen-regent, Mary de Medici, was a weak woman, of narrow
understanding, and in no way adapted to the difficult and perilous
situation which had been conferred upon her. She commenced her
regency by retaining all the Ministers of her murdered husband, and
confirming the Duke of Sully in the power and influence which he had
exercised during the reign of Henry IV. The troops promised by
Henry IV. were sent to the assistance of the German Protestants, and
the Edict of Nantes was solemnly confirmed and renewed.
But in the course of time the queen-regent surrendered herself en-
tirely to the influence of her Italian favorites, especially to her foster-
sister, Leonora Galigai, and her husband, Concino Concini, an obscure
Florentine adventurer. Concini's wife was the first lady of the queen-
mother's bed chamber ; and Concini himself was rapidly raised from one
post to another until he was created Marquis d'Ancre, and finally
Marshal of France. Under the guidance of this Italian favorite and
his wife, Mary de Medici organized a secret council or cabinet, con-
sisting of Concini, the Jesuit Cotton, the Pope's Nuncio in France, and
the Spanish ambassador at Paris, surrendering herself wholly to this
clique.
Mary de Medici was induced by her new favorites and councilors to
establish the most friendly relations with the Austrian and Spanish
Hapsburgs, thus reversing the entire policy of her murdered husband.
To strengthen this new alliance with Spain and Austria, a marriage
was contracted between the youthful King Louis XIII. and the In-
fanta Anne of Austria; while the young French king's sister, the
Princess Elizabeth, was betrothed to Philip, Prince of Asturias, the
eldest son and heir of King Philip HI. of Spain.
The Duke of Sully viewed the queen-regent's foreign policy with
deep regret, as he could not sanction such an overwhelming overthrow
of the designs of Henry IV. for the humiliation of the Austrian and
Spanish Hapsburgs. He vainly remonstrated with the queen-regent
for making this alliance with the old enemies of France, and thus mak-
ing the interests of France subservient to her new allies. As Mary de
Medici persisted in her new foreign policy, the Duke of Sully resigned
his office of Prince Minister in disgust and retired to his estate, in
1611, taking no further part in public affairs, though he was fre-
quently consulted by the queen-regent during the rest of his life. He
died in 1641, at the age of eighty-two.
The alliance of the leading Catholic powers of Europe — France,
Spain and Austria — occasioned a closer consolidation of the Protestant
influence, thus hastening the inevitable conflict in Germany between
Catholicism and Protestantism. The policy of the French court was
to intimidate the Huguenots, who were too numerous to be won over
Mary de
Medici
and Her
Policy.
Her
Italian
Favorites.
Her
Alliance
with the
Spanish
and
Austrian
Haps-
burgs.
Resigna-
tion of
the Duke
of Sully.
Protest-
ant
Consoli-
dation.
2960
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Intimida-
tion of
the Hu-
guenots.
Louis
XIII.
Assumes
the Gov-
ernment.
States-
Geiieral
Convened.
Richelieu.
The Dis-
sensions
and Dis-
solution
of the
States-
General.
Marriage
of Louis
XIII.
with
Anne of
Austria.
Conde
and the
Parlia-
ment of
Paris.
Cimde's
Opposi-
tion to
Marshal
d'Ancre.
by gifts and pensions. They possessed two hundred fortified towns,
had four thousand nobles in their ranks, and were able to muster an
army of twenty-five thousand men.
Louis XIII. attained his majority September 27, 1614, at the ripe
age of thirteen, and the next day he assumed the nominal charge of
the government of France; though his mother, Mary de Medici, con-
tinued to exercise the real power in the kingdom. Just before the
expiration of the regency she had granted one demand of the Prince
of Conde by summoning the States-General, and that assembly con-
vened at Paris, October 14, 1614. The three orders of France were
numerously represented; and among the deputies of the clergy was
Armand Duplessis de Richelieu, the young Bishop of Lucon, who was
destined to achieve a world-wide fame as the greatest of the cardinal-
statesmen of France. At the end of the session this young clerical
summed up the demands of the nobility and the clergy in an eloquent
address which attracted universal attention.
The session of the States-General was passed in wrangling, and the
dissensions of the various orders enabled the government to put them
off with promises which it never intended to fulfill. Their quarrels
filled the entire French nation with disgust, and the young king re-
joiced at seeing the national legislature of his realm give so complete
a spectacle of its incapacity to discharge its duties. The Third
Estate, or commons, having offended the queen, King Louis XIII.
suddenly dissolved the States-General and forbade them ever to assemble
again, March 24, 1615. This great national legislature was not again
convoked untid 1789, one hundred and seventy-four years later, on the
eve of the great French Revolution, as we shall see in a subsequent
volume of this work.
Louis XIII. was married to Anne of Austria late in the year 1615.
The Prince of Conde, who had twice taken up arms to force the French
court to put an end to its intimate relations with Austria and Spain
and to renew the alliances of Henry IV. against the two branches of
the House of Hapsburg, bitterly opposed this royal marriage. He and
his party were supported by the Parliament of Paris, which refused to
register the decrees which the court issued to destroy that powerful
leader and his partisans; and Mary de Medici was obliged to make
lavish grants to him in order to silence his opposition.
The Prince of Conde was especially hostile to the queen-mother's
Italian favorite, Marshal d'Ancre; and the marshal felt himself so
unsafe at court that he took refuge in Normandy. It was believed that
the Prince of Conde contemplated to remove the queen-mother from
power by force ; but in this design he encountered a formidable op-
ponent in Richelieu, who had risen rapidly since the meeting of the
FIRST TWO BOURBONS AND CARDINAL RICHELIEU.
29G1
States General, and who now occupied a seat in the Council of State.
This ambitious prelate supported the interests of Mary de Medici with
great vigor; and Marshal d'Ancre, who had perceived Richelieu's
talents, thought that he had now secured a useful instrument in the
promotion of the ambitious bishop.
Richelieu soon took the decisive step of advising the queen-mother
to arrest the Prince of Conde, who was accordingly taken into custody
in August, 1616, as he was leaving the council chamber, and he was
imprisoned in the Bastile. The other leaders of his party fled from
Paris ; but their adherents made an effort to excite an insurrection in
the city, and plundered and destroyed Marshal d'Ancre's elegant man-
sion. The riot was soon quelled, and Marshal d'Ancre returned to the
capital, but his insolence soon made him detested by all but the queen-
mother. Richelieu was rewarded for his services against the Prince
of Conde by being made Secretary of State, in November, 1616,
through the influence of Marshal d' Ancre, who still congratulated
himself on using the ambitious prelate as his instrument.
In 1616 Louis XIII. was sixteen years of age, and he was beginning
to chafe under the restraints which his mother and her Italian favorite
were imposing upon him. The young king thoroughly despised Mar-
shal d'Ancre, and chose the Sieur de Luines, a young man of pleasing
manners and great ambition, as his confidant. This man, who be-
came the king's falconer, had an unbounded influence over Louis XIIL,
and sought to advance his own fortunes by prejudicing the young
king against Marshal d'Ancre, who had also quarreled with Richelieu,
who now felt sufficiently powerful to separate himself from the party
of the queen and her Italian favorite. Thus there were two parties
at the French court, led by the respective favorites of the king and
his mother.
The Sieur de Luines succeeded so well in his machinations against
Marshal d'Ancre that the young king had the marshal arrested, April
24, 1617. The marshal having made a slight movement which was
supposed to be an effort at resistance, he was shot down by the royal
guard while on his way to the Louvre. The young king, who be-
held the tragic scene from a window of the Louvre, cried aloud:
" Thank you, good friends ! I am now a king ! "
The populace of Paris hailed the assassination of Marshal d'Ancre
with the greatest delight, and they disinterred his body, dragged it
through the streets and burned it. The murdered marshal's wife was
tried on a frivolous charge of sorcery, and was executed on the Place
de Greve. The property of both the marshal and his wife was con-
fiscated and conferred upon the youngr king's favorite. The queen-
mother, Mary de Medici, was arrested on the day of the assassination
Conde
Opposed
by
Riciitlieu
Arrest
of Conde.
Riot
Quelled.
Richelieu
Made
Secre-
tary of
State.
Louis
XIII.
and
Sieur de
Luines.
Marshal
d'Acre
Opposed
by Louis
XIII. and
Richelieu.
Assassi-
nation of
Marshal
d'Ancre.
Indigni-
ties to
His Body.
His Wife
Executed.
Mary de
Medici
Exiled.
£962
FRANCE AND THE AGE OP LOUIS XIV.
Elevation
of the
Sieur de
Luines
Opposi-
tion to
Him and
Louis
XIII.
Rescue of
Mary de
Medici.
Recon-
ciliation
Effected
by
Richelieu.
Conde's
Release.
Rise
of the
Valtelline
against
the Swiss.
Spanish
Occupa-
tion
of the
Valtelline
Ended by
France.
Beam
Annexed
by Louis
XIII.
of her favorite, and was afterward exiled to Blois; while Richelieu
was dismissed to his bishopric of Lu9on.
The Sieur de Luines was now at the head of affairs in France. The
new Council of State, like the old, favored the House of Hapsburg;
and its policy hastened the Thirty Years' War in Germany. The
king's favorite sought to enrich himself and his family. He was
created a duke and a peer of France, was appointed Governor of the
Isle de France and of Picardy, and received the daughter of the Duke
de Montbazon in marriage. Two of his brothers likewise were made
dukes. His rapacity soon made him universally unpopular, and the
discontented French nobles gathered at the queen-mother's court at
Blois, which became the seat of a most formidable and resolute opposi-
tion to King Louis XIII. and his favorite. The Duke d'Epernon
rescued Mary de Medici from the Castle of Blois, February 22, 1619,
and conducted her safely into the province of Angouleme.
Louis XIII. and his favorite were seriously alarmed at the imminence
of civil war. Conscious of his inability to confront the impending
storm, the Sieur de Luines appealed to Richelieu, who had remained in
quiet retirement, awaiting what he was aware of would be the con-
sequence of the kingly favorite's effort at government. Richelieu
hastened to the queen-mother's court, and succeeded in effecting a
reconciliation between her and her son, thus averting the danger of
civil war. The Prince of Conde was liberated from the Bastile, and
joined the party of the king and the Sieur de Luines, who hoped that
the released prince would prove a valuable ally against the queen-
mother and her party.
In 1620 a dispute arose between France and Spain concerning the
Valtelline territory in Northern Italy. This long and narrow valley,
watered by the river Adda, and extending from Lake Como to the
frontiers of the Tyrol, had formerly been under the dominion of the
Dukes of Milan ; but the last of the Sforzas had ceded it to the Swiss
canton of Grisons. It was very important to the Spaniards during
the wars in Germany, as it afforded a passage into that country from
Milan. As the inhabitants of the Valtelline were Catholics they re-
sisted the dominion of the Protestant Swiss. In July, 1620, they rose
against their Swiss rulers, massacred all whom they got into their
power, and solicited protection from the neighboring Spaniards. The
Spaniards sent troops to sieze all the fortresses in the valley. The
French government made a demand upon the Spanish court that the
Spanish troops evacuate the Valtelline, and a treaty to that effect
was signed in the spring of 1621, but was never carried into execution.
King Louis XIII. now proceeded to annex the little Protestant
province of Beam, on the north side of the Pyrenees, to the crown of
FIRST TWO BOURBONS AND CARDINAL RICHELIEU.
France, and ordered the Roman Catholic religion to be reestablished
therein. This action of the king produced a revolt of the inhabitants
of the province, whose cause was .quickly espoused by the Huguenots
throughout France. The king mustered an army to reduce the Hugue-
nots to submission, and disgusted the entire kingdom by appointing
the Sieur de Luines to the important and responsible office of Con-
stable of France.
The new religious war in France commenced in the spring of 1621.
The Constable de Luines was utterly incompetent for the execution of
the task imposed upon him. After some insignificant successes in
Poitou, he besieged Montauban, the chief fortress of the Huguenots
in the province of Languedoc, where his incapacity was completely
manifested. Notwithstanding the efforts of the royal army, the ad-
vance of a Huguenot force under the Duke de Rohan forced King
Louis XIII. to raise the siege, after he had lost eight thousand of his
troops. The Constable de Luines died soon after this humiliation, De-
cember 14, 1621, from the effects of a malignant fever; his death
being regretted by none, not even by the king.
The civil and religious war continued with vigor after the death of
the incompetent Constable de Luines; and in 1622 the Huguenots ex-
perienced a great loss in the defection of Marshal Lesdiguieres, one of
the ablest soldiers of the time, who deserted the Huguenot cause, em-
braced the Catholic faith, and was made Constable of France by King
Louis XIII. The revolt was crushed in the provinces of Languedoc
and Guienne, and the city of Montpellier was finally compelled to
surrender to the royal army. By the Peace of Montpellier, October
19, 1622, the Huguenots surrendered all the fortified towns guaranteed
to them by the previous treaties, excepting the strongholds of Mon-
tauban and La Rochelle.
The office of Prime Minister had been made vacant by the death
of the Constable de Luines ; and it was for some time warmly contested
by the queen-mother, Mary de Medici, and the Prince of Conde.
Richelieu zealously supported the queen-mother, thus enabling her to
triumph over her rival. Richelieu's genius had already commenced
making itself felt in the royal councils, and his ambition became mani-
fest to all. Men of all parties in France felt instinctively that he
would make himself master of France when the opportunity presented
itself, and all united in an effort to exclude the ambitious prelate from
the Council of State. Louis XIII. personally disliked Richelieu, and
long refused to admit him to any share of power ; but the young king
finally yielded to his mother's solicitations by fulfilling the promise
which he had made to Richelieu long before, and accordingly asked
the Pope to confer a cardinal's hat upon Richelieu.
Huguenot
Revolt.
Failure
of Louis
XIII. in
the Siege
of Mon-
tauban.
Death of
the Con-
stable de
Luines.
Desertion
of a Hu-
guenot
Leader.
Capture
of Mont-
pellier.
Peace of
Mont-
pellier.
The
Prime
Ministry
and
Richelieu.
His
Genius
and
Ambition.
2964
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Richelieu
Made a
Cardinal.
Called
into the
Council
of State.
Cardinal
Richelieu
Made
Prime
Minister.
His Able
Rule.
His
Remark
as to the
Condition
of France.
His
Three
Great
Objects.
His Prot-
estant
Alliances.
Royal
Inter-
marriage
wi'h
England.
His Holiness, Pope Gregory XV., created Richelieu a cardinal of
the Holy Roman Church, September 5, 1622. This was only a step
to the triumph of the great churchman and statesman. The weak-
ness of the royal government was becoming more apparent daily, and
the ambitious designs of Spain and Austria under the Hapsburgs were
causing serious alarm in France. Louis XIII. changed his Ministers
repeatedly, but none was found sufficiently competent to conduct
France safely through the perplexities in which she was involved; and
the young king was finally obliged to heed the urgent solicitations of
his mother by summoning Cardinal Richelieu to a place in the Council
of State, which was accordingly done April 26, 1624.
Louis XIII. had intended that Cardinal Richelieu should hold only
a subordinate position in the Council of State, but the king was unable
to prevent the genius of the great cardinal-statesman whom he had
so reluctantly summoned to his aid from asserting itself. Before
Richelieu had been in the council six months he was the real ruler of
France ; and the king, the court and the entire nation acknowledged
his supremacy. He infused his indomitable energy into every branch
of the public service, and the French government suddenly acquired a
strength which was felt throughout the entire kingdom.
Cardinal Richelieu himself alluded to the condition of France when
he came into power as follows : " I may say with truth that at the
time of my entrance upon office the Huguenots divided the power of
the state with Your Majesty; that the great nobles conducted them-
selves as if they were not your subjects, and the governors of provinces
as if they were independent subjects in their own dominions. Foreign
alliances were depreciated and misunderstood; private interests pre-
ferred to those of the state; and, in a word, the majesty of the crown
was degraded to such a depth of abasement that it was scarcely to be
recognized at all."
From the moment that Richelieu entered upon the office of Prime
Minister of France he pursued a consistent and undeviating policy,
the principal objects of which were the destruction of the Huguenots
as a political party, the firm establishment of the royal authority over
the nobility of France, and the reestablishment of French ascendency
in Europe by the systematic humiliation of the Austrian House of
Hapsburg.
In pursuance of his policy, Cardinal Richelieu endeavored to weaken
the German Empire and Spain by forming an alliance between France
and the Protestant powers of Northern Europe. His first step was
the negotiation of a marriage between Charles, Prince of Wales, son
of King James I. of England, and the Princess Henrietta Maria, a
sister of King Louis XIII. A match which had previously been ar-
FIRST TWO BOURBONS AND CARDINAL RICHELIEU.
2965
ranged between this British prince and a Spanish infanta was broken
off, and the marriage arranged by Richelieu occurred in May, 1625.
Cardinal Richelieu furnished the German Protestants with funds,
and permitted them to enlist troops in France; while a French army
was sent into the ValteKine, which was held by the Austrians and the
Spaniards, and which furnished them a direct communication between
Northern Italy and the Tyrol. A campaign of several weeks ended
in the complete expulsion of the Austrian forces from the Valtelline,
all the fortresses of which were occupied by French troops. Pope
Urban VIII. looked wilh open disfavor upon Cardinal Richelieu's
attacks upon the principal Catholic powers of Europe, and protested
against his course ; but Richelieu told the Pope very plainly that, while
he acknowledged his duties as a prince of the Roman Catholic Church,
his first allegiance was due to France, whose interests and dignity were
his first objects under any and all circumstances.
Cardinal Richelieu was obliged to suspend the operation of his
plans against Austria, in consequence of an unexpected revolt of the
Huguenots under the Dukes de Rohan and Soubise in the summer of
1625. Richelieu proceeded with vigor against the Huguenot rebels;
and, with the aid of a fleet furnished by Protestant England and
Protestant Holland, he defeated the Huguenot fleet off La Rochelle,
and reduced that Huguenot stronghold to great extremities.
Richelieu was obliged to make peace with the Huguenots in con-
sequence of the existence of a formidable conspiracy against his power
and his life; and in February, 1626, the Huguenots were granted
favorable terms. In March of the same year a treaty was made with
Spain, France restoring the Valtelline to the Swiss canton of the
Grisons, from which it had been wrested by Spain and Austria in
1620. Richelieu was subjected to severe censure and ridicule for his
leniency to the Huguenots on this occasion, but he was well aware that
the time had not yet come for the success of his p^ns.
The plot against Cardinal Richelieu's power had been skillfully or-
ganized by Gaston, Duke of Anjou, the only brother of King Louis
XIII., and included many of the leading nobles of France. The
young queen was also a party to it. The conspirators intended to
assassinate the cardinal-statesman at his country seat, and to make
Gaston his successor in power. Richelieu discovered the plot. Gaston
betrayed his confederates, and threw himself upon the mercy of his
brother, the king, who rewarded Gaston's treachery by making him
Duke of Orleans, with the immense revenues of that duchy; but the
other conspirators were beheaded or exiled. The young queen was
summoned before the Council of State, and was severely reprimanded
for her share in the conspiracy, thus increasing the coldness which
French
Aid to the
German
Protest-
ants and
Occupa-
tion
of the
Valtel-
line.
Richelieu
and Pope
Urban
VIII.
Huguenot
Revolt
and
Defeat.
Peace
with the
Hugue-
nots and
Treaty
with
Spain.
Plot of
Gaston,
Duke of
Anjou,
against
Richelieu.
Gaston
Betrays
His
Accom-
plices
and Is
Made
Duke of
Orleans.
2966
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Royal
Edict
against
Dueling.
Execution
of Two
Duelists.
Another
Huguenot
Revolt
at La
Rochelle.
English
Aid to
the Hu-
guenots.
Siege
of La
Rochelle
by
Richelieu.
English
Fleet
Defeated.
Two
English
Fleets
Obliged
to Retire.
Fall
of La
Rochelle.
for some time had existed between herself and her royal husband.
Thenceforth the queen and the cardinal-statesman were avowed enemies.
In consequence of this conspiracy, Richelieu's power became more
firmly established than ever.
In 1627 Cardinal Richelieu gave a startling evidence of the vigor
with which he intended to humble the French nobles by bringing them
to the foot of the throne. A royal ordinance was issued against duel-
ing, which had become a serious evil among the gallants of the French
court. In defiance of this royal ordinance, the Counts de Bouteville
and Des Chapelles engaged in a desperate encounter in the Place
Royale at Paris. They were arrested by Richelieu's order, tried, con-
victed, and beheaded with a grim firmness which filled the entire French
nobility with terror.
In 1627 the Huguenots of La Rochelle again revolted, and this time
England sided with the Huguenots against King Louis XIII. The
Duke of Buckingham, the Prime Minister of King Charles I. of Eng-
land, had conceived a foolish feeling for the queen of Louis XIII. ; and
Richelieu exposed and ridiculed this. For the purpose of obtaining
revenge upon the cardinal-statesman of France, the Duke of Bucking-
ham induced the English king to aid the Huguenots. The Huguenot
cause was popular in England, and the Huguenots might have derived
some advantage from this alliance had a more popular leader than the
Duke of Buckingham been chosen to lead the English fleet of one
hundred vessels and the English land force sent to the relief of La
Rochelle in July, 1627.
Cardinal Richelieu in the meantime had made extraordinary exertions
for the reduction of La Rochelle. With a splendidly-equipped and
powerful army he laid siege to the Huguenot stronghold, and proved
himself an able general as well as a great statesman. The Huguenots
made a heroic defense, but the English fleet which attempted to re-
lieve the beleaguered stronghold was defeated with great loss. The
Duke of Buckingham then sailed back to England, thus leaving the
Huguenots to defend their stronghold single-handed against the royal
forces of France.
Richelieu closely invested La Rochelle by land, and constructed a
mole across the mouth of the harbor, which he fortified, thus cutting
off relief for the city by sea. Two English fleets sent to the relief
of the starving Huguenots of La Rochelle were unable to enter the
harbor on account of the barrier which Richelieu had erected there,
and consequently retired. After a siege of fifteen months, during
which half of the inhabitants perished from famine, and during which
the Huguenot garrison was reduced to less than two hundred men, La
Rochelle surrendered to Richelieu, October 28, 1628.
FIRST TWO BOURBONS AND CARDINAL RICHELIEU.
The triumphant cardinal-statesman used his victory with modera-
tion. He declared that the age of persecution for conscience sake had
gone by, and that the king had waged war upon the people of La
Rochelle not as Huguenots but as rebels. He confirmed the people
of the conquered town in the exercise of their religion, but punished
them for their rebellion by depriving them of their political rights
and destroying the fortifications of the city. Montauban, the last
Huguenot stronghold, surrendered in August, 1629 ; and the Hugue-
nots ceased to exist as a political party.
Spain took advantage of Richelieu's civil war with the Huguenots
to try to injure France in Italy by driving the Duke de Nevers, a
French nobleman, from the duchies of Mantua and Montferrat, to
which he had just succeeded. After the capture of La Rochelle,
Cardinal Richelieu induced King Louis XIII. to lead a French army
of thirty-six thousand men across the Alps into Italy, in March, 1629,
to aid the Duke of Mantua and Montferrat. Charles Emmanuel the
Great, Duke of Savoy, who was an enemy of France, was forced to
make a treaty of peace ; and the Spaniards were compelled to relinquish
their designs upon Mantua and Montferrat.
No sooner had the French recrossed the Alps than the Spaniards and
the Austrians again invaded Mantua and occupied the territory of the
Grisons. The Duke of Savoy entered into a secret alliance with the
Spaniards and the Austrians, and prepared to prevent the French army
from passing through his territory into Italy. Cardinal Richelieu re-
ceived the chief command of the French army, and appointed Marshals
Bassompierre and Schomberg as his lieutenants. He marched rapidly
into Savoy, took Pignerol after a siege of three days, and also cap-
tured a number of other fortresses in the duchy. The French forces
soon overran Savoy and the marquisate of Saluces, so that the allies
were obliged to make peace.
By the Treaty of Cherasco, in April, 1631, the Austrians evacuated
Mantua, and the Emperor Ferdinand II. of Germany invested the
Duke de Nevers with the duchy. Victor Amadeus I., Duke of Savoy,
was forced to cede Pignerol and two other fortresses to France. One
of the most prominent negotiators of this treaty was Giulio Mazarini,
then an agent of Pope Urban VIII. at the ducal court of Savoy, and
afterward so famous in French history as Cardinal Mazarin.
Though Richelieu was successful against the enemies of France, he
now found himself surrounded by personal enemies, and numerous plots
were formed against him. King Louis XIII. was attacked with a
dangerous illness at Lyons, while on his way to join the French army
in Italy. The queen-mother, Mary de Medici, had become an enemy
of Cardinal Richelieu, because she found that she could not rule him,
VOL. 9—11
Riche-
lieu's
Modera-
tion and
Tolera-
tion.
Fall of
Montau-
ban.
Spanish
Designs
in Italy
Foiled by
Richelieu.
The
Duke of
Savoy's
Alliance
with
Spain and
Austria.
French
Occupa-
tion of
Savoy.
Treaty
of Che-
rasco.
Giulio
Mazarini.
Plots
against
Richelieu
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Mary do
Medici
Seeks
His Over-
throw.
Riche-
lieu's
Quarrel
with
Mary de
Medici.
The
Day of
Dupes.
Riche-
lieu's
Action.
Banish-
ment,
Exile and
Death of
Kary de
Medici.
Rebell-
ions and
Flight of
Gaston,
Duke of
Orleans.
as she before supposed that she could. She took advantage of the
king's illness to extort a promise from him that he would dismiss the
great cardinal-statesman from office. Louis XIII. consented on condi-
tion that no step should be taken against Richelieu until the termina-
tion of the war in Italy. When the king recovered his health he
manifested a reluctance to deprive himself and his kingdom of the
services of his great Prime Minister; but the clamors of his wife, his
mother and his courtiers for the dismissal of the cardinal-statesman
became louder daily.
In the meantime Cardinal Richelieu returned to court, and finally
he quarreled with the queen-mother in the king's presence. Louis
XIII. ended the quarrel by leaving the palace and proceeding to Ver-
sailles. The entire court now considered the great Prime Minister's
ruin inevitable, and his enemies openly manifested their exultation.
The cardinal-statesman himself was confident that he would be dis-
graced, and was surprised when he received a summons to meet the
king at Versailles. Louis XIII. received Richelieu very cordially, as-
suring him that he would not listen to any charges against him, and
that he would remove from court all who were able or disposed to in-
jure him or thwart his plans. The day upon which these events
occurred — November 11, 1630 — is still known in France as The Day
of Dupes.
Cardinal Richelieu now proceeded to take vigorous action against
those who had sought to injure him, causing Marshal de Marillac to
be executed on a charge of peculation, and banishing his brother, the
keeper of the seals, to Chateaudun.
Richelieu then tried to persuade King Louis XIII. that there could
be no peace at court until the queen-mother was compelled to cease
her plottings. The king was very much averse to adopt any stringent
measures against his mother; but a fresh rebellion of his brother
Gaston, Duke of Orleans, in 1631, said to have been instigated by
Mary de Medici, induced Louis XIII. to take a decisive step against
her. She was banished from court and sent to Compiegne. Several
days afterward the king ordered her to retire to Moulins. She re-
fused to obey her son's order, and fled across the north-eastern frontier
of France to the Spanish rulers at Brussels. This step was fatal to
her, as Louis XIII. sternly refused to permit her to return to France ;
and she died in exile at Cologne in 1642, the very year of Richelieu's
death.
The rebellion of Gaston, Duke of Orleans, was suppressed, his estates
were confiscated, and he took refuge in Lorraine ; but, as he was denied
shelter in that province, he fled to Brussels. His followers were im-
prisoned or exiled. The king's brother continued his plottings at
FIRST TWO BOURBONS AND CARDINAL RICHELIEU.
2969
Brussels, and induced a number of discontented French nobles to join
in his schemes, among them the Duke de Montmorenci, one of the most
illustrious men in France. Gaston invaded France with a small force
in 1632, but his army was defeated by the royal troops, and he was
again obliged to seek refuge in exile. The saddest result of this un-
happy insurrection was the execution of Duke Henry de Montmorenci,
who was beheaded at Toulouse, October 30, 1632.
The Thirty Years' War in Germany had now been in progress for
more than a decade. In accordance with his policy for weakening the
Austrian House of Hapsburg, Richelieu entered into an alliance with
King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden in 1631, as already noticed;
promising him an annual subsidy of four hundred thousand crowns,
and thus openly taking sides with the German Protestants against
their Emperor and the Catholic League of Germany.
After the death of Gustavus Adolphus in the moment of victory on
the bloody fie'd of Lutzen in 1632, Richelieu renewed his alliance with
Sweden by a treaty with the Swedish Chancellor, Axel Oxenstiern.
The victory of the German imperialists at Nordlingen in September,
1634, appeared to establish the success of the Emperor Ferdinand II.;
but Richelieu went about vigorously to neutralize its effects. Accord-
ingly, under her great Prime Minister's direction, France concluded
treaties of alliance with Sweden, Holland, the Protestant princes of
Germany, Switzerland, and the Duke of Savoy; France agreeing to
put four large armies in the field, numbering in the aggregate one
hundred and twenty thousand men.
The events of the next three years were unfavorable to France. In
1636 the German imperial army advanced into the French province of
Picardy and seriously menaced Paris, but the imperialists were finally
obliged to retire with considerable loss. In 1638 the tide turned in
favor of the French. Duke Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar, who had en-
tered the service of France, captured several fortresses on the Upper
Rhine, and defeated the German imperial army at Rheinfeld, March
3, 1638. In December of the same year he captured the strong
fortress of Breisach after a siege of six months. The events of 1639
were also favorable to the French ; and, after the death of Duke Bern-
hard of Saxe-Weimar, Richelieu annexed Alsace to France. In Italy
the French under the Count d'Harcourt defeated the German im-
peria'is^s in Piedmont, overran that country, and captured Turin in
September, 1640, after a siesre of more than four months. In the
same year the French drove the Spaniards from Artois and annexed
that province to the crown of France.
In the meantime Cardinal Richelieu's good fortune did not desert
him. He discovered a secret correspondence between the queen and the
Execution
of Henry
de Mont-
Franco-
Swedish
Alliance
in the
Thirty
Years'
War.
Riche-
lieu's
Alliance
with
Oxen-
stiern.
France's
Oilier
Alliances.
French
Victories
under
Bernhard
of Saxe-
Weimar.
Annexa-
tion of
Alsace.
French
Victories
in Italy.
Annexa-
tion of
Artois.
The
Queen's
Treason.
2970
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Royal
Recon-
ciliation.
Birth of
an Heir.
Plot and
Execution
of Cinq-
Mars and
De Thou.
Annexa-
tion of
Roussil-
lon and
Sedan.
Riche-
lieu's
Great-
ness.
His
Death.
French
Academy
Founded.
Spaniards at Brussels, and the queen was so terrified by the discovery
of her offense that she confessed her fault to Richelieu and signed a
solemn pledge never to commit a similar offense. The cardinal-states-
man sought to bring about a reconciliation between Louis XIII. and his
queen, in which he succeeded to the satisfaction of both husband and
wife. The royal couple had been married for over twenty years, but
thus far had no children. Anne now gave birth to a son at the palace
of St. Germains, September 5, 1638, who became the heir to the
French throne.
Richelieu had selected the gay and brilliant Marquis of Cinq-Mars
as the king's companion ; but when the cardinal-statesman endeavored
to check this nobleman's ambitious schemes the marquis organized a
formidable conspiracy against Richelieu, and began a treasonable cor-
respondence with the Spaniards. Richelieu detected this conspiracy,
and procured a copy of the treaty which the conspirators had made
with Spain. The Marquis of Cinq-Mars was arrested, along with De
Thou, another conspirator; and both were executed at Lyons, Sep-
tember 12, 1642.
In the same year the French took Perpignan from the Spaniards,
thus completing the conquest of the province of Roussillon, which was
annexed to France. The principality of Sedan also became one of
the possessions of the French crown, having been confiscated as a
penalty imposed on the Duke of Bouillon for his complicity in the
plot of the Marquis of Cinq-Mars.
Cardinal Richelieu was now at the height of his power and great-
ness. He was supreme in France, and had made his country great
at home and feared abroad. He had given his king the first place in
France, and had given France the first place in Europe. He had
humbled the Huguenots and the French nobles at home, and had
humiliated the proud House of Hapsburg and all the other foreign
enemies of France; but all this time he was sinking under a mortal
disease, and he died December 4, 1642, in the fifty-eighth year of
his age.
Richelieu was a great patron of science and literature, and many
scientific and literary institutions in France date from his time. He
founded the French Academy in 1635, for the purpose of improving
the French language and the literary taste of the French people.
SECTION IL— ANNE OF AUSTRIA AND CARDINAL
MAZARIN (A. D. 1642-1661).
of*Loui Louis XIII., who owed his proud position in France and Europe
XIII. entirely to Richelieu's able statesmanship and diplomacy, coldly re-
ANNE OF AUSTRIA AND CARDINAL MAZARIN.
2971
marked upon hearing of his great Prime Minister's death : " There is
a great politician gone." The only change which the king made in
the Ministry selected by Richelieu was to assign a seat in the Council
of State to the Italian Cardinal Mazarin.
In less than six months King Louis XIII. followed his great Prime
Minister to the grave, dying at the palace of St. Germains, May 14,
1643, on the anniversary of his illustrious father's assassination, having
thus reigned exactly thirty-three years, A. D. 1610-1643. Louis
XIII. left the regency for his little son and successor, Louis XIV., to
his widow, Anne of Austria, and appointed his brother, Gaston, Duke
of Orleans, to the office of Lieutenant-General of the kingdom. The
king's will also appointed a Council of State, consisting of Cardinal
Mazarin, the Prince of Conde, the Chancellor Seguier, and Chavigny
and Bouthillier, Secretaries of State.
As soon as the queen-mother, Anne of Austria, was confirmed in the
regency she dismissed the Council of Regency and made Mazarin her
Prime Minister — a selection which surprised all parties, as Mazarin
had been the faithful subordinate of Richelieu, her old enemy. But
the choice was good, as Mazarin was a man of great genius ; and, as
Louis XIV. was not yet five years old, the queen-regent very well
knew that she would need a competent adviser during her little son's
long minority, and she therefore selected the one best adapted to
the position.
Cardinal Mazarin's policy and aims were the same as those of his
illustrious predecessor, Richelieu, and he prosecuted the war against
Austria and Spain with great vigor. The German imperialists re-
sumed hostilities immediately upon Richelieu's death ; while the Spanish
forces from the Netherlands laid siege to the fortress of Rocroi, but
were decisively defeated by the French under the Duke d'Enghien in
the battle of Rocroi, May 19, 1643.
The French arms in Germany, under Marshal Turenne and the
Duke d'Enghien, defeated the imperialists at Nordlingen, August 7,
1645. The Duke d'Enghien, with the assistance of the Dutch fleet
under Admiral Van Tromp, took the important sea-port of Dunkirk,
on the North Sea, from the Spaniards, in October, 1646. The Duke
d'Enghien returned to France in 1647, and succeeded to the title of
Prince of Conde upon his father's death about the same time.
Cardinal Mazarin, who dreaded the new Prince of Conde's influence
at court, sent the great general to Catalonia to aid the revolted
Catalans against the Spaniards. The Prince of Conde laid siege to
Lerida in May, 1 647 ; but he was obliged to raise the siege, in spite
of his great genius ; whereupon he returned to France in utter disgust,
and bitterly reproached Mazarin for failing to sustain him. Mazarin
&-29
Cardinal
Mazarin.
Death of
Louis
XIII.
Louis
XIV.
A. D.
1643-
Regency
of Anne
of
Austria.
Cardinal
Mazarin,
Prime
Minister.
His
Policy.
Battle of
Rocroi.
Second
Battle of
Nord-
lingen.
Capture
of
Dunkirk
Kazarin
and
Conde.
Siege of
Lerida.
2972
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Conde's
Kew
Victories.
Success
of
Turcnne
in
Geiruany.
Peace of
V7est-
phalia.
France's
Gains.
France's
Prestige
Raised.
France's
Internal
Troubles.
was profuse in his excuses, and immediately appointed the Prince of
Conde to the command of the French army in Flanders. The great
general took the town of Ypres in May, 1648, drove the German im-
perial troops out of the French province of Picardy, and defeated the
imperial army under Archduke Leopold at Lens, in Arlois, August,
1648.
In the meantime the French arms under Marshal Turcnne also
triumphed in Germany. In 1648 Turenne, in conjunction with the
Swedes, defeated the German imperial army under the Italian general
Montecuculi near Augsburg, and would have marched upon Vienna
had he not been prevented by a sudden rise of the river Inn.
The successes of the French arms, particularly the victory at Lens,
hastened the peace negotiations, which had been in progress for five
years, to a conclusion ; and the Treaty of Westpha ia, October 24,
1648, ended the Thirty Years' War, as already noticed. This famous
treaty was highly advantageous to France, which received all of Alsace
except Strasburg, thus extending her eastern frontier to the Rhine.
The town of Brcisach, on the east side of the Rhine, was ceded to
France ; while the fortress of Philipsburg was to be garrisoned by
French troops. The three bishoprics of Toul, Verdun and Metz were
confirmed to France, in whose possession they now had been for almost
a century ; and the duchy of Lorraine was also virtually ceded to
France by being left to her until an amicable arrangement cou d be
effected with its dispossessed duke. France also obtained the fortress
of Pignerol, in Piedmont.
Thus the Thirty Years' War had been, on the whole, favorable to
France. The power of the Austrian House of Hapsburg had been
humbled, and the Germano-Roman Empire was practically destro3'cd,
while France had become the leading power of Europe. France and
Spain, however, did not come to terms ; and the war between them
lasted eleven years longer.
In the very year that the Thirty Years' War closed, France began
to be distracted by serious internal troubles. Cardinal Mazarin's
rapacity and misgovernment, .which had full sway in consequence of
his complete influence over the queen-regent, Anne of Austria, was
rapidly involving the French kingdom in serious financial embarrass-
ments, which eventually brought on a dras1 rous civi1 war. Richelieu
had left a full treasury, but the resources which he had so carefully
husbanded were soon squandered by Mazarin, and recourse was had to
the most oppressive and obnoxious expedients in order to meet the
enormous expenses of the war and the extravagance of the court.
An impost levied upon all merchandice brought into Paris for sale
by land or water, and levied upon all classes indiscriminately, en-
ANNE OF AUSTRIA AND CARDINAL MAZARIN.
2973
countered serious opposition on the part of the Parliament of Paris,
thus arraying that tribunal in direct antagonism to the French crown.
The quarrel increased in bitterness daily ; and finally the court was
guilty of a serious error in taking advantage of the rejoicings which
greeted the intelligence of the great French victory at Lens, to arrest
three of the chief leaders of the opposition in the Parliament of Paris —
Blancmesnil, Broussel and Charton.
The populace of Paris had sided with the Parliament from the very
beginning of the troubles, and when the three popular leaders were
arrested the Parisians rose in open revolt against the government and
barricaded the principal streets ; while an angry mcb surrounded the
Palais Royal, demanding the release of Broussel, who was extremely
popular. The Cardinal de Retz, Archbishop Coadjutor of Paris,
represented to the queen-mother, Anne of Austria, the danger of the
situation, and urged her to comply with the popular demand by re-
leasing Broussel ; but the queen-mother refused to release the popular
leader, and troops were marched into the Palais Royal to protect the
court.
Cardinal de Retz joined the rebels when the queen-regent refused to
take his advice, and became one of the chief leaders of the insurrection.
The next day, August 27, 164-8, the outbreak showed such vigor and
such alarming signs of spreading that the queen-regent released the
arrested members of the Parliament of Paris ; and they returned to the
city the next day, amid the rejoicings of the populace. The affair ap-
peared settled for the time, but the trouble had only really commenced,
so that August 27, 1648, may be considered the date of the beginning
of the four years' civil war known as the War of the Fronde.
Order appeared to be restored outwardly; but the Parliament of
Paris proved so insolent and unmanageable that the queen-regent
retired from Paris with the boy king and Cardinal Mazarin, and went
to Rueil. The intervention of the Prince of Conde brought about a
reconciliation between the queen-regent and the Parliament of Paris in
October, 1648, Anne of Austria granting the demands of the Parlia-
ment unconditionally. The queen-regent shed tears while signing this
document, which she declared to be the suicide of the royal authority
in France.
Soon afterward the Prince of Conde became disgusted with the
arrogance and insubordination of the Perisian populace, and offered
his services to the court to reduce them to submission. He collected
an army of eight thousand men near Paris ; and the queen-regent, the
boy king and the rest of the royal family, accompanied by Cardinal
Mazarin, secretly retired from Paris to St. Gcrmians, January 6,
1649. At the same time a royal order was issued commanding the
Collision
between
the
French
Crown
and the
Parlia-
ment of
Paris.
Popular
Revolt in
Paris.
The
Queen-
regent's
Obsti-
nacy.
Impris-
oned
Popular
Leaders
Released.
Civil
Wars
of the
Fronde.
The
Queen-
regent's
Submis-
sion to
the Par-
liament
of Paris.
Corde's
Support
of the
Queen-
regent.
2974
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Fresh
Trouble
with the
Parlia-
ment of
Pans.
The
Fronde
Sup-
ported by
Nobles
and
Marshal
Turenne.
Treaty
of Rueil
and
Cardinal
Mazarin's
Triumph.
Conde's
Arrest
and
Impris-
onment.
Revolts
of His
Parti-
sans.
The
Revolts
Sup-
pressed.
Parliament of Paris to transfer its sittings to Montargis. The Parlia-
ment refused to obey this command, at the same time denouncing
Cardinal Mazarin as a public enemy and demanding his banishment
from France.
Many of the leading nobles of France espoused the cause of the
Fronde, which was likewise sustained by most of the provincial parlia-
ments of the kingdom. There was fighting between the troops of the
Prince of Conde and the forces of the Parliament of Paris near that
city, but the cause of the Fronde gained strength daily. Marshal
Turenne joined the Fronde, thus furnishing the popular party with a
great military leader able to cope with the Prince of Conde on the
royal side. The rebels were also promised assistance by the Archduke
Leopold, the Governor of the Spanish Netherlands.
The court now desired peace, and Mazarin negotiated a treaty with
a deputation from the Parliament of Paris headed by the president,
Mole, at Rueil, March 11, 1649. The conditions of the treaty were
not as favorable as the Parliament had desired, and that body at first
refused to register it. The infuriated mob of Paris threatened to
assassinate Mole and the other members of the Parliamentary deputa-
tion which had negotiated the treaty. By modifying some of the most
objectionable provisions of the treaty, Cardinal Mazarin secured its
acceptance by the Parliament of Paris. He likewise gained over the
leading officers of Marshal Turenne's army, who deserted the marshal
and espoused the cause of the court. Thereupon Marshal Turenne
retired into Holland, thus leaving the Fronde without a competent
military leader. The court returned to Paris in August, 1649.
The Prince of Conde, who presumed upon the great services which
he had rendered the state, now endeavored to secure control of the
entire power of the government. His insolence and insubordination
became so intolerable that the queen-regent and Cardinal Mazarin
resolved to arrest him. The Prince of Conde, and also his brother, the
Prince of Conti, and his brother-in-law, the Duke de Longueville, were
arrested in the council chamber January 18, 1650, and were im-
prisoned in the Castle of Vincennes. The partisans of the Prince of
Conde thereupon rose in arms against the court. The province of
Burdundy, of which he was governor, openly revolted ; and the Duchess
de Longueville excited outbreaks in Normandy, of which province her
husband was governor. The city of Bordeaux took up arms for the
Prince of Conde, placing itself under the orders of the fearless and
devoted Princess of Conde, the niece of Cardinal Richelieu.
The royal troops soon restored tranquillity in Normandy, and soon
also reduced Burgundy to submission. Bordeaux was forced to sur-
render, after a siege, during which the Princess of Conde displayed
ANNE OF AUSTRIA AND CARDINAL MAZARIN.
2975
the greatest heroism. The princess and her partisans were permitted
to retire peaceably to their estates, but the court resolutely refused her
petition for the release of her husband and his fellow-captives. Mar-
shal Turenne, who had been joined by a Spanish force, won some im-
portant successes in the province of Picardy ; but he was thoroughly
defeated near Rhetel by the Marshal du Plessis-Praslin, December 15,
1650, whereupon he fled into the province of Lorraine with a few-
followers.
The triumph of the court now appeared complete; but a reaction
set in at Paris in favor of the imprisoned princes, and the leaders
of the original Fronde headed a coalition against Cardinal Mazarin.
The Parliament of Paris demanded the banishment of the cardinal-
statesman, who became so terrified by the strength of the opposition
that he fled secretly to Havre, February 8, 1651. The queen-regent
prepared to follow him with the boy king ; but she was prevented from
doing so by the leaders of the Fronde, who insisted upon entering the
palace to satisfy themselves of the presence of the court.
In the meantime Cardinal Mazarin hastened to Havre and ordered
the release of the captive princes, hoping to gain their support by his
promptness ; but they treated him coldly, and hastened to Paris after
their liberation. The cardinal-statesman retired to Bruhl, in the terri-
tory of Cologne, whence he maintained a correspondence with the
queen-regent, by which he continued to direct the affairs of state in
France.
The Prince of Conde expected to find , himself supreme in power
when he returned to Paris ; but he discovered that the queen-regent was
still bitterly hostile to him, and that the leaders of the Fronde were
disinclined to acknowledge his authority. The queen-regent finally
brought matters to a crisis by accusing him before the Parliament of
Paris of being guilty of a treasonable correspondence with the
Spaniards. The Prince of Conde was so enraged by this accusation
that he hastened to his province of Guienne, where he headed an open
armed rebellion against the court.
The queen-regent now declared her son of age, and accordingly
young Louis XIV. took his place at the head of the army designed to
take the field against the Prince of Conde. Cardinal Mazarin now
boldly returned to Paris and rejoined the court; and Marshal Turenne,
who had made his peace with the court, was assigned a command in
the royal army.
A desultory warfare followed without any decisive result for either
party; and late in the spring of 1652 both armies — the royalists under
Marshal Turenne, and the Frondeurs under the Prince of Conde —
marched to Paris, which had not yet pronounced for either party. A
Flight of
Marshal
Turenne.
New
Outbreak
in Paris
and
Flight of
Mazarin.
Release
of Conde.
Mazarin's
Self
Exile.
Conde's
New
Revolt
against
the
Queen-
regent.
Young
King
Louis
XIV.
Mazarin's
Return.
Battle
of St
Antoine,
in Paris,
2976
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Conde's
Victory
over
Turenne.
Fickle-
ness of
the Pa-
risians.
Conde's
Flight.
Triumph
of tlie
Royal
Family.
Punish-
ment
of the
Fronde
Leaders.
Absolute
Eoyal
Power in
France.
Spanish
Successes.
Spanish
Arnves
Led by
CoEde.
desperate battle was fought in the Faubourg St. Antoine, July 2, 1652,
which was decided by Mademoiselle de Montpensier, the daughter of
the Duke of Orleans, who caused the cannon of the Bastile to open
fire upon the royal forces at the critical moment. Thereupon the
citizens threw open the Porte St. Antoine, thus allowing the army of
the Prince of Conde to enter the city. Marshal Turenne, who had
felt confident of victory, then retreated to St. Denis.
The Prince of Conde was master of Paris for some time, and it
appeared that the capital was about to fully espouse the cause of the
Fronde ; but the fickle Parisians suddenly changed sides and commenced
treating with the youthful king. The Prince of Conde found his in-
fluence wholly destroyed by the trickery of the Cardinal de Retz ; and
he according'y retired from Paris in utter disgust, in October, 1652,
and joined the Spanish army under the Duke of Lorraine.
Louis XIV. and his mother, escorted by Marshal Turenne's army,
entered Paris several days afterward, amid the rejoicings of the
populace, and occupied the Louvre. The young king granted a gen-
eral amnesty, from which the Prince of Conde, the Duke of Beaufort
and several other leaders of the Fronde were especially excepted. The
Prince of Conde was condemned to death as a traitor. The Duke of
Orleans was ordered to retire to Blois, where he died in 1660. The
Cardinal de Retz, who had been the most active man in France in
fomenting the troubles, was imprisoned in Vincennes. He was after-
ward liberated from prison, but the rest of his life was passed in
obscurity.
Thus ended the civil war of the Fronde, which had agitated France
for four years, A. D. 1648-1652. It was the final struggle of the
feudal nobility of France against absolute royal power. It had pro-
duced the greatest discomfort and even actual privation upon the royal
family of France, and ics effect was to confirm Louis XIV. in his ideas
of despotic rule. The French nobles utterly failed in their efforts to
limit the royal power, and the failure of the revolt enabled the young
king to erect an absolute monarchy in France.
As the civil war of the Fronde was now ended, Cardinal Mazarin
was able to direct his attention to the war with Spain. The Spaniards
had profited greatly by the internal troubles of France; having re-
covered Dunkirk, Ypres and Gravelines in the Nether'ands, Barcelona
and Catalonia in Spain, and Casale in Northern Italy. The Spanish
army on the frontier of Picardy was now under the command of the
Prince of Conde, and that able general ravaged the French territory as
far as the Somme during the summer of 1653. The French army under
Marshal Turenne, though inferior in numbers, was able to hold his
great adversary in check during the entire campaign.
ANNE OF AUSTRIA AND CARDINAL MAZARIN.
2977
In 1654 the Prince of Conde and the Archduke Leopold, at the head
of twenty-five thousand Spanish troops, laid siege to Arras, the capital
of the valuable province of Artois. Though the siege was conducted
with great ability, Marshal Turenne forced the Prince of Conde to
raise it and to retreat, leaving three thousand prisoners in the hands of
the victorious French. The campaign of 1656 was remarkable for one
of the Prince of Conde's most brilliant exploits. He attacked the
French division under Marshal de la Ferte, which was separated from
Turcnne's main army, then engaged in the siege of Valenciennes ; almost
annihilated it, and took the marshal himself, with nearly all his officers
and four thousand of his troops, prisoners.
Cardinal Mazarin now induced the Commonwealth of England, then
under the iron rule of its famous Lord Protector, Oliver Cromwell, to
enter into an alliance with France against Spain. An English force
of six thousand infantry under General Reynolds reinforced Marshal
Turenne, who captured Montmedy, St. Venant and Mardj'ke in 1656;
the last fortress being turned over to the English, by whom it was at
once garrisoned.
The allied French and English forces then b.id siege to Dunkirk. A
Spanish army under the Prince of Conde and Don John cf Austria
marched to the relief of the beleaguered fortress, but was defeated with
heavy loss by Marshal Turenne in the battle of the Dunes, June 14,
1658. The immediate result of this French victory was the surrender
of Dunkirk, which France ceded to England in accordance with the
treaty of alliance. Marshal Turenne then proceeded to the reduction
of Gravelines, and overran Flanders, advancing to within two days'
march of Brussels.
Spain was so dispirited by her reverses that she now desired peace ;
her anxiety on the point being increased by the formation of a coali-
tion between France and the German states to uphold the Treaty of
Westphalia — a league which virtually isolated Spain from the rest of
Europe.
Ever since the Peace of Westphalia the Emperor Ferdinand III.,
though nominally at peace with France, had been indirectly supplying
the Spaniards with money and troops. Duke Charles of Lorraine, who
had been driven from his duchy by the French, g'adly enlisted German
imperial troops undrr his own banners, and gained many advantages
in Flanders and on the frontiers of Germany. To resist his ravages,
the Elector-Palatine, the Archbishop-Electors of Cologne, Mayence
and Treves and the Bishop of Miinster formed a Catholic League, for
the avowed purpose of enforcing the Treaty of Westphalia. A
Pmtestant League was formed in Northern Germany with the same
design. Intimidated by these coalitions, the Emperor Ferdinand III.
Conde's
Failure
in the
Siege of
Arras.
Spanish
Victory
under
Cotiue.
England's
Alliance
with
Ftauce.
Siege of
Dunkirk.
Battle
of the
Dunes
and
Fall of
Dunkirk.
Spain
and the
Franco-
German
Alliance.
Prevnas
German
Aid to
Spain.
Catholic
and Prot-
estant
Leagues.
2978
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Mazarin's
Futile
Opposi-
tion
to the
Election
of
Emperor
Leopold I.
The
Rhenish
League.
Proposed
1 ranco-
Spanish
Royal
Inter-
marriage.
Peace
of the
Pryenees.
caused the Treaty of Westphalia to be confirmed by the Imperial Diet
at Ratisbon in 1654.
Upon the death of Ferdinand III., in 1657, Cardinal Mazarin, with
all the German princes who were in the interest of France, sought to
prevent the election of another prince of the Austrian House of Haps-
burg to the imperial throne of Germany. Mazarin would have gladly
obtained the imperial crown for King Louis XIV. ; but, as this was
impossible, the French interest was exerted in behalf of the young
Elector of Bavaria. The eldest son of Ferdinand III. had died be-
fore his father; and his second son, Leopold, had been educated only
for the Church. But Leopold I. was elected Emperor of Germany
about sixteen months after his father's death, in spite of the opposition
of the French and their German allies, who, however, imposed the most
rigorous conditions upon him concerning the war then in progress be-
tween France and Spain. Leopold I. solemnly pledged himself not to
render any secret or open aid to the enemies of France, and not to inter-
fere in Italy or in the Spanish Netherlands. The fulfillment of this
treaty was insured by the consolidation of the Catholic and Protestant
Leagues into the Rhenish League, under the protection of Louis XIV.
The military forces of the Rhenish League were styled " The army of
His Most Christian Majesty and of the Allied Electors and Princes."
In October, 1658, King Philip IV. of Spain commenced negotiations
for peace with France by proposing that Louis XIV. should marry the
Infanta Maria Theresa, the daughter of the Spanish king. Louis
XIV. was deeply in love with the beautiful Maria Mancini, Cardinal
Mazarin's niece ; but Mazarin removed her from court and induced
Louis XIV. to accept the Spanish king's offer.
Cardinal Mazarin proceeded to the Pyrenees and met the Spainsh
Prime Minister, Don Luis de Haro, on the Isle of Pheasants, in the
Bidassoa, a small stream which forms part of the boundary between
France and Spain. Negotiations for peace and for the royal marriage
were successfully consummated. Spain insisted positively that the
Prince of Conde shouM receive a full and free pardon, be reconciled to
the French court and be restored to all his honors and possessions.
For a long time Mazarin refused this demand, but finally yielded when
the Spanish Prime Minister threatened to form a principality for the
Prince of Conde in Flanders. The Prince of Conde was pardoned for
his treason and was restored to the government of Burgundy; and
the Peace of the Pyrenees was signed November 7, 1659.
By the terms of the treaty the Spanish Infanta Maria Theresa was
contracted in marriage to Louis XIV., and was promised a dowry of
half a million crowns by her father, in consideration of her renunciation
of all claims to the succession to the Spanish crown. All the children
LOUIS XIV. AND HIS WAR WITH SPAIN.
2979
of this marriage and their descendants were likewise solemnly excluded
from the succession to the Spanish crown. Spain ceded to France the
county of Artois and the towns of Gravelines, Landrecies, Thionville,
Montmedy, Avesnes and a few others, as well as the counties of Rous-
si.lon and Cerdagne. Lorraine was nominally restored to its duke, but
really remained annexed to the crown of France. As France had
succeeded against the Austrian Hapsburgs in the Treaty of Westphalia
in 1648, so she succeeded against the Spanish Hapsburgs in the Treaty
of the Pyrenees in 1659, and secured for herself the proud position of
being the leading power of Europe — a position which she held for a
century and a half.
Louis XIV. repaired to St. Jean de Luz, in May, 1660; and, after
a magnificent interview with King Philip IV. of Spain at the Isle of
Pheasants, he married the Infanta Maria Theresa in the Church of St.
Jean de Luz, June 9, 1660.
The two Treaties of Westphalia and the Pyrenees secured the
supremacy of France in European diplomacy, and, in connection with
the marriage of Louis XIV., placed Cardinal Mazarin at the height of
his power. Like Richelieu, Mazarin did not long survive this realiza-
tion of his hopes, but he died March 8, 1661, at the age of fifty-nine.
Mazarin was one of the ablest and most unscrupulous of the states-
men who have swayed the destinies of France, and would have left a
more honorable name to posterity had it not been for his inordinate and
insatiable love of money. Like Richelieu. Mazarin patronized art,
literature and education, and founded many colleges and academies in
France.
Marriage
of Louis
XIV.
with the
Spanish
Infanta
Maria
Theresa
Nego-
tiated.
France's
Triumph.
Marriage
Consum-
mated.
France's
Suprem-
acy in
Europe.
Death of
Mazarin.
His
Char-
acter.
SECTION III.— LOUIS XIV. AND HIS WAR WITH SPAIN
(A. D. 1661-1638).
THE next day after Cardinal Mazarin's death, King Louis XIV.,
whose ambition was beginning to make him impatient of restraint, made
this important announcement to his Council : " For the future I shall
be my own Prime Minister." He was well qualified for the task which
he assumed. Mazarin was in the habit of saying of the young king:
" There is enough in him to make four kings and one honest man."
Louis XIV. was a man of good judgment, of a firm, determined will,
of great sagacity and penetration, of the most indomitable energy and
perseverance. He possessed great powers of application, and through-
out his reign he was occupied eight hours daily with the cares of state.
He had imbibed the most exalted ideas of his " divine right " as a king,
and considered himself the absolute master of the lives, liberties and
Louis
XIV.
Assumes
the Gov-
ernment.
His
Abilities
and His
Ideas of
Kindly
Divine
Right.
2980
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
His
Long and
Brilliant
Reign.
His
Absolute
Personal
Rule.
Dishon-
esty and
Imprison-
ment of
Fouquet.
Colbert.
Colbert's
Ability as
Finance
Mnister.
Material
Prosper-
ity of
France
under
Colbert.
property of his subjects, which he became in reality. Thus believing
that his royal authority was conferred upon him directly from Heaven,
Louis XIV. regarded himself as the author and the source, as well as
the dispenser, of all law and justice in his kingdom. He intended
that his will should be the law of France, and considered himself re-
sponsible only to God for his conduct. The essence of his theory of
government was expressed in his celebrated saying : " I am the state."
He faithfully adhered to his principles throughout his reign, and suc-
ceeded in making France one of the most perfect examples of an abso-
lute and irresponsible despotism in all history.
The reign of Louis XIV. lasted seventy-two years, A. D. 1643—
1715; the first eighteen of which embraced the regency of his mother,
Anne of Austria, when the government was administered by Cardinal
Mazarin. After taking the government into his own hands and ap-
pointing no Prime Minister, Louis XIV. ruled in the most absolute
and despotic manner for fifty-four years, A. D. 1661—1715; his
Ministers being but passive instruments for the execution of his will.
Louis XIV. was the greatest monarch of the seventeenth century and
was the greatest of French kings. His reign was one of the most
bril'iant in French history ; and his great generals — Conde, Turenne
and Luxembourg — surpassed the generals of all other countries.
The disordered exchequer of France soon felt the master-hand of the
able but despotic king. The brilliant but dishonest Finance Minister,
Nicholas Fouquet, who had enormously enriched himself by his em-
bezzlements and his falsification of the public accounts, was arrested,
tried and convicted in September, 1661, and imprisoned for life in the
Bastile. Louis XIV. then appointed the celebrated Jean Baptiste Col-
bert, a man of stainless integrity and of marked ability as a financier,
in Fouquet's p^ce.
Colbert found the public finances in about as wretched a condition
as the Duke of Sully had found them during the reign of Henry IV.,
and he at once set to work with energy and skill to reform them. In
the course of a few years he placed the national finances on a secure
and staWe footing, and raised the gross income of the state to over
one hundred million francs, of which over ninety millions reached the
national treasury. He introduced a rigid economy into the administra-
tion of his departments, thus saving vast sums for the pleasure-1 oving
and war-loving king to squander. Colbert was able to provide funds
for the most costly wars and for the king's extravagance, without
increasing the rate of taxation.
Besides being Minister of Finance, Colbert rrd charge of the de-
partments of commerce, agriculture and p-blic works. He wisely
fostered every species of industry which could contribute to the wealth
LOUIS XIV. AND HIS WAR WITH SPAIN.
2981
of France, thus making the royal demands easily to be borne; and
throughout this brilliant reign Prance was as much celebrated for her
manufactures as for the feats of her arms.
The Minister of War, Louvois, also possessed talents necessary for
the direction of great exploits. The great engineer, Vauban, strength-
ened the fortresses on the French frontiers. Magnificent works —
such as the Palace of Versailles, the Louvre, the Hotel des Invalides
and the Canal of Languedoc — are standing monuments of the glory of
this reign. French fashions, tastes, language, habits, and modes of
thought began to be adopted by the cultured and higher circles of
Europe. Louis XIV. was a great patron of literature and the arts ;
and the period of his reign — known as the Augustan Age of French
Literature — was adorned by the genius of the dramatists Corneille,
Moliere and Racine, the poet Boileau, the fabulist La Fontaine, and
the divines Bossuet, Bourdaloue, Massillon, Bayle and Fenelon.
Louis XIV. soon gave a characteristic proof of his determination to
assert and maintain his royal dignity. The Spanish ambassador at
London having offended him by taking precedence of the French am-
bassador, Louis XIV. demanded satisfaction of King Philip IV. of
Spain, threatening war in case of the Spanish king's refusal to make
amends for the affront of his ambassador. Philip IV. was obliged to
make a most humb e apology and to send to the French court a special
envoy, who promised, in the presence of the entire diplomatic body and
in the name of his sovereign, never again to give a similar cause of
complaint by infringing the claims of His Most Christian Majesty,
the King of France.
During the same year Louis XIV. inflicted a similar humiliation upon
His Holiness, Pope Alexander VII. Some of the Pope's Corsican
guard having insulted the French ambassador at Rome, the Pope was
obliged to send messengers to France to beg the great king's pardon
in the most humble terms ; to disband his Corsican guard, and to erect
an obelisk at Rome bearing an inscription renting the offense and the
expiation therefor, as a memorial and a warning for the future.
Louis XIV. began the active part of his reign with designs upon the
integrity of the Spanish dominions, by annexing the Spanish-Nether-
lands and Franche-Comte to the crown of France ; and every act of the
early years of his reign was directed to the consummation of this
result. He encouraged the Portuguese, who had achieved their in-
dependence of Spain ; and he brought about the alliance of Portugal
with England by the marriage of Charles II. of England with the
Princess Catharine of Braganza, the daughter of King Alfonso VI. of
Portugal. Louis XIV. secured the good will of Charles II. of England
by purchasing Dunkirk from him by the payment of five million livres,
Louvois
as War
Minister.
Great
l-ubiic
Works.
French
Social
Influence.
Augusta/ >
Age of
French
Litera-
ture.
Louis
XIV.
Extorts
an
Humble
Apology
from
Philip
IV. of
Spain.
He Also
Forces an
Burnt le
Apology
Irom
Pcpe
Alexan-
der VII.
His
Agrres-
sive
Designs
against
Spain.
His
Alliance
with
Er gland
and the
Dutch
Republic.
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
His
Alliance
with the
Dutch
Republic
in Her
War with
England.
Peace of
Breda.
Claim of
Louis
XIV. to
Franche-
Comte
and the
Spanish
Nether-
lands.
Spain's
Resist-
ance and
Louis's
Assertion.
French
Conquest
of the
Spanish
Nether-
lands.
in November, 1662. Louis XIV. also contracted an offensive and de-
fensive alliance with the Dutch Republic, thus preventing Holland from
espousing the cause of Spain against him.
The operations of Louis XIV. were delayed by a war between his
English and Dutch allies, which broke out in 1664. Holland appealed
to the French king as her ally for aid against England. The King
of France was reluctant to go to war with the King of England, and
sought to mediate between the belligerent powers. When Louis XIV.
found it impossible to accomplish anything in the way of mediation he
sent six thousand French troops to assist the Dutch, and declared war
against England in January, 1666, as noticed in the preceding chapter.
The Bishop of Minister, England's subsidized German ally, ravaged
Holland on the east, until the French king and the German allies of
the Dutch Republic forced him to lay down his arms. The war was
mainly fought at sea between the English and Dutch fleets, and was
ended by the Peace of Breda, July 31, 1667, England restoring to
France all the places in North America and the West Indies which
she had wrested from her during the struggle.
Before the close of the war just mentioned, Louis XIV. had
astonished all Europe by a sudden march into the Spanish Netherlands.
King Philip IV. of Spain had died in September, 1665, and had been
succeeded on the Spanish throne by his only son, Charles II., the issue
of a second marriage. Louis XIV. at once claimed the whole Spanish
Netherlands and Franche-Comte, on the plea that his wife, Maria
Theresa, who was the child of the first marriage of Philip IV. of Spain,
had a superior claim to that of Charles II. of Spain, who was the issue
of his father's second marriage.
The Spanish court, under the regency of the widow of Philip IV.,
the mother of Charles II., refused to acknowledge the French king's
claim, and reminded Louis XIV. of his wife's relinquishment of all her
pretensions to the Spanish dominions at the time of her marriage.
Louis XIV. replied that this relinquishment on his wife's part was
conditional upon her dowry, and that, as this dowry had never been
paid, her surrender of her claims was null and void.
The French king cut short the argument by marching his army
under Marshal Turenne into the Spanish Netherlands, May 24, 1667.
This French army overran the province of Flanders with very little
opposition. Most of the towns submitted to the invaders upon the
first demand, though Lille only surrendered August 28, 1667. Louis
XIV. made a sudden pause in his career of conquest by concluding a
truce of three months with the Spaniards, and returned to Paris.
The ambitious designs and the rapid success of the King of France
excited alarm throughout all Europe; and England and Holland,
WAR OF LOUIS XIV. WITH HOLLAND AND HER ALLIES.
2983
after ending their own war with each other, resolved to put an end to
his territorial aggrandizement. Accordingly, a treaty known as the
Triple Alliance was signed at The Hague between England, Holland
and Sweden, January 23, 1668. These three Protestant powers agreed
to mediate a peace between Roman Catholic France and Roman Cath-
olic Spain, and to force a settlement between them by threatening war
in case of their refusal. They engaged to induce Spain to cede all
the places which the French had already conquered, on condition that
Louis XIV. should promise to relinquish his claim upon the Spanish
dominions in right of his wife.
Before Louis XIV. had been officially informed of the conclusion of
the Triple Alliance he had sent an army of twenty thousand men under
the Prince of Conde into Franche-Comte, and this French army
overran that Spanish province in fifteen days. Well satisfied with this
brilliant military exploit of the Prince of Conde, Louis XIV. consented
to the Peace of Aix la Chapelle, which was signed May 2, 1668 ; Louis
XIV. retaining all his conquests in the Spanish Netherlands, but restor-
ing Franche-Comte after all its fortresses had been dismantled by the
French troops ; while the three powers which had concluded the Triple
Alliance, along with the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany and the
German princes, guaranteed the integrity of the remainder of the
Spanish dominions.
Triple
Alliance
of
England,
Holland
and
Sweden.
French
Conquest
of
Franche-
Comte.
Peace of
Aix la
Chapelle.
SECTION IV.— WAR OF LOUIS XIV. WITH HOLLAND
AND HER ALLIES (A. D. 1672-1679).
THOUGH the Triple Alliance ended one war, it led to another of far
greater dimensions. The Dutch Republic was now at the height of her
power and glory; being the protectress of the power which by her
heroic struggle for independence she had contributed most to humble,
while being also the successful rival of England in the dominion of
the seas, as well as the deliverer of Denmark from the ambitious grasp
of Sweden. Holland was thus able to interpose a formidable barrier to
the ambitious career of Louis XIV. himself ; but the " Grand Mon-
arch " was resolved upon revenge upon the powerful little republic
which had originated that Triple Alliance which had so suddenly cut
short his conquest of the entire Spanish dominion in the Netherlands.
As the champion of absolute royal power, Louis XIV. cherished a
special hatred toward the Dutch Republic because she afforded a gener-
ous asylum to all exiles from civil or religious tyranny.
Louis's Ministers, Louvois and Colbert, encouraged their king's de-
sign by telling him that he could never reduce the Spanish Netherlands
YVL. 9— IS
Griev-
0*i^jg
XIV.
t^^utch
Republic.
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
His
Secret
Treaty
with
Charles
II. of
England.
German
Allies
and
Enemies
of Louis
XIV.
Alliance
of Spain
with the
Dutch
Republic.
France
and
England
at War
with the
Dutch
Republic.
French
Invasion
of
Holland.
Dutch
Alarm.
until he had humbled and subdued Holland. He accordingly proceeded
to break up the Triple Alliance, and succeeded in buying off the un-
principled Charles II. of England, who agreed to desert his allies in
consideration of an annual subsidy of three million francs, the posses-
sion of the island of Walcheren and two fortresses on the Scheldt in
case of the conquest of Holland. The unscrupulous King of England
also agreed to aid the King of France with a force of six thousand men
and fifty ships of war, and to become a Roman Catholic and to do all
in his power to restore that faith as the state religion of England;
Louis XIV. promising to aid him with French troops and French
money.
By bribery, Louis XIV. also secured the neutrality of Sweden and
the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany, and the active alliance of the
Archbishop-Elector of Cologne and the Bishop of Miinster. But
Frederick William, the Great Elector of Brandenburg, was the faithful
ally of Holland ; while the Archbishop-Electors of Mayence and Treves,
the Elector of Saxony and the Margrave of Baireuth entered into a
league to oppose the ambitious designs of the French king and to
defend the independence of the German Empire.
Holland stood almost alone against the rest of Christendom ; but in
December, 1671, Spain, after being delivered from the corrupt and
incompetent Jesuit Prime Minister, Niethard, and anxious to check the
alarming increase of the French power, concluded an alliance with
the Dutch Republic, which had reduced her to such deplorable weak-
ness, but which had so recently saved her from the ambitious grasp of
the King of France. William, Prince of Orange, then twenty-one
years of age, was created Captain-General of the forces of the Dutch
Republic for the first campaign.
France and England declared war against Holland at very nearly
the same time in the spring of 1672, and equally without honorable
cause. In April of that year Louis. XIV., with an army of two hun-
dred thousand men, directed by the great genius of the Prince of
Conde and Marshal Turenne, crossed the Lower Rhine at three points,
and in the course of a few weeks overran the territories of the Dutch
Republic, occupying the provinces of Guelders, Utrecht and Overyssel
and part of the province of Holland. At the head of the main division,
the French king was attended by Louvois, his Minister of War, and
by Vauban, his famous military engineer. For the first time the bayo-
net, so terrible a weapon in French hands, and named from the city of
Bayonne, where it was first made, was affixed to the end of the musket.
The Dutch, who could at most raise an army of only thirty thou-
sand men, were for the moment paralyzed with dismay at this gigantic
invasion. So utterly helpless were they rendered by terror that it was
WAS OF LOUIS XIV. WITH HOLLAND AND HER ALLIES.
2983
said that " every man seemed to have received sentence of death." In
the forlorn hope of securing what yet remained of the Dutch Re-
public, the Grand Pensionary, or Prime Minister of Holland, offered
the most abject terms of peace. But Louvois induced his king to
reject these terms; and so haughty and insulting was the reply of
Louis XIV. that it aroused a storm of indignation against the Grand
Pensionary, John De Witt, and his brother, the Admiral Cornelius De
Witt, that both were assassinated by a furious mob in the streets of the
Dutch capital, thus bringing about a revolution which resulted in
elevating the young Prince William of Orange to the head of the
Dutch Republic with the offices of Stadtholder, Captain-General and
Admiral for life with dictatorial powers.
Prince William of Orange proceeded vigorously to arouse his
countrymen to a more determined spirit of resistance. He proposed to
the States-General that, rather than yield to the insolent demands of
the French king, the entire Dutch nation — men, women and children —
should abandon their country, embark on board their fleet, with such
movable property as they could take with them, and sail to their
possessions in the East Indies, where they should seek new homes ; so
that the Dutch Republic thenceforth would have existed in tropical
regions on the other side of the g^be.
But, through the genius and determination of Prince William of
Orange, the tide soon turned in favor of the Dutch, whose navy was
able to hold its own in struggles with the united fleets of France and
England. The advance of the French army in the Dutch territories
was arrested by opening the dykes around Amsterdam by the orders of
William of Orange, thus laying the country under water and enabling
the Dutch fleet to approach the capital and to assist in its defense.
Thus the Dutch gained valuable time to prepare for defense against
the invaders.
The Emperor Leopold I. of Germany offered to aid the imperilled
Republic on certain conditions, notwithstanding his .promised neu-
trality; and Frederick William, the Great Elector of Brandenburg,
also entered into an alliance with the Dutch. A German imperial army
of forty thousand men under the Italian general Montecuculi marched
to the Rhine ; but the masterly movements of the French under Mar-
shal Turenne prevented this imperial army from effecting a junction
with the Dutch forces under the Prince of Orange. The Great Elector
of Brandenburg lost patience and retreated to his own dominions,
pursued by Marshal Turenne as far as the Elbe. The diversion
afforded the Dutch some relief, though it did no more for them.
The freezing of the canals early in 1673 enabled a French army of
thirty thousand men under the Duke of Luxemburg to invade Holland,
Assassi-
nation
of the
De Witts.
William
of Orange.
His
Scheme
of Mi-
gration
to the
East
Indies.
Amster-
dam
Saved by
Opening
the
Dykes.
Emperor
Leopold I
and the
Great
Elector
of Bran-
denburg
Come to
Holland's
Rescue.
298G
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
French
Opera-
tions in
Holland
and in
Alsace.
Allied
Successes
and
French
Evacua-
tion of
Holland.
Peace of
West-
minster
between
England
and
Holland.
French
Conquest
of
Franche-
Comte.
First
French
Desola-
tion
of the
Palat-
inate.
French
Conquest
of Alsace.
Battle of
Seneffe.
but a sudden thaw forced this army to retreat without accomplishing
anything. The French took Maestricht and Treves in 1673 ; and dur-
ing the same year Louis XIV. in person occupied the ten imperial
cities of Alsace, the prefecture of which had been granted to him by
the Peace of Westphalia, and reduced them to absolute subjection, com-
pelling them to renounce the privileges guaranteed to them by that
treaty.
A closer alliance between the Dutch Republic, the German Empire
and Spain now threatened France with a general European war. The,
Prince of Orange captured Naarden after a siege of twelve days, and
effected a junction with the German imperial army under Montecuculi,
notwithstanding Marshal Turenne's effort to prevent it. The capture
of Bonn by the allies, after a short siege, gave them command of the
Rhine, and forced the French to evacuate Holland early in 1674, thus
rescuing the Dutch Republic from the ambition of the " Grand
Monarch," who, of all his conquests, retained only Grave and Maest-
richt.
For some time the English people and Parliament had been anxious
to put an end to the degrading alliance which King Charles II. had
entered into with Louis XIV., and they finally forced their king to
make peace with the Dutch Republic. By the Peace of Westminster,
in February, 1674, England and Holland restored the conquests which
they had made from each other during the war. Sweden now re-
mained as the only ally of the King of France.
The seat of war was now entirely changed. In May, 1674, Louis
XIV. invaded Franche-Comte, and reconquered that Spanish province
by the 1st of July. This time he intended to hold on to his conquests
in that region.
With an inferior French force, Marshal Turenne drove the German
imperial army from Alsace, and ravaged the Palatinate* of the Rhine
with fire and sword. At one time the Elector-Palatine beheld from his
castle windows at Mannheim two cities and twenty-five villages on fire.
He was so incensed at the sight that he challenged Marshal Turenne
to fight a duel, but the marshal declined the challenge by his king's
command. Later in the year 1674 the imperialists gained some ad-
vantages in Alsace, but Marshal Turenne again drove them across
the Rhine and secured Alsace permanently for France. The Eng-
lish colonel, John Churchill — afterward so famous as the Duke of
Marlborough — served under Marshal Turenne in this campaign.
In Flanders the French under the Prince of Conde fought a severe
but indecisive battle with the Prince of Orange at Seneffe, August 11,
1674 ; but the campaign in that quarter closed to the general advantage
of the allies.
WAR OF LOUIS XIV. WITH HOLLAND AND HER ALLIES.
2987
In 1675 Louis XIV. again crossed the Rhine with a powerful army
under Marshal Turenne ; but that great French general was killed by
a cannon-ball at Salzbach, July 27, 1675, while reconnoitering for a
battle which was never to take place. After a bloody battle at Alten-
heim, the French army was driven back across the Rhine. Turenne's
remains were honored with a magnificent funeral, and were buried in
the Abbey at St. Denis amid those of the Kings of France.
The Prince of Conde succeeded to Marshal Turenne's command, as
the only man in France capable of executing the dead hero's plans with
credit. The Prince of Conde found that the German imperial army
under Montecuculi had crossed the Rhine at Strassburg and were be-
sieging Haguenau. He compelled them to raise the siege and arrested
their progress, but he followed Turenne's tactics by refusing to be
drawn into a general engagement. The imperialists under Montecuculi
finally evacuated Alsace and retired into winter-quarters at Spires.
The Prince of Conde and Montecuculi, enfeebled by age and disease,
resigned their respective commands, and both retired to private life.
In 1676 the war was chiefly fought at sea; and the French fleet
under Admiral Duquesne defeated the Dutch fleet in the Mediterranean
in three naval battles off the coast of Sicily, in the second of which
the heroic Dutch Admiral De Ruyter was mortally wounded He had
risen from the humble condition of a cabin boy to be one of the greatest
admirals in Europe. The ungrateful and bigoted French king re-
proached the heroic Duquesne for being a Protestant. The blunt
admiral replied: " When I fought for Your Majesty I never thought
of what might be your religion." His son, being driven in exile for
being a Huguenot, carried his father's bones with him, as he was re-
solved not to leave them in an ungrateful country. •
In 1677 the French army under the Duke of Luxemburg laid siege to
Valenciennes, and the town was speedily taken through the skillful
operations of the great engineer Vauban. The towns of Cambray and
St. Omer were soon afterward taken also ; and the Duke of Luxemburg
defeated Prince William of Orange, who was marching to the relief of
St. Omer, at Cassel, April 11, 1677. On the Rhine during the same
year the French under Marshal de Crequy defeated the German im-
perial troops under the Duke of Lorraine at Kochersberg, near Strass-
burg, and took the city of Freiburg, -November 16, 1677.
Prince William of Orange, the Stadtholder of the Dutch Republic,
was the consistent, lifelong opponent of Louis XIV. ; and their relative
positions in the European States-System were almost the same as those
of Queen Elizabeth of England and King Philip II. of Spain a cen-
tury before. The English Parliament was ardently in favor of the
Prince of Orange ; but King Charles II. had just sold himself afresh to
5—30
Death of
Marshal
Turenne.
Battle of
Alten-
heim.
German
Imperial
Invasion
of Alsace
and
Retreat.
Retire-
ment of
Conde
and
Monte-
cuculi.
Admiral
Du-
quesne's
Three
Victories
over the
Dutch
Fleet.
His
King's
Ingrati-
tude.
The
Dnke of
Luxem-
burg's
Victories.
French
Victories
on the
Rhine.
William
of Orange
and Louis
XIV.
2988
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS TJV.
England's
Alliance
with the
Dutch
Republic.
P^ace of
Nime-
guen.
Spain's
Cessions
tc France.
Louis
XIV. and
Lorraine.
Power
and
Glory of
Louis
XIV.
the King of France for a pension of two hundred thousand livres, and
promised not to enter into any alliance without that king's consent.
Nevertheless, the King of England was forced, by the voice of his Par-
liament and people, to declare war against France and to confirm his
alliance with Holland by the marriage of his niece Mary, daughter of
his brother James, Duke of York, with William of Orange. This
marriage took place October 23, 1677, William having gone to Eng-
land to secure the alliance of that country; and an offensive and de-
fensive alliance was concluded between England and Holland in De-
cember of the same year, 1677.
England and Holland agreed to force Louis XIV. to accept terms
of peace. While the negotiations which had been going on at Nime-
guen, in Holland, since 1675 were still in progress the French king
seized the cities of Ghent and Ypres, thus gaining the power to dictate
his own terms. At the same time the Prince of Orange obtained con-
clusive evidence that King Charles II. of England was still in secret
alliance with the King of France. Thereupon the Dutch envoys re-
solved to accept the terms of peace offered by Louis XIV. and to
conclude a separate treaty with him regardless of their allies, although
these allies had come to Holland's rescue in her distress.
Accordingly the Peace of Nimeguen was concluded between France
and Holland, August 14, 1678 ; France retaining the Dutch settle-
ments in Senegal, in Africa, and Guiana, in South America, which had
been conquered by her arms during the war. Spain signed the treaty
September 17, 1678 ; ceding to France the province of Franche-Comte
and that part of Flanders afterward known as French Flanders, con-
taining eleven towns, among which were the four fortresses of Valen-
ciennes, Cambray, Ypres and St. Omer; so that Spain was the chief
loser by the war. The Emperor Leopold I. signed the treaty February
5, 1679, thus restoring peace between France and the German Empire
and finally ending this bloody war.
Louis XIV. offered to restore Lorraine to its duke only on condition
of granting to the French king four military roads, each half a
league wide, from France into Germany ; but the duke chose voluntary
exile for life from his hereditary estates in preference to such humiliat-
ing terms.
The Peace of Nimeguen was the culminating point of the power and
glory of Louis XIV. The citizens of Paris solemnly conferred upon
him the title of the Great, and erected the triumphal arches of the
Porte St. Martin and the Porte St. Denis in his honor. He was the
most powerful monarch in Europe; and he was very much elated by
his triumphs, imagining that they were due to his merits. He con-
sidered himself the master of Europe as well as of France.
WAR OF LOUIS XIV. WITH HOLLAND AND HER ALLIE&
In September, 1681, Louis XIV. seized the imperial free city of
Strassburg and annexed it to the French crown ; and the engineering
skill of Vauban soon made it an impregnable fortress. So important
was this acquisition considered as a bulwark of France on her eastern
frontier that a medal was struck to commemorate the completion of the
work, bearing the inscription : " Clausa Germanis Gallia." Strassburg
remained in the possession of France until 1870, when it was recon-
quered by Germany.
Encouraged by his success, Louis XIV. continued his aggressions
upon Germany and also upon Spain. Twenty other towns were
wrested from the neighboring German princes; and regular Courts
of Reunion were instituted in France to ascertain what territories had
previously been dependent upon the annexed dominions. The French
king's aggressions excited the most intense indignation in Germany,
which was increased by his intrigues to secure a promise of the im-
perial crown at the next election.
Under the influence of Prince William of Orange, Holland, Sweden,
Spain and the German Empire jointly protested against the siege of
Luxemburg by the French army, and insisted upon a faithful execu-
tion of the Treaties of Westphalia and Nimeguen. This powerful
coalition had the effect of inducing Louis XIV. to desist from his
aggressions, and he found a pretext for his apparent moderation in the
siege of Vienna by the Turks in 1683. He declared that he would not
pursue his personal designs so long as Christendom was menaced by the
forces of Islam, but he secretly encouraged the Sultan in his attacks on
the territories of the Austrian House of Hapsburg.
The least insult offered to French ambassadors, or neglect of
etiquette, was certain to bring down signal vengeance upon the party
so offending. In 1682 and 1683 a French fleet bombarded Algiers —
a more justifiable action — and forced the pirates to beg for mercy
and to liberate their French and other Christian captives. In 1684
Genoa was also bombarded by the French navy for refusing to permit
Louis XIV. to establish a depot within its territory.
After the retreat of the Turks from Vienna in 1683, Louis XIV.
marched his troops into the Spanish Netherlands and siezed Courtray
and Dixmude. In the spring and summer of 1684 the French army
took Oudenarde and Luxemburg, dismantled Treves and menaced
Mons and Brussels. On August 15, 1684, France and Holland con-
cluded a truce for twenty years, and the Emperor Leopold I. of
Germany and King Charles II. of Spain acceded to this truce in the
course of a few weeks. By this truce Louis XIV. was permitted to re-
tain the free city of Strassburg, the province of Luxemburg and all
the towns which he had seized before August, 1681, but was forbidden
Seizure
of Strass-
burg by
Louis
XIV.
Hia
Seizure of
Twenty
Other
German
Towns.
Coalition
against
Louis
XIV.
His
Instiga-
tion
of the
Turkish
Siege of
Vienna.
French
Naval
Bombard-
ments of
Algiers
and
Genoa.
Seizure
of Towns
in the
Spanish
Nether-
lands
by Louis
XIV.
Truce
Treaty
2990
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Tempo-
rary
Truce.
to advance any additional claim upon the territories of the German
Empire.
This was merely a temporary settlement, as the powers which the
French king had despoiled of their territories were thoroughly resolved
to make another effort to crush him. Though he was at the zenith of
his power and greatness, he had incurred the enmity of all Europe, and
had laid the foundation for the numberless troubles and mortifications
which clouded his later years.
Louis
XIV. and
His Mis-
tresses.
Madame
de Main-
tenon.
Her
Influence
over
Louis
XIV.
The
Hugue-
nots and
Their
Industry.
SECTION V.— LOUIS XIV. AND PERSECUTION OF THE
HUGUENOTS (A. D. 1683-1685).
DURING the earlier years of his reign Louis XIV. had abandoned
himself to the unrestrained indulgence of his licentious passions. He
openly insulted his queen by retaining mistress after mistress at his
court, and bestowing upon these dissolute women his affections for the
time. His first mistress was the beautiful and unfortunate Louise
de la Valliere, who bore him two children, after which she retired to a
convent, heart-broken and penitent, in 1674. The king's next mis-
tress was the Marchioness de Montespan, who held her place in the
king's affections for many years, bearing him eight children, all of
whom he legitimated.
Madame de Montespan selected Fran9oise D'Aubigne, the widow of
the comic poet Scarron, as governess for her children. Fran9oise
D'Aubigne was handsome and highly accomplished, attractive in man-
ner and endowed with great tact. Louis XIV. frequently saw her
while she was in charge of his children, and she acquired over him
an influence which she retained during the rest of his life. She after-
ward became Madame de Maintenon, and acted a conspicuous part in
the latter part of this king's reign, as we shall presently see. She had
many good qualities, but was a relentless bigot in religious matters,
and this quality made her the evil genius of France.
Madame de Maintenon professed to be shocked by the king's evil
ways, and proceeded to reform him. Louis XIV. was as superstitious
as he was licentious, and as cruel as he was superstitious. Madame
de Maintenon made use of these traits in the king's character to per-
suade him that the best atonement he could make for his evil life was
to destroy heresy in his kingdom.
At this time France contained about a million Huguenots, who had
become wealthy and prosperous under the wise protection of the Edict
of Nantes. They were sober, earnest and faithful, and had almost
monopolized the productive industry of France. Their silks, paper,
LOUIS XIV. AND PERSECUTION OF THE HUGUENOTS.
2991
velvet and other manufactured articles were the boast of the kingdom ;
and their efforts seemed about to make France the leading manufactur-
ing country of the world. They were skilled farmers and vine-dressers,
and wherever the land showed signs of the most skillful culture the
owner was certain to be a Huguenot.
The Huguenots were as celebrated for their integrity as for their
industry. A Huguenot's word was as good as his bond, and to be
" honest as a Huguenot " became a proverb. This characteristic of
integrity — an essential in a merchant who deals with foreigners whom
he never sees — was so conspicuous in the business transactions of the
Huguenots that they got the foreign trade of France almost exclusively
into their hands. The English and the Dutch were always more will-
ing to begin a correspondence with the Huguenot than with the Ro-
man Catholic merchants. Thus the foreign business of France came
almost wholly into the hands of Huguenot merchants at Bordeaux, at
Rouen, at Caen, at Metz, at Nismes and at the other great centers
of commerce in France. Colbert had fostered the industries of the
Huguenots, and had encouraged them to prosecute those industries in
every possible quarter.
The Jesuits and the Roman Catholic Church had always regarded
the tolerance shown to the Huguenots with great disfavor, and the
Jesuits had succeeded to some extent in renewing the persecutions of
the sixteenth century. The Huguenots had been treated with great
rigor for twenty years, and the king had been induced to look upon
them with open hostility, in spite of their great usefulness to the state.
The Jesuits now made use of the king's infatuation for Madame de
Maintenon, and obtained her aid by offering to favor the scheme upon
which her heart had been set.
Maria Theresa, the Spanish wife of Louis XIV., died in 1683; and
Madame de Maintenon resolved to marry the king. She carefully got
him under her influence, and accordingly proceeded to persuade him
that by extirpating heresy in his kingdom he could render adequate
satisfaction to Heaven for his past sins. The ill health of her royal
paramour materially aided her, and the king during his fits of illness
was anxious to quiet the remorse of conscience from which he suffered
because of the past sins of his dissolute life. Penance must be per-
formed, but not by himself. Says Sismondi : " Those who boasted of
having converted him had never represented to him more than two
duties — that of renouncing his incontinence, and that of extirpating
heresy in his dominions."
The king's confessor, the Jesuit Pere la Chaise, well seconded
Madame de Maintenon's efforts with the king. Under their influence,
Louis XIV. inflicted upon his Huguenot subjects all the horrors that
Their
Commer-
cial
Enter-
prise.
Jesuit
Instiga-
tion of
Religious
Persecu-
tion.
Louis
XIV.
Insti-
gated to
Persecu-
tion by
Madame
de Main-
tenon.
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Dreadful
Persecu-
tion
of the
Hugue-
not*.
The
Dragon-
nades.
Smiles's
State-
ment.
Marriage
of Louis
XIV.
with
Madame
de Main-
tenon.
bigotry could devise or that a fiendish cruelty could execute. In the
year of Colbert's death, 1683, the military executions commenced.
Life was rendered intolerable to the Huguenots. Every avocation was
closed against them, and they were given the alternative of abjuring
their religion or starving. Their churches were closed or destroyed.
Their pastors were forbidden to preach. Entire congregations of
Huguenots were massacred by the royal dragoons. Cruelty had full
sway from Grenoble to Bordeaux. In the Viverais and the Cevennes
the unfortunate Protestants were put to the sword, multitudes of them
being brutally massacred.
It was generally understood that a Huguenot was outside the pro-
tection of the laws, and that any one was at perfect liberty to maltreat
him at pleasure. Children were torn from their parents that they
might be educated in the Roman Catholic faith. The fiercest and
most brutal of the royal soldiery were let loose upon the defenseless
Huguenot communities. The horrors of the Dragonnades, as these
persecutions were called, are indescribable. Those who refused to ab-
jure Protestantism were put to death or imprisoned. Many yielded
and were " converted." In September, 1685, Louvois, the Minister of
War, wrote to King Louis XIV. : " Sixty thousand conversions have
been made in the district of Bordeaux, and twenty thousand in that of
Montauban. So rapid is the progress that before the end of the
month ten thousand Protestants will not be left in the district of
Bordeaux, where there were one hundred and fifty thousand on the
fifteenth of last month."
Says Smiles : " The farce of Louis's conversion went on. In
August, 1684, Madame de Maintenon wrote thus, ' The king is pre-
pared to do everything that shall be judged useful for the welfare of
religion. This undertaking will cover him with glory before God and
man.' The Dragonnades were then in full career throughout the
southern provinces, and a long wail of anguish was rising from the
persecuted all over France. In 1685 the king's sufferings increased,
and his conversion became imminent. His miserable body was begin-
ning to decay, but he was willing to make a sacrifice to God of what the
devil had left of it."
The Jesuits now made an agreement with Madame de Maintenon to
advise King Louis XIV. to marry her on condition that she should in-
duce him to revoke the Edict of Nantes. The infamous bargain was
carried out. Pere la Chaise counseled a secret marriage, and the cere-
mony was performed at Versailles by the Archbishop of Paris in the
presence of the confessor and two other witnesses. As the marriage
was never acknowledged, Madame de Maintenon's position at court re-
mained anomalous and equivocal ; but she exercised a supreme influence
LOUIS XIV. AND PERSECUTION OF THE HUGUENOTS.
£99*
over her royal husband, and immediately after her marriage she in-
duced him to revoke the Edict of Nantes.
The Revocation of the Edict of Nantes occurred October 17, 1685,
thus depriving the Huguenots of all the privileges which Henry IV.
and Louis XIII. had granted them. The exercise of the Protestant"
religion was absolutely prohibited throughout France, except in Alsace.
The Huguenot churches were ordered to be destroyed, and their pastors
were commanded to leave the kingdom within fifteen days. The
Huguenots themselves were forbidden to leave France on penalty of
confiscation of their property and penal servitude in the galleys. They
were required to embrace the Roman Catholic religion and to have
their children educated in that faith.
The Roman Catholic world greeted the Revocation of the Edict of
Nantes with rejoicings, but the cruel measure inflicted a death-blow
upon the prosperity of France. The fierce French soldiery and thou-
sands of foreign mercenaries were let loose upon the Huguenots
throughout France, and the most shocking atrocities were perpetrated.
These brutal dragoons invaded every Huguenot dwelling, from the
herdsman's hut to the noble's castle, and their occupants were subjected
to the greatest outrages. Men and women were murdered at their own
firesides. Little children were torn from the arms of their parents and
butchered in their presence. Wives and maidens were outraged amid
the ruins of their own homes.
The Huguenots were forbidden to bury their dead or to comfort their
dying. The bodies of those who died without the last offices of the
Roman Catholic Church were removed from their dwellings by the
public hangman, and cast into the common sewer. Those who re-
fused the viaticum when sick were punished, in case of recovery, with
the galleys or imprisonment for life and the confiscation of all their
property.
So severe was the persecution that hundreds and thousands of
Huguenots fled from France, in spite of the cruel laws against emigra-
tion. Thousands who attempted to escape were shot down by the
soldiers, and thousands of others were captured and sent to the galleys.
The purest and gentlest men were sent there and chained beside the
vilest criminals. Each galley had a Jesuit chaplain, who constantly
offered pardon to each captive Huguenot if he would renounce the
Protestant religion for the Roman Catholic faith. Notwithstanding
the sufferings of the captives, most of them remained true to their
religious convictions.
Altogether about two hundred thousand Huguenots fled from their
native land, and many thousands were massacred in the Dragonnades.
Among the exiles were some of the noblest names of France. Marshal
Revoca-
tion
of the
Edict of
Nantes.
Suffer-
ings and
Massa-
cres of
Hugue-
nots.
Hugue-
nots
Denied
Religious
Ministra-
tion and
Sepul-
ture.
Whole-
sale
Exodus
of Hugue-
nots.
Distin-
guished
Exiles.
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Ruin of
French
Industry.
Huguenot
Industry
in Other
Lands.
Liberality
of the
Great
Elector
of Bran-
denburg.
Schomberg, one of the talented commanders of Louis XIV., escaped
into Holland and entered the service of Prince Will? am of Orange.
Among the exiles were many distinguished literary men; such as
Basnage, Bayle, Jurieu, Lenfant, Beausobre, Saurin, Rapin and
others. Most of the refuges belonged to the industrial, commercial and
manufacturing classes.
This Huguenot exodus well-nigh destroyed the industry of France.
Lyons, Tours and Nantes were ruined. Lyons did not recover its
former prosperity for a century. Nantes has not yet recovered from
the losses which the bigotry of Louis XIV. thus inflicted upon it.
This bigotry was a severer blow to the prosperity of his kingdom than
all the costly wars which his ambition had kindled.
The industry which France had thus lost was transplanted to
Protestant countries; and thus England, Holland, Germany, Switzer-
land, and even the English colonies in North America, were enriched
by the skill and labor of these Huguenot exiles. They established new
branches of manufacture in those countries, and these have grown
steadily until the present time. Thus those countries gained what
France had lost, and that which is the most valuable source of wealth
that any country can possess — an enlightened, industrious and skill-
ful class of citizens.
Frederick William, the Great Elector of Brandenburg, distinguished
himself by his liberality to the twenty thousand Huguenot refugees who
settled in his dominions. He provided them with land, with building
materials and with capital for their manufactures ; and their industry
and diligence soon transformed the waste lands about Berlin into a
well-cultivated garden.
Louis
XIV. and
William
of Orange.
League
of Augs-
burg.
SECTION VI.— WAR OF LOUIS XIV. WITH THE GRAND
ALLIANCE (A. D. 1686-1697).
THE cruelties inflicted upon the Huguenots by their bigoted king
aroused the most inveterate hatred of Louis XIV. in all Protestant
Europe; and his great opponent, Prince William of Orange, soon per-
ceived the blunder which the " Grand Monarque " had committed, and
took full advantage of it. The position of William, who was uni-
versally considered the champion of the Protestant cause, as well as
the implacable foe of Louis XIV., was vastly improved.
Through William's exertions the powerful League of Augsburg was
formed in July, 1686, uniting the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany,
King Charles II. of Spain, King Charles XI. of Sweden and the
leading German princes, such as the Elector-Palatine and the Electors
WAR OF LOUIS XIV. WITH THE GRAND ALLIANCE.
2995
of Bavaria and Saxony, against the King of France. Holland did
not immediately join the league, as William's interests did not demand
that the illustrious Stadtholder should break with Louis XIV. just
then. He was secretly preparing to drive his father-in-law, King
James II., from the throne of England. He skillfully concealed his
designs from the King of France until it was too late for that monarch
to oppose them.
The affairs of Cologne and the Palatinate soon furnished a pretext
for hostilities. By means of French gold a partisan of Louis XIV.
was elected Archbishop-Elector of Cologne, while Pope Innocent XI.
and the League of Augsburg supported a Bavarian prince as a candi-
date for the office. The Duke of Orleans, the French king's brother,
had married the sister of the last Elector-Palatine belonging to the
House of Simmern. At her marriage this new Duchess of Orleans re-
nounced all feudal rights in the Palatinate, but retained her hereditary
claim to the movable property or allodial possessions of her family.
Louis XIV. now claimed all the artillery of the fortresses of the
Palatinate as " movables," and his lawyers interpreted the allodial
tenure so as to make it include almost the whole of the Palatinate.
The new Elector-Palatine, Philip William of Neuburg, appealed to
the Emperor Leopold I. ; and the alarm which the arrogant assump-
tions of the King of France excited gave a new importance to the
League of Augsburg.
The War of the League of Augsburg commenced in September,
1688, when Louis XIV. hurled his forces against Germany. A French
army of eighty thousand men under the command of the Dauphin
and Marshals Duras and Vauban invaded the Palatinate of the Rhine,
took Philipsburg after a month's siege, and captured Mannheim
shortly afterward. A French division under the Marquis de Boufflers
occupied the whole of the Palatinate of the Rhine west of that river;
and another French detachment under Marshal d'Humieres seized Di-
nant, in the bishopric of Liege.
Prince William of Orange took advantage of the French movement
against Germany by prosecuting his design against King James II. of
England, who had become thoroughly estranged from his subjects by
his arbitrary and illegal efforts to make Roman Catholicism the state
religion of England. The English nobility, gentry, clergy and people
turned their eyes toward the Prince of Orange, who, as we have seen,
was invited to come to England to defend liberty and Protestantism,
and with whom many of the most prominent men in England had been
negotiating for some time.
Louis XIV., in great anger, warned the Prince of Orange that any
attempt which he made against James II. would involve him in a war
Designs of
William
of Orange.
The
Cologne
and Pa-
latinate
Succes-
sions.
Claims
of Louis
XIV. to
the Pal-
latinate
Artillery.
French
Invasion
of the
Palat-
inate.
William
of Orange
and
James
II. of
England.
3996
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
William
of Orange
Made
King of
England
by the
Revolu-
tion of
1688.
William
Congratu-
lated by
Catholic
Sover-
eigns.
Second
French
Desola-
tion
of the
Palat-
inate.
Dreadful
Suffer-
ings in
Conse-
\uence.
Grand
Alliance
against
Louis
XIV.
with France; but the League of Augsburg kept the French king sa
closely occupied that he was unable to interfere with William's move-
ments against the King of England; and the Prince of Orange em-
barked unmolested in the expedition with which he landed in England,
thus giving the signal for the Glorious Revolution of 1688, which
hurled the usurping tyrant James II. from the English throne, and
which made William and his wife Mary joint sovereigns of England.
The deposed James II. and his queen and infant son found refuge in
France, where they were generously received and maintained by
Louis XIV.
So altered were the relations of European powers that such Catholic
sovereigns as Pope Innocent XL, the Emperor Leopold I. and King
Charles II. of Spain united in congratulating the Protestant Prince
William of Orange on his accession to the thrones of England, Scotland
and Ireland; and this event, by turning England, the former ally of
Louis XIV., into an enemy, imposed a serious check upon the French
king's extravagant ambition, which all Europe alike dreaded and pre-
pared to curb.
As Louis XIV. was unable to occupy the whole of the Palatinate of
the Rhine, he hearkened to the advise of his brutal Minister of War,
Louvois, and commanded his generals to ravage that beautiful district
with fire and sword; and the Rhenish Palatinate accordingly suffered
a desolation far more terrible than in the preceding war. More than
forty cities and hundreds of flourishing villages were reduced to ashes,
because the French could not garrison these towns. The important
cities of Mannheim, Heidelberg, Spires, Worms, Frankenthal, Oppen-
heim and Bingen were thus burned; and the beautiful country became
a blackened desert, as the farms, orchards and vineyards were likewise
laid utterly waste.
Such of the unfortunate inhabitants as were able to emigrate took
refuge in other countries ; but over a hundred thousand peasantry
wandered helpless amid the ruins of their dwellings, imploring the curse
of Heaven upon the merciless French king who had been the cause of
their sufferings. Their cruelties aroused the most intense hatred of
the French in the hearts of the German people — a hatred which has
not yet died out.
The- Emperor Leopold I. of Germany now declared war against
Louis XIV., denouncing him as the enemy of Christendom; and such
was the effect of the cruelties of the French that a Grand Alliance was
formed against the King of France, consisting of England and Hol-
land under William of Orange, Charles II. of Spain, Duke Victor
Amadeus II. of Savoy, the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany and the
German princes who had formed the League of Augsburg. England,
WAR OF LOUIS XIV. WITH THE GRAND ALLIANCE.
under the vigorous government of King William III., was the head
of the Grand Alliance.
The generals on the side of France in this war were the Duke of
Luxemburg, Marshal Catinat and the great engineer Vauban. The
leading commanders of the forces of the allies were William III. of
England and Holland, Prince Eugene of Savoy, the Earl of Marl-
borough and the Dutch engineer Cohorn. The Duke of Lorraine, the
best general of the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany, died in 1690, and
was succeeded in the command of the imperial armies by the Elector
Maximilian Emanuel of Bavaria.
After the formation of the Grand Alliance the allies placed three
armies in the field to oppose the French. The first of these armies,
under the Prince of Waldeck, entered the Spanish Netherlands, and de-
feated the French under Marshal D'Humieres at Walcourt and drove
them back from the line of the Sambre. The second allied army,
under the Duke of Lorraine, and the third, under the new Elector
Frederick III. of Brandenburg, at once marched to the Rhine and took
Mayence and Bonn ; after which they retired into winter-quarters in the
Palatinate, which still was able to furnish them subsistence in spite of
the barbarous ravages to which it had been subjected by the French.
In Italy the French under Marshal Catinat defeated the Duke of
Savoy at Staffarda, August 18, 1690 — a severe blow to Louis XIV.
in that quarter.
In order to weaken England by aiding James II. in his efforts to
recover his lost throne, Louis XIV. sent James to Ireland with a
French force in March, 1689 ; and in the summer of 1690 a French
fleet of seventy-eight ships-of-the-line under Admiral Tourville at-
tempted to make a descent upon England in the interest of James II.,
and defeated the English and Dutch fleet under Admiral Herbert, Earl
of Torrington, off Beachy Head, on the southern coast of England,
June 30, 1690. The Dutch sustained the brunt of this engagement
with great bravery, but the English admiral is said to have held aloof
because he was disloyal to King William III. and secretly in the inter-
est of James II.
The allied fleet was obliged to retire and to seek the shelter of the
Thames, and for some time there were fears in England of a French
invasion ; but these fears were dispelled by King William's victory
over the fallen James II. in the decisive battle of the Boyne, in Ire-
land, July 1, 1690, the day after the naval battle off Beachy Head.
James II. returned to France; and when Ireland was reduced to sub-
mission in 1691 the French forces evacuated the island, many of the
Irish going with them and afterward doing good service to King
Louis XIV.
French
Generals.
Allied
Generals.
Allied
Annies
in the
Spanish
Nether-
lands, the
Palat-
inate and
Italy.
French
Army in
Ireland.
French
Naval
Victory off
Beachy
Head.
Battle
of the
Boyne and
French
Evacua-
tion of
Ireland.
£998
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Marshal
Luxem-
bourg.
Battle of
Fleurus.
Capture
of Mons
by Louis
XIV.
Death of
Louvois.
At-
tempted
French
Invasion
of
England.
French
Naval
Defeat
off the
Isle of
Wight.
French
Naval
Defeat off
Cape La
Hogue.
Siege and
Capture
of Namur
by Louis
XIV.
Early in 1690 Louis XIV. appointed the Duke of Luxemburg to
the command of the French army in the Spanish Netherlands, and this
commander became famous as Marshal Luxembourg. He forced a
passage of the Sambre in spite of the resistance of the Prince of Wai-
deck, and defeated that general in the great battle of Fleurus, June
30, 1690, the very day of the French naval victory over the Anglo-
Dutch fleet off Beachy Head.
In the spring of 1691 the French army under Louis XIV. in persori
captured Mons, one of the strongest fortresses in the Spanish Nether-
lands, after a siege of nine days. In the summer of the same year
Louvois, the able but brutal French Minister of War, died; but none
regretted his death, except King Louis XIV., who found himself at
great loss to find one to fill his place.
In May, 1692, a French army of thirty thousand men, largely com-
posed of British exiles, was assembled at various points on the coast
of Normandy — at Havre, Cherbourg and Cape Le Hogue — to invade
England and replace James II. on the throne of that kingdom. This
force was commanded by James himself and Marshal Belief on ds, and
was to be conveyed to the English coast by a French fleet of forty-
four ships-of-the-line under Admiral Tourville.
No sooner was Admiral Tourville ready to embark the troops de-
signed to make a descent on the English coast than he was ordered by
his king to attack the English and Dutch fleet of ninety-nine ships-of-
the-line under Admiral Russell, which had entered the English Channel.
Though Admiral Tourville did not expect victory against such odds,
he obeyed his king's order without the slightest hesitation, and thus
attacked the Anglo-Dutch fleet off the Isle of Wight, May 19, 1692,
but was defeated and forced to retire at night.
Most of Tourville's shattered fleet sought shelter in the roadstead of
Cape La Hogue, where they were stranded with their broadsides to the
victorious foe. There they were attacked by the pursuing English
ships of Admiral Russell's victorious fleet and totally destroyed, May
23, 1692. James II. viewed the engagement from the nighboring
cliffs, and could not refrain from expressing his admiration of the
valor of the English sailors, though the result of the battle put an end
to his hopes of recovering his lost crown. Louis XIV. was so dis-
heartened by the loss of his fleet that he abandoned the cause of James
II., who passed the remainder of his life in pious seclusion at the palace
of St. Germains, near Paris.
While his navy was thus destroyed, the King of France was more
fortunate on land. On May 25, 1692, he in person laid siege to
Namur, the strongest fortress in the Spanish Netherlands. Vauban's
engineering skill was irresistible, and the fortress surrendered June 5,
WAR or i.oris xiv. WITH THE GRAND ALLIANCE.
2091)
1692. William III. of -igland and Holland in the meantime had
marched to the relief of the " oieaguered fortress, at the head of an
allied army of seventy thousand !on, but was prevented from crossing
the Sambre by the French aimy under Marshal Luxembourg. William
attacked Marshal Luxembourg at Steinkirk, in the province of Hain-
ault, July 24, 1692, but as rep'ilsed with heavy loss after an obstinate
battle, and forced to ^etreat to Brussels.
King Villiam III. beg^n the campaign of 1693 by endeavoring to
draw the French aiuty under King Louis XIV. in person into an en-
gagement near Louvain ; but the French king declined to meet his
great adversary in the open field, and abruptly left his army and sent
a portion of it into Germany — an act which so weakened his military
prestige that he did not afterward appear in person at the head of
an army.
King William III. was defeated by the French army under Marshal
Luxembourg in the bloody battle of Neerwinden, July 29, 1693, thus
leaving the French in the ascendency in the Spanish Netherlands ; but
William conducted his vcireat with such skill that his antagonists said
that he was more formidable in defeat than others in victory.
On October 4, 1693, the French army in Piedmont under Marshal
Catinat defeated the Duke of Savoy in the battle of Marsaglia ; and
the French army in Spain under the Duke of Noailles captured Rosas,
in the province of Catalonia.
The French fleet under Admiral Tourville attacked and defeated an
English fleet under Admiral Sir George Rooke in Lagos Bay, on the
southern coast of Portugal, June 27, 1693, thus capturing four Eng-
lish men-of-war and forty of the richly-laden English and Dutch
merchantmen which the English fleet was convoying toward Smyrna.
English commerce suffered greatly from the depredations of French
privateers. In South America the French squadron under Commodore
de Pointis surprised the rich city of Carthagena, inflicting a loss of
thirty millions upon the Spaniards; while another French squadron
under Duguay-Trouin captured a Dutch fleet on its way from Bilbao.
France had now been engaged for seven years in a constant and
ruinous war with the Grand Alliance; and Louis XIV. was anxious
for peace, being conscious of the fact that his resources were com-
pletely exhausted. " The people were perishing to the sound of Te
Deums." In the language of Fenelon, Louis XIV. " had made France
a vast hospital." The French finances had greatly fallen into dis-
order since Colbert's death, in 1683. The French peasantry had been
largely drafted into the armies, and the lands were left uncultivated.
Taxes upon industry had eaten up the very sources of revenue, while
the kingdom was burdened with an enormous debt.
VOL. 9—13
Battle of
Steinkirk.
Military
Retire-
ment of
Louis
XIV.
Battle of
Neer-
winden.
French
Victories
in Italy
and
Spain.
French
Naval
Victory
in Lagos
Bay.
Other
French
Naval
Victories.
France's
Exhaus-
tion.
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Louis
XIV.
and the
Spanish
Succes-
sion,
Failure
of His
Efforts
for Peace.
Recap-
ture of
Namur by
William
III. of
England.
The Duke
of Savoy
Detached
from the
Grand
Alliance.
Peace of
Ryswick.
Its Con-
cessions
to
England
and
Spain.
Louis XIV. had a still stronger motive for peace in his views con-
cerning the Spanish succession, as the childless Charles II. of Spain
vras evidently near the end of his life. For a long time Louis XIV.
had an understanding with the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany, who,
like himself, was a first cousin and a brother-in-law of the Spanish king.
As the French king could not realize his hope respecting a partition
of the Spanish dominions if the death of Charles II. should occur while
all Europe was in arms against France, Louis XIV. sought the media-
tion of Pope Innocent XII. and of Kings Christian V. of Denmark and
Charles XI. of Sweden; offering ample concessions for the sake of
peace. William III. of England and Holland and the Emperor Leo-
pold I. of Germany were well aware of the exhaustion of their great
antagonist, and opposed and neutralized all his efforts, so that the
war went on four years longer. French armies renewed their devasta-
tions in the Rhineland, while French privateers continued prejdng upon
English and Dutch commerce.
Marshal Luxembourg, the ablest of the French commanders in this
war, died at Versailles, January 4, 1695, at the age of sixty-seven.
He was succeeded by Marshal Villeroi, who began his military career
by allowing King William III. to recapture the strong fortress of
Namur, thus giving the allies the ascendency in the Spanish Nether-
lands and producing a marked improvement in their fortunes. As
this was the first conquest wrested from Louis XIV., the allies felt
greatly encouraged.
Louis XIV. still became more anxious for peace, and proceeded to
break up the Grand Alliance. By restoring Pignerol, in Piedmont,
and Nice and the other possessions which the French had wrested from
the House of Savoy, the French king succeeded in inducing Victor
Amadeus II., Duke of Savoy, to desert the Grand Alliance and to sign
a treaty of peace and alliance with France, May 30, 1696, thus weaken-
ing the allies to that extent.
Sweden offered her mediation for a peace. The Emperor Leopold
I. of Germany was most averse to a treaty with the King of France,
but when England and Holland intimated that they would conclude a
separate treaty with Louis XIV. the Emperor finally consented to
negotiate. The plenipotentiaries of all the belligerent powers met at
the little village of Ryswick, in Holland, in May, 1697. After four
months of negotiation, the Peace of Ryswick was concluded between
France, England, Holland and Spain, September 30, 1697. Louis
XIV. bound himself to acknowledge William III. as the rightful King
of England, Scotland and Ireland, and to render no further assistance
to the exiled James II. Louis XIV. also restored to Spain the French
conquests in the Spanish province of Catalonia, and also some of
WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION.
3001
the French acquisitions in the Spanish Netherlands, such as the duchy
of Luxemburg and the towns of Charleroi, Mons, Ath and Cambray.
The next month, October, 1697, the Emperor Leopold I. of Ger-
many acceded to the Peace of Ryswick by reluctantly signing a treaty
with France, by which he recovered all the imperial territory which
Louis XIV. had wrested from him since the Peace of Nimeguen, in
1678, except the city of Strassburg, which France still retained. Duke
Leopold of Lorraine was restored to his parental inheritance; and the
Duchess of Orleans renounced all her claim to the Palatinate upon the
payment of a sum of money from the new Elector-Palatine; while
Joseph Clement of Bavaria was confirmed in the dignity of Archbishop-
Elector of Cologne.
The terms of the Peace of Ryswick were humiliating to Louis XIV. ;
but the exhausted condition of his kingdom, and his anxiety to have his
hands free upon the approaching vacancy of the Spanish throne,
allowed him no other alternative than to accept them. This treaty re-
leased England forever from French influence and made her the chief
counterpoise to France in the European States-System. The last war
of Louis XIV. was that of the Spanish Succession, in the early part
of the eighteenth century, which involved the great powers of Central
and Western Europe, and which will be described in the next section.
Its Con-
cessions
to
Germany.
Humilia-
tion of
Louis
XIV.
England's
Elevation.
SECTION VII.— WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION
(A. D. 1701-1714).
FOR the next three years after the peace of Ryswick, in 1697, all
Europe watched the declining health of the childless King Charles II.
of Spain, the last of the dynasty of the Spanish Hapsburgs. His
kingdom appeared almost as near dissolution as himself, suffering from
a bankrupt treasury and the general neglect of public discipline;
while famine, earthquakes, hurricanes and inundations were adding to
the misery of the wretched country, which but a century before had
been the leading power of Europe.
In case of the death of Charles II. the throne would have been
claimed by three princes, all of whom derived their claims from the
daughters of Charles's father, King Philip IV. The elder daughter,
Maria Theresa, as we have seen, was the first wife of Louis XIV. The
younger daughter, Margarita, had married the Emperor Leopold I.
According to the law of hereditary succession, the eldest daughter was
clearly entitled to the Spanish dominions; but the Spaniards pleaded
her renunciation of all her claims upon her marriage with the French
king as debarring her issue from the inheritance of the Spanish
Charles
II. of
Spain
and the
Spanish
Succes-
sion.
Three
Claim-
ants
for the
Spanish
Throne.
3002
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Archduke
Charles
of Austria
and the
Electoral
Prince of
Bavaria.
First
Partition
Treaty
of Louis
XIV. and
William
III.
Bavarian
Electoral
Prince as
Spanish
Heir and
His Sus-
picions
Death.
Second
Partition
Treaty
of Louis
XIV. and
William
III.
Will of
Charles
II. of
Spain
in Favor
of Philip
of Anjou.
dominions. Louis XIV., however, asserted that this relinquishment
had been rendered null and void because the dowry on which it de-
pended had never been paid, and that therefore the claims of his first
wife's children were valid.
The Emperor Leopold I. of Germany claimed the Spanish throne
for his second son, the Archduke Charles of Austria, as the child of
his wife, the younger daughter of Philip IV. of Spain. The third
claimant to the Spanish inheritance was the little Electoral prince of
Bavaria, whose mother was the daughter of the Emperor Leopold I.
and his wife, the Empress Margarita. King Charles II. of Spain and
his subjects considered the little Bavarian prince the rightful heir.
Louis XIV. did not expect to secure the success of his claim with-
out difficulty, but he hoped to obtain at least a part of the Spanish
dominions by continuing his intrigues, and for this purpose he nego-
tiated a treaty with William III. of England and Holland in October,
1698, for the partition of the Spanish dominions, upon the death of
Charles II. of Spain ; by which Spain and her possessions in America
and the Netherlands were to be assigned to the Electoral prince of
Bavaria ; while France was to have the Kingdom of Naples and Sicily,
certain specified sea-ports in Tuscany and the province of Guipuzcoa ;
and the Duchy of Milan was to be given to the Archduke Charles of.
Austria, the Emperor Leopold's son.
Notwithstanding the precautions of the contracting parties, Charles
II. of Spain received information of this insolent attempt for the
partition of his dominions without consulting him; and, incensed at
this action, he at once, by a solemn act of succession, declared the youth-
ful Electoral prince of Bavaria the sole heir to the Spanish dominions ;
but that little prince soon afterward died suddenly at Brussels, Feb-
ruary 6, 1699, not without suspicion of having been poisoned at the
secret instigation of the Austrian Hapsburgs.
In 1700 Kings Louis XIV. and William III. signed a new parti-
tion treaty, assigning Lorraine and all the Spanish possessions in Italy
except Milan to the Dauphin, while Spain itself was allotted to the
Archduke Charles of Austria on condition that it should never be
united with the German Empire. The Duke of Lorraine was to have
Milan in exchange for his hereditary duchy. If the Emperor Leopold
I. of Germany rejected this arrangement Spain was to be bestowed on
a third party.
Greatly irritated at the King of France, King Charles II. of Spain
made a will acknowledging the Archduke Charles of Austria as his heir
and successor to all the Spanish dominions; but the Spanish nobles,
corrupted by the gold of Louis XIV., induced King Charles II. to
make a new will, by which Duke Philip of Anjou, grandson of the
WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION.
3003
King of France, was appointed successor to the whole Spanish inherit-
ance. Charles II. died November 1, 1700; and, after some hesitation,
Louis XIV. adopted the last will. When the Duke of Anjou started
for Madrid to take possession of the throne of Spain, with the title of
PHILIP V., the French monarch said to him: "There are no more
Pyrenees."
In December, 1700, Philip of Anjou was welcomed at the Spanish
capital with acclamations, and most of the European powers hastened
to acknowledge his title to the crown of Spain. The interference of
the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany was delayed by symptoms of a
Hungarian rebellion and by disturbances in the North of Germany
caused by the creation of the ninth Electorate — that of Hanover under
the Guelfs, the House of Brunswick-Wolfenbiittel.
All seemed for the time to favor the French king's interests, and by
a conciliatory policy he perhaps might have secured the advantages
which he had gained. The other European powers were greatly averse
to a general European war, and did not appear disposed to support
the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany in his efforts to place his son, the
Archduke Charles of Austria, upon the Spanish throne. In England
the Tories, who were opposed to war, came into power in place of the
Whigs, who were ready to go to war with the French king to drive
Philip of Anjou from the throne of Spain.
The Emperor Leopold I. of Germany opposed the last will of
Charles II. of Spain, and listened to the advice of his great general,
Prince Eugene of Savoy, who represented to him that the German
Empire could never be secure while the French held entrances to it
through Northern Italy on the south and the Spanish Netherlands on
the west.
By the Treaty of the Crown, concluded at Vienna with the Elector
Frederick III. of Brandenburg, who coveted the title of King of
Prussia, the Emperor Leopold I. acquired a powerful ally without cost.
The splendor-loving Elector Frederick III. considered the outward
magnificence surrounding the court of Versailles the greatest triumph
of earthly majesty, and attached the highest importance to a splendid
court and magnificent feasts. He considered a royal crown the most
inestimable of all worldly possessions, and therefore looked with envy
upon the Elector of Saxony, who had been elected King of Poland, and
upon the Elector of Hanover, who had become heir-apparent to the
crown of England in accordance with the Act of Settlement passed by
the English Parliament in 1701. Great was the joy of Frederick III.
when the Emperor Leopold I. showed a disposition to confer upon him
the royal title, in return for his assurances of vigorous support in the
impending war.
5-31
Philip of
Anjou in
Madrid.
Elector-
ate of
Hanover.
Peaceful
Attitude
of the
European
Powers.
Prince
Eugene's
Advice to
Emperor
Leopold I.
Treaty
of the
Crown
between
Leopold I.
and the
Elector
of Bran-
denburg.
3004
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Frederick
I., First
King of
Prussia.
A. D.
1701-
1713.
His Coro-
nation.
His
Patron-
age of
Art and
Science.
Prussia's
Military
Character.
German
Imperial
Army
under
Prince
Eugene
of Savoy
in Italy.
England
Insulted
by Louis
XIV.
By the Treaty of the Crown, already alluded to, the Emperor Leo-
pold I. engaged to recognize the royal dignity of the Elector of
Brandenburg, in consideration of certain aids to be rendered in the
field, the Imperial Diet and the Electoral Council; and the Elector
Frederick III. hastened to Konigsburg, where he was solemnly crowned
the first King of Prussia^ with the title of FREDERICK I., January
18, 1701.
In the magnificent ceremony of coronation, King Frederick I.
placed the crown of Prussia upon his own head and upon the head of
his wife; and, after a succession of splendid banquets, he held a
magnificent entry into Berlin, which he made the capital of the new
Kingdom of Prussia, and which he attempted to render a suitable resi-
dence for royalty by public buildings, pleasure grounds and monu-
ments of art.
The first King of Prussia encouraged the arts and sciences. In his
country-seat of Charlottenberg, where his highly-accomplished queen,
Sophia Charlotte, held her gracious rule, there was always an assem-
blage of distinguished and intellectual people. Societies for the culti-
vation of the arts and sciences were established at Berlin, under the
auspices of the great philosopher Leibnitz ; while a flourishing univer-
sity arose at Halle.
The new Kingdom of Prussia, from the necessity of its position,
assumed from its very beginning that military character which has
ever since distinguished it. In consequence of the energetic war policy
of the Great Elector Frederick William of Brandenburg — the father
of the first King of Prussia — the new kingdom was raised by a pro-
gressive military organization to a rank among the great powers of
Europe.
With such powerful aid, the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany re-
solved upon war with the King of France, and accordingly sent a large
army to Italy under his great general, Prince Eugene of Savoy, who,
as we have already seen, was a Frenchman by birth and had gained
great renown in the wars against the Ottoman Empire. After mass-
ing his army near Trent, Prince Eugene crossed the Tyrolese Alps
and descended upon the plain of Lombardy, in May, 1701. He de-
feated the French army under Marshal Catinat, and the German im-
perial troops occupied the entire region between the Adige and the
Adda. Prince Eugene defeated Marshal Villeroi, Catinat's successor,
still more signally at Chiari and Cremona.
While this petty war between France and Germany was in progress,
Louis XIV., by one imprudent act, provoked a powerful combination
against himself. On the death of the exiled James II., in 1701, Louis
recognized his son as King of England, with the title of James III.,
WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION.
3005
after having promised not to do so. This act of the French king was
regarded by England as . > national insult ; and King William III.
found his Parliament and people, who before had been averse to Eng-
land's participation in a Continental war, ready to second all his views.
The most earnest and extensive preparations for war were now made
by England.
The English Parliament immediately voted liberal supplies for the
war, with the petition that " no peace shall be made with France until
His Majesty and the nation have made reparation for the great indig-
nity offered by the French king." Several months afterward the Eng-
lish Parliament also passed an " Act for abjuring the pretended Prince
of Wales."
The Dutch were also alarmed by the expulsion of their garrisons
by the French from several towns in the Spanish Netherlands which
had been guaranteed to Holland as a frontier on the side of France.
Thus several great European nations were ready to combine against
the King of France when the favorable moment should arrive.
Accordingly a Second Grand Alliance was formed against Louis
XIV. by the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany, King Frederick I. of
Prussia, the Elector-Palatine, England and Holland. As in the First
Grand Alliance, William III., King of England, Scotland and Ireland,
and Stadtholder of Holland, was the soul of the Second Grand Alliance
against the French monarch. His death, March 8, 1702, made no
change in this respect; as his successor on the throne of England,
Queen Anne, declared her determination to adhere to her illustrious
predecessor's war policy.
An English army under the famous general, John Churchill, Earl of
Marlborough, was sent to Holland. By a peaceful revolution in the
Dutch Republic, the office of Stadtholder was abolished, and was suc-
ceeded by a more purely republican government supported by the De
Witts. Heinsius, Grand Pensionary of Holland, firmly adhered to the
policy of the Prince of Orange, and had the chief voice in the affairs
of the Dutch Republic. Heinsius along with the Earl of Marlborough
and Prince Eugene constituted the Triumvirate of the Second Grand
Alliance.
The Elector of Bavaria and his brother, the Archbishop-Elector of
Cologne, entered into an alliance with the King of France. England,
Holland and the German Empire declared war against France and
Spain in May, 1702. Thus began the War of the Spanish Succes-
sion, which for twelve years convulsed Southern and Western Europe.
In his former wars Louis XIV. had generally triumphed over his
enemies, but during the whole course of the War of the Spanish Suc-
cession he suffered a continuation of the most calamitous defeats. He
England's
Warlike
Action.
Dutch
Alarmed
by Louis
XIV.
Second
Grand
Alliance
against
Louis
XIV
Constitu-
tional
Change
in the
Dutch
Republic.
France's
Allies.
War
Declared.
French
Defeats.
SOOG
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Allied
Generals.
French
Generals.
The Earl
of Marl-
borough.
Parties in
England.
Victories
of the
Earl of
Marlbor-
ough in
1702.
Events in
Germany,
Italy and
Spain in
1702.
Earl, now
Duke of
Marlbor-
ough.
no longer displayed the vigor and energy for which he had been
before noted.
The great generals on the side of the allies were the Earl of Marl-
borough, who was soon created Duke of Marlborough, the commander
of the English forces, and Prince Eugene of Savoy, the famous com-
mander of the German imperial troops. The ablest of the French
generals was Marshal Villars. The other French commanders were
Marshals Villeroi, Catinat, Boufflers, Marsin and Tallard, and the
Dukes of Vendome, Burgundy and Berwick — the last of whom was an
illegitimate son of the ill-fated King James II. of England.
The Earl of Marlborough was a great statesman as well as a great
general^ and was the most prominent political leader in England dur-
ing the whole period of the War of the Spanish Succession, being the
great upholder of the war policy. Both parties in England at first
supported the war — the Tories because it was waged by a Tory gen-
eral, and the Whigs because it was waged in the interest of a Whig
policy.
The English and Dutch made the territory of Cologne their first ob-
ject of attack. In the campaign of 1702 the skillful maneuvers of the
Earl of Marlborough forced the French army under Marshal Boufflers
and the Duke of Burgundy to abandon the entire line of the Meuse,
and compelled the towns of Kaiserswerth, Venloo, Stephanswerth and
Ruremonde to surrender in succession. Finally, the Earl of Marl-
borough took Liege by storm, October 28, 1702. This brilliant cam-
paign raised the Earl of Marlborough to the first rank among Euro-
pean generals and vastly increased England's influence in European
affairs.
On the Upper Rhine the German imperial army under Prince Louis
of Baden took Landau in September, 1702. In Northern Italy, during
the year 1702, a French force under the Duke of Vendome gained the
battle of Luzara over the Austrians. In Piedmont the German im-
perial army under Prince Eugene conducted a campaign against the
French and Spanish forces under King Philip V. During the year
1702 the united fleets of England and Holland were repulsed in an
attack upon the Spanish port of Cadiz ; but they succeeded in destroy-
ing in the Bay of Vigo the entire Spanish West India fleet laden with
the treasures of gold and silver from Spanish America, October
22, 1702.
As a reward for his brilliant services in the campaign of 1702, the
Earl of Marlborough was created Duke of Marlborough. In 1703 he
completed the conquest of the entire Electorate of Cologne, while the
allied forces also took Limburg and Guelders. In Germany, during
the same year, the French king's ally, the Elector of Bavaria, repulsed
WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION.
300'
a twofold invasion of his dominions and seized Ratisbon. A French
army under Marshal Villars crossed the Rhine and effected a junction
with the Elector of Bavaria in the valley of the Danube.
The Austrian forces were then diverted by Count George Ragotzky's
formidable insurrection in Hungary, which continued until 1711 ; and
the Elector of Bavaria might have taken Vienna had he not postponed
his attack until the season was too far advanced. The Elector instead
undertook the conquest of the Tyrol, and seized Innsbruck; but he
was driven out of that mountain country by the brave Tyrolese, who
rose en masse to resist his invasion. In the meantime the French on the
Rhine had taken Breisach, defeated the German imperial army at
Spirebach and recaptured Landau.
The German imperial army now invaded Bavaria in two columns
and menaced Munich. By a skilful maneuver, the French army under
Marshal Villars interposed between these two imperial columns, and de-
feated the column under Count Styrum at Hochstadt, September 20,
1703. Marshal Villars again urged the Elector of Bavaria to invade
Austria, but the Elector refused to venture upon so bold a movement,
whereupon Villars asked his king to relieve him of his command, and he
was succeeded by Marshal Marsin. Soon afterward the Elector of
Bavaria endeavored to carry out the plan of Marshal Villars ; but it was
too late, as the decisive moment had passed away and a golden oppor-
tunity was thus lost.
The advantages which Marshal Villars gained for France were lost
by the defection of Duke Victor Amadeus II. of Savoy, who, offended
because he did not receive the command of the French and Spanish
forces in Italy, now deserted the cause of his son-in-law, King Philip
V. of Spain, and joined the Second Grand Alliance, October 25, 1703,
thus cutting off the communication between France and Italy. King
Pedro II. of Portugal was also indxiced to enter into a perpetual alliance
with England and Holland, through the efforts of the Admiral of
Castile, who considered himself slighted by King Philip V. of Spain.
These accessions so emboldened the allies that they now not only pushed
the claims of the Austrian Archduke Charles in Italy and the Spanish
Netherlands, but resolved to substitute him for the Bourbon Philip of
Anjou on the throne of Spain itself.
While the tyranny of the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany had
caused a rebellion of his Protestant Hungarian subjects under Count
George Ragotzky in 1703, religious persecution drove the Huguenots
of the region of the Cevennes to rebellion against the bigoted and
tyrannical King Louis XIV. during the same year, 1703 ; and the re-
bellion was suppressed with difficulty in 1704 by Marshal Villars, who
had been sent into that mountain region after his return from his
Cam-
paign of
1703.
Unsuc-
cessful
Bavarian
Invasion
of the
Tyrol.
Opera-
tions in
Bavaria.
Marshal
Villars
and the
Elector of
Bavaria.
The
Grand
Alliance
Joined
by the
Duke of
Savoy
and the
King of
Portugal.
Protest-
ant
Rebell-
ions in
Hungary
and
France.
3008
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Cam-
paigns
of 1704
in Italy
and .
Portugal.
Capture
of
Gibraltar
by Sir
George
Rooke.
Its Per-
manent
Impor-
tance to
England.
The Duke
of Marl-
borough's
Invasion
of
Bavaria.
His
Junction
with
Prince
Eugene.
Battle of
Blenheim.
French
Retreat
from
Germany.
campaign in Germany; but tranquillity was not fully restored until
1710.
In 1704 the French regained their communication with Italy by re-
conquering the northern part of Piedmont, but they encountered
serious reverses in every other quarter during the year. The Arch-
duke Charles of Austria, with the assistance of an English and Dutch
army under the Earl of Peterborough, landed in Portugal; but his
advance into Spain was checked by the French army under the Duke
of Berwick, the illegitimate son of the ill-fated James II. of England.
' The English fleet under Admiral Sir George Rooke accidentally
gained possession of the strong rocky fortress of Gibraltar, in the
South of Spain, August 4, 1704. It had been weakly garrisoned by
the Spaniards, who considered it impregnable on account of its great
natural strength. A party of English sailors from Rooke's fleet took
advantage of a holiday, when the eastern side of the fortress had been
left unguarded, by scaling that precipitous and almost inaccessible
height, while another party stormed the South Mole; and Admiral
Rooke took possession of the fortress in the name of the Queen of
England. This achievement was by far the most important to Eng-
land of any during the War of the Spanish Succession ; as Gibraltar
has ever since remained in her possession, and has been to her the key
to the Mediterranean sea.
In 1704 the seat of war was transferred to Germany, and the forces
of Austria and the German Empire were hard pressed by the French
and the Bavarians. The allied English and Dutch army under the
Duke of Marlborough was joined by the German imperial army under
Prince Louis of Baden near Ulm, in the duchy of Wurtemberg, and
took the heights of Schellenberg by storm, thus gaming an important
control of the Danube.
The allied army under the Duke of Marlborough crossed the Neckar,
June 4, 1704, and, forcing its way into Bavaria, succeeded in effect-
ing a junction with the German imperial army under Prince Eugene,
who had advanced from Italy. The united armies, numbering eighty
thousand men, won a brilliant victory over the combined French and
Bavarian army of eighty thousand men under Marshals Marsin and
Tallard and the Elector of Bavaria, at the small village of Blenheim,
near Hochstadt, August 13, 1704. The victorious English and Ger-
man imperialists lost thirteen thousand men, while the vanquished
French and Bavarians lost thirty thousand. Marshal Tallard was
taken prisoner; and all the French artillery, baggage and camp-equi-
page fell into the hands of the victors.
The disastrous issue of this battle compelled the French to fall back
to the west side of the Rhine and to evacuate Germany. They were
OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION.
3009
pursued across the Rhine by the victors ; and the Duke of Maryborough
took Treves and several other towns, and fixed his advanced posts upon
the Saar. All the fortresses of Bavaria were surrendered to the Ger-
man imperial troops, except Munich, which was dismantled; and the
Elector of Bavaria retained only his appointment of Governor-General
of the Spanish Netherlands, while his wife remained in Munich.
Thus the campaign of 1704 was favorable to the allies. The French
had been driven from Germany ; the English had gained possession of
the key to the Mediterranean ; and France was threatened with invasion
by the allied army on the Moselle.
The year 1705 was marked by the death of the Emperor Leopold I.
of Germany and the accession of his son JOSEPH I. to the hereditary
Austrian territories and to the imperial throne of Germany by the
choice of the Electors. The Hungarians under Count George
Ragotzky were still in revolt against the House of Hapsburg, and all
of Joseph's concessions did not induce them to cease their demand for
a return to their former elective constitution.
A rebellion in Bavaria was suppressed by force, and the Emperor
Joseph I. resolved to blot out that Electorate from the map of Ger-
many. Its territories were partitioned among several princes; the
Upper Palatinate being restored to the Elector-Palatine, from whose
dominions it had been separated since the Thirty Years' War.
In Northern Italy, during 1705, the French under the command of
the skillful Duke of Vendome gained many advantages over the Aus-
trians, and finally inflicted a severe defeat upon Prince Eugene at
Cassano. In Spain, during the same year, the French were forced
to raise the siege of Gibraltar; and the English under the Earl of
Peterborough took Barcelona, thus securing the allegiance of the
provinces of Catalonia and Valencia for the Archduke Charles of
Austria, who himself was present at the surrender of Barcelona, and
was hailed with acclamations as King of Spain.
The campaign of 1706 was a glorious one for the allies, who ac-
quired the supremacy in the Spanish Netherlands, in Italy and in
Spain. In the Spanish Netherlands the allied English and Dutch
armies under the Duke of Marlborough defeated the French army of
eighty thousand men under Marshal Villeroi in the decisive battle of
Ramillies, May 23, 1706, thus placing the provinces of Brabant and
Flanders in the possession of the allies. The Duke of Marlborough
also took the towns of Brussels, Antwerp, Ghent, Ostend, Menin, Den-
dermonde and Ath; and the Archduke Charles was proclaimed at
Brussels.
In Italy, during 1706, the French under the Duke of Orleans, the
nephew of Louis XIV., and Marshal Marsin laid siege to Turin ; but
Imperial
Occupa-
tion of
Bavaria.
French
Losses.
Emperor
Joseph I.,
A. D.
1705-
1711.
Hunga-
rian
Revolt.
Projected
Partition
of
Bavaria.
French
Victories
in Italy
in 1705.
English
Capture
of Bar-
celona.
The Duke
of Marl-
borough
in the
Spanish
Nether-
lands.
Battle of
Ran: lilies.
Pn^ce
Eugene
in Italy.
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Battle of
Turin.
Capture
of Madrid
by the
Allies.
Other
Events
in Spain
in 1706.
Offers
of Louis
XIV.
Battle of
Almanza.
Other
French
Victories
in Spain
in 1707.
Prince
Eugene
Forced to
Raise the
Siege of
Toulon.
Cam-
paigns
of 1707
in Italy,
Germany
and the
Spanish
Nether-
lands.
the German imperial army under Prince Eugene, after being joined
by the forces of that commander's cousin, Duke Victor Amadeus II.
of Savoy, advanced to the relief of the city, and defeated the French
so disastrously before the walls of the city, September 7, 1706, that
they were obliged to raise the siege and evacuate Italy. Thereupon
the Archduke Charles was proclaimed in Milan, and all Lombardy was
occupied by the victorious German imperialists.
In 1706 the province of Aragon also proclaimed the Archduke
Charles; and the allied English, Dutch and Portuguese armies under
Lord Galway advanced from Portugal and captured Madrid, after
Philip V. had fled from the city. But the Spanish people preferred
the Bourbon king to the Austrian Hapsburg, and rose against the
invaders, drove out the allied garrisons, and compelled the two allied
armies to retreat into Valencia. The English took Alicante and Car-
tagena, but the French under the Duke of Berwick recaptured the
latter town. During the same year Pedro II. of Portugal died, and
was succeeded by his son JOHN V.
Humiliated by these reverses, Louis XIV. offered to abandon the
whole Spanish inheritance, except the Italian possessions, to the Arch-
duke Charles ; but the allies demanded all, and so the war continued.
Fortune now smiled on the French arms in Spain. In the mean-
time Philip V. reentered Madrid in triumph amid the rejoicings of the
populace. The allied English, Dutch and Portuguese army under
Lord Galway was almost annihilated by the French army under the
Duke of Berwick in the decisive battle of Almanza, April 25, 1707, in
which the allies lost all their standards, baggage and artillery. There-
upon the provinces of Valencia and Aragon submitted to Philip V. ;
and the towns of Lerida and Ciudad Rodrigo — the former on the
frontier of Catalonia, and the latter on that of Portugal — were re-
captured by the victorious French and Spanish forces. But Barcelona
gallantly resisted the arms of Philip V. until the end of the war.
The allies were almost as unsuccessful in Northern Italy and in their
invasion of France. Prince Eugene and the Duke of Savoy led their
united armies into Provence and laid siege to Toulon, while the Eng-
lish fleet under Sir Cloudesley Shovel blockaded that great French port
by sea; but a French force under Marshal Tesse advanced to the
relief of the beleaguered city, and forced the allies to raise the siege
after they had lost ten thousand men.
In Southern Italy the whole Kingdom of Naples was conquered for
the Archduke Charles by a small German imperial army under Marshal
Daun during the same year, 1707. In the Spanish Netherlands dur-
ing that year the Duke of Marlborough was held in check by the
French army under the Duke of Vendome. On the side of the Rhine
WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION.
3011
the French under Marshal Villars performed the brilliant exploit of
forcing the lines of Stolhoffen, hitherto considered impregnable.
Though France was successful for the moment her situation was
yearly becoming more critical. The kingdom was exhausted by the
great expense of the struggle. Every mean's of raising funds had been
resorted to — " loans at ruinous rates of interest, the creation of new
and frivolous offices, assignments on the revenue of future years, vexa-
tious taxes, immense issues of paper money." Fresh embarrassments
followed each new expedient, and the French people were discontented,
so that murmurs were heard on every side. Chamillart, Minister
of Finance, was succeeded by Desmartes, Colbert's nephew ; but the
new Minister was unable to afford relief to the suffering nation. Louis
XIV. had well-nigh ruined the industry of France to gratify his
religious bigotry, and was now reaping the fruits of his unstatesman-
like policy.
Under political stress at home the Duke of Marlborough felt that
his future interests depended upon a vigorous campaign, especially as
the French under tke Duke of Vendome had by treachery gained
possession of Ghent and Bruges, thus regaining some of their lost
ground in the Spanish Netherlands. The Duke of Marlborough, at
the head of the English and Dutch army in the Spanish Netherlands,
was reinforced by the German imperial army under Prince Eugene ;
and the two great generals increased their military renown by their
brilliant victory over the French army under the Dukes of Vendome
and Burgundy at Oudenarde, on the Scheldt, July 11, 1708. Soon
afterward the allies took Lille from Marshal Boufflers after a long and
difficult siege, October 22, 1708, thus opening the way to Paris. They
also rescued Brussels from the Elector of Bavaria, and recovered Ghent
and Bruges, thus regaining all of Spanish Flanders and occupying
part of French Flanders.
In the Mediterranean during 1708 the English fleet under Admiral
Sir John Leake received the submission of the island of Sardinia to the
Archduke Charles of Austria, and established a British garrison at
Port Mahon. The islands of Majorca and Ivi£a had already declared
for the Archduke Charles.
These brilliant successes of the allies in the campaign of 1708 raised
their confidence to the highest pitch; and Lord Godolphin and the
Duke of Marlborough found the English Parliament willing to grant
additional supplies for the war, while the Dutch agreed to augment
their troops, and the German imperialists promised to show more
activity.
King Louis XIV. was disheartened by defeat, his treasury was ex-
hausted, and his counsels were distracted. In addition to her military
France's
Exhaus-
tion.
Marlbor-
ough and
Eugene
in the
Spanish
Nether-
lands.
Battle of
Oude-
narde.
Allied
Success
in the
Mediter-
ranean.
Elation
of the
Allies.
8012
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV,
Famine
and
Suffering
in France.
Insulting
Demands
of the
Allies.
French
Patriot-
ism.
Marlbor-
ough and
Eugene
in the
Spanish-
Nether-
lands.
Battle of
Mal-
plaquet.
Insolent
Demands
of the
Allies
again
Rejected
by Louis
XIV.
reverses, France was beginning to suffer the horrors of famine, caused
by the severity of the winter of 1708-'9, which froze the vineyards,
orchards and the grain already sown. Whole families of poor were
frozen to death in their miserable hovels. Even the Rhone was frozen
over, and the Mediterranean seemed almost transformed into a polar
sea. The misery of the French people produced a universal outcry for
peace throughout the kingdom, and the popular discontent manifested
itself in riots and other violent demonstrations.
Humiliated and chagrined, Louis XIV. was obliged to heed the out-
cry of his subjects for peace; but the allies, doubting his sincerity,
scornfully rejected his overtures, and demanded the most humiliating
terms as the price of peace — terms which he could not accept without
sacrificing his honor and dignity. They demanded that he himself
should aid them in driving his grandson Philip V. from the throne of
Spain. He refused to entertain such a proposition, and appealed to
the patriotism of his subjects to sustain him in another effort.
The haughty and insolent demands of the allies aroused the pride
of the French people, who, even in their distress, revolted at such in-
dignity, and resolved to support their king in continuing the war
rather than submit to such humiliation. The French king and many
of his nobles sent their plate to the mint, and by a series of vigorous
measures funds were raised for the expenses of the war during the en-
suing year, while the sum of thirty-five millions was obtained from the
Spanish West Indies.
In 1709 the able Marshal Villars was assigned to the command of
the French army in the Spanish Netherlands. The allied English,
Dutch and German imperial armies under the Duke of Marlborough
and Prince Eugene captured Tournay, and defeated the French army
of eighty thousand men under Marshals Villars and Boufflers in the
bloody battle of Malplaquet, September 11, 1709, in which Marshal
Villars himself was wounded and borne from the field, and his army fled
with the loss of ten thousand men, while the victorious allies lost
twenty thousand. The vanquished French army retreated in good
order to Valenciennes, and Marshal Villars wrote to his king that
another such defeat would secure France against the efforts of the
Second Grand Alliance. Mons surrendered to the allies immediately
after the battle, and was occupied by them.
In 1710 Louis XIV. again solicited peace, offering to make great
concessions to the allies. He even offered to recognize the Archduke
Charles as King of Spain, to furnish no more assistance to his grand-
son Philip V., and even to supply the allies with money to prosecute
the war against him. But the allied powers demanded that Louis
himself should send an army into Spain to assist in driving out his
WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION.
3013
grandson. This insulting demand Louis rejected with scorn, saying:
" If I must continue the war, I should rather fight against my enemies
than against my own grandson." The French people, who had
clamored for peace, shared the indignation of their monarch, and were
resolved not to submit to any such degrading and abjectly-humiliating
conditions.
Louis XIV. was much encouraged by the successes of his arms in
Spain during the year 1710. The campaign opened with the victories
of the Austrians under Count Stahremberg in the battles of Almenara
and Saragossa ; but afterward the entire English corps under Stanhope
was captured by the Duke of Vendome, after a severe battle at
Brihuega, December 9, 1710. The Duke of Vendome defeated Stah-
remberg at Villaviciosa, after a bloody battle of two days, December
11, 1710. These two great victories secured Philip V. on the throne
of Spain, and the Archduke Charles of Austria was driven from that
country.
Early in 1711 an event occurred which changed the views and
situation of all parties. This was the death of the Emperor Joseph I.
of Germany, and the accession of his brother, the Archduke Charles,
the competitor of Philip of Anjou, to the thrones of Austria and the
German Empire, with the title of CHARLES VI. The union of the
crowns of Spain and Germany, in the person of a prince of the House
of Hapsburg, was as alarming to the other powers of Europe as the
union of the crowns of Spain and France, under a prince of the
House of Bourbon.
Although both parties in England had at first supported the war —
the Whigs because it was a Whig war, and the Tories because it was
waged by a Tory general — the Tories gradually drifted away from the
Duke of Maryborough's war policy, and the great general and political
leaders was obliged to drift away gradually from the Tory party and
become the leader of the Whigs, who upheld his policy. The Eng-
lish people gradually grew weary of the war on account of the heavy
burden of taxation which it entailed, finding little compensation in a
struggle in which they bore the chief burdens while reaping few ad-
vantages, the chief of which was the military prestige of the Duke of
Maryborough's great victories.
The change of public opinion in England in opposition to the war
ultimately grew so strong that the Whigs were driven from power in
1711 and were succeeded in office by the Tories, who were now thor-
oughly opposed to the war. The leaders of the new Tory Ministry
were Robert Harley, Earl of Oxford, and Henry St. John, Viscount
Bolingbroke, who soon dissolved Parliament, and were sustained by the
election of a Tory majority in the new House of Commons.
French
Victories
in Spain
in 1710.
Death of
Emperor
Joseph I.
Emperor
Charles
VI., A D.
1711-
1740
The Duke
of Marl-
borough
and War
Politics
in
England.
Political
Change in
England.
3014
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Disgrace
of the
Duke of
Marlbor-
ough.
Peace
Negotia-
tions.
Successes
of
Marshal
Villars.
Domestic
Afflictions
of Louis
XIV.
Peace of
Utrecht.
The Duke of Mariborough, who had so nobly sustained the military
honor of England in this war, fought his last campaign in 1711, during
which he carried the intrenched camp of Marshal Villars at Arleux
and captured the strongly-fortified town of Bouchain. Being accused
of prolonging the war unnecessarily for his own personal and private
benefit, and being charged with avarice and corruption in enriching
himself in army contracts, he was censured by a vote of the House of
Commons and deprived of his military command and of all his civil
offices, and was succeeded in his command by the Duke of Ormond,
who had secret orders not to fight. The disgraced general and political
leader at once retired into voluntary exile from his native land.
The new Tory Ministry of England soon entered into secret peace
negotiations with France, and a preliminary treaty between England
and France was signed at London in October, 1711. Through the
influence of England under her Tory Ministers, conferences for peace
opened at Utrecht, in Holland, as early as January, 1712. Eighty
plenipotentiaries of the allied powers met the three French envoys, but
negotiations progressed very slowly, through the opposition of the
Dutch and German imperial ambassadors.
The interests of France in the peace congress at Utrecht were
materially improved by the brilliant successes of Marshal Villars, who,
in the campaign of 1712, totally outgeneraled Prince Eugene, de-
feated and captured an allied force under the English Duke of Albe-
marle at Denain, July 24, 1712, and recovered Douay, Le Quesnoy and
Bouchain in quick succession, thus wresting from the allies all their
acquisitions in the North of France.
In the meantime Louis XIV. met with many sad domestic afflictions.
His only legitimate son, the Dauphin, died in April, 1711 ; leaving
three sons — the Duke of Burgundy, King Philip V. of Spain and the
Duke of Berry. The young Duke of Burgundy succeeded his father
as heir to the crown of France. His wife, Adelaide of Savoy, who
was greatly beloved by Louis XIV. and his court, died of a malignant
fever in February, 1712; and her husband died of the same disease
six days later. Their eldest child, the youthful Duke of Brittany,
then became heir to the French throne, but also died three weeks later.
His brother, the little Duke of Anjou, the next heir to the French
crown, was a weak and sickly child; and in case of his death King
Philip V. of Spain would have become heir to the throne of France.
This threatened union of the crowns of France and Spain alarmed
the allied powers, and the Tory Ministers of England were obliged to
threaten that they would renew the war unless Philip V. of Spain re-
nounced his claim to the French crown, A. D. 1712. France and
Spain conceded this point, thus facilitating the conclusion of a defini-
WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION.
tive treaty of peace between France and England, to the great disgust
of the Dutch and the German Emperor. Finally, April 11, 1713,
the Peace of Utrecht was signed by the plenipotentiaries of France,
England, Holland, Spain, Portugal, Prussia and Savoy.
By the Peace of Utrecht, England and the other allied powers Terms
recognized Philip V. as King of Spain on condition that the crowns of
France and Spain should never be united; while Louis XIV. acknowl-
edged Queen Anne as the rightful sovereign of England and the
Elector George of Hanover as her rightful heir and successor. Eng-
land received the fortress of Gibraltar and the island of Minorca from
Spain, and Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and the Hudson's Bay Terri-
tory from France. The Dutch were allowed to garrison a line of
frontier fortresses in the Spanish Netherlands, as a barrier against
France. France recovered Lille and agreed to dismantle the fortifica-
tions of Dunkirk. Philip V. of Spain agreed to cede Milan, Naples,
the island of Sardinia and the Spanish Netherlands to the Austrian
Hapsburgs ; and he also ceded the island of Sicily to Duke Victor
Amadeus II. of Savoy with the title of king. The Duke of Savoy
recovered his lost territories, which were divided from the dominions of
France by the watershed of the Alps. The new Kingdom of Prussia
was recognized ; and Louis XIV. ceded to its king, as representative of
the House of Orange, the principality of Neuchatel, in Switzerland;
while King Frederick I. of Prussia relinquished his claims to the
principality of Orange.
The Emperor Charles VI. of Germany refused to accede to the Treaty French
of Utrecht, so that hostilities continued between France and the Ger- S^CT the
man Empire. In the campaign which followed, the French under German
Marshal Villars achieved brilliant successes in the Palatinate, defeating
the German imperial forces and capturing Spires, Worms, Landau
and Freiburg. These reverses of the imperial arms induced the Em-
peror Charles VI. to consent to peace, and a series of peace conferences
were held by Marshal Villars and Prince Eugene. When the two
great generals met in friendly conference for the first time, on this
occasion, Prince Eugene said to Marshal Villars : " We are not
enemies. Your enemies are at Versailles, and mine are at Vienna."
Accordingly the Peace of Rastadt was concluded between France Peace ot
and Austria, March 7, 1714. By this treaty the Austrian Haps- Raatadl
burgs received the Spanish Netherlands, the Duchy of Milan, the '
Kingdom of Naples and the island of Sardinia — all of which were
thus separated from the dominion of the King of Spain; while the
Emperor Charles VI. recognized Philip V. as King of Spain. By this
treaty the Emperor also allowed the exiled Electors of Bavaria and
Cologne to return to their dominions ; and Louis XIV. recognized the
vox. 9—14
3016
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Peace of
Baden.
France's
Deplo-
rable
Condi-
tion.
Exhaus-
tion
of the
French
Treasury.
Persecu-
tion
of the
Jansen-
ists.
Regency
and Suc-
cession.
new Kingdom of Prussia by acknowledging the royal title of FBED-
EEICK WILLIAM I., who became King of Prussia upon the death of his
father Frederick I., in 1713. The Peace of Baden, between France
and the German Empire, in September, 1714, finally ended the War
of the Spanish Succession. Thus, after a war which had been, on the
whole, disastrous to Louis XIV., that monarch obtained honorable terms
of peace; and the allied powers were punished for their former un-
reasonable and insolent demands.
Peace came none to soon for France, whose condition, in consequence
of the long and expensive wars occasioned by the ambition of her war-
like monarch, was at this time most deplorable. The public debt was
enormous, the nation was almost financially ruined, and the resources
of the kingdom were almost exhausted ; and nothing but a long period
of peace would enable the country to recuperate. The revenues were
mortgaged for many years to come, as the national credit was almost
destroyed. Agriculture, manufactures and all branches of industry
were reduced to the lowest state of depression. Bankruptcy was gen-
eral throughout France, while thousands of the laboring classes were
perishing by famine and disease. Such was the dear price paid by
Louis XIV. to seat a Bourbon on the throne of Spain, while that
kingdom was deprived by treaty of some of its most valuable foreign
possessions.
The great talents of Louis XIV. and his rich inheritance would havei
given him a leading power among nations in any case ; but his im-
moderate thirst for conquest made him the scourge of Europe, instead
of its benefactor. He was obliged to replenish his treasury, so drained
by his costly and ruinous wars, by resorting to the most oppressive
measures to wring supplies from his starving subjects.
Conscious of his failures and the worthlessness of the military glory
which he had cherished in his younger and more prosperous days,
Louis XIV. sought refuge in an abject superstition which inflicted
a final injury upon his kingdom. Influenced by his confessor, the
Jesuit Le Tellier, he bitterly persecuted the new Catholic sect of
Jansenists — the followers of Jansen — the steadfast opponents of the
moral, political and doctrinal system of the Jesuits.
The assistance which Louis XIV. rendered the Pretender James
Stuart in his invasion of Scotland in 1715, and the French king's
evasion of several other articles of the Peace of Utrecht, would prob-
ably again have broken the peace of Europe had the life of the
" Grand Monarque " been prolonged. But his health had been failing
for some time. Feeling that his end was approaching, he appointed a
Council of Regency under the presidency of the Duke 6f Orleans to
conduct the government during the minority of his great-grandson, a
FRENCH COLONIES IN NOKTH AMERICA.
3017
child of five years, who had become the heir to the French throne in
consequence of the death of the king's legitimate children and grand-
children. In order to provide for the succession in case of the little
prince's death, Louis XIV. caused his two sons by Madame de Montes-
pan — the Duke of Maine and the Count of Toulouse — to be legiti-
mated and placed in the line of succession.
Louis XIV. was soon seized with a violent fever; and on his death-
bed he addressed to his great-grandson and heir the following admoni-
tion, which was a condemnation of his own lifelong policy : " Live at
peace with your neighbors. Do not imitate me in my fondness for
war, nor in my exorbitant expenditure. Endeavor to relieve the people
at the earliest possible moment, and thus accomplish what, unfor-
tunately, I myself am unable to do." Louis XIV. died at Versailles,
September 1, 1715, at the age of seventy-seven years, and after a reign
of seventy-two years, or fifty-four from the expiration of the regency.
His great-grandson Louis XV. then began his long reign of fifty-nine
years, A. D. 1715-1774.
Illness
and Death
of Louis
XIV.
SECTION VIII.— FRENCH COLONIES IN NORTH
AMERICA (A. D. 1605-1763).
WMIUS the English were colonizing the Atlantic coast of North
America, r*rom New England to Georgia, the French were exploring
and settling the valley of the St. Lawrence, the shores of the Great
Lakes and the valley of the Mississippi. In 1605 the Huguenot De
Monts founded the first permanent French settlement in North America,
at Port Royal, ncrw Annapolis, in Nova Scotia; giving the terri-
tory, now known as Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, the name of
Acadia.
In 1608 Samuel CJiAtnplain, a Frenchman, founded the city of
Quebec, on the St. Lawrenoe river; and in the following year, 1609,
he discovered the beautiful lake, between the present States of Ver-
mont and New York, which bears his name. Champlain and his
followers allied themselves with the Huron and Algonquin Indians, and
defeated their foes, the Five Nations, of New York. Thenceforth the
Five Nations were the firm friends of the English and the bitter enemies
of the French.
In 1679 Jacques Marquette, a French Jesuit, and Louis Joliet, a
French Canadian, entered the Mississippi river from the Wisconsin, and,
in two birch-bark canoes, sailed down the great river to a point below the
mouth of the Arkansas. In 1682 Robert de La Salle, a French Cana-
dian officer, after exploring the shores of the Great Lakes, entered
French
on the
St. Law-
rence,
Great
Lakes
and the
Missis-
sippi.
Acadia.
Quebec
Founded
by
Samuel
Cham-
plain.
Indian
Wars.
The Mis-
sissippi
Explored
by Joliet;
Mar-
qnett*
and
La Sail*.
3018
FRANCE. AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
French
Settle-
ments
in the
Missis-
sippi
Valley.
Anthony
Crozat.
Missis-
sippi
Company.
New
Orleans.
Wars
with the
Natchez
and
Chick-
asaw
Indians.
French
Forts.
Jesuit
Mission
Stations.
the Mississippi from the Illinois, and sailed up the mighty stream
almost to its source, and then down to its mouth, and, naming the
entire Mississippi valley Louisiana^ in honor of his king, Louis XIV.,
claimed that extensive and fertile region for France.
In the latter part of the seventeenth century, and in the beginning
of the eighteenth, the French made settlements on the banks of the
Mississippi river, on the shores of the Great Lakes and on the coast
of the Gulf of Mexico. Kaskaskia, in the present State of Illinois,
was founded in 1683 ; Cahokia, also in the present Illinois, was founded
about the year 1700 or 1701 ; Detroit, in Michigan, in 1701 ; and
Vincennes, in Indiana, in 1705. In 1699 a company of French
colonists, headed by Lemoine d'Iberville, a French Canadian, settled
Biloxi, in the present State of Mississippi; and in 1702 most of the
settlers of Biloxi founded the city of Mobile, in the present Alabama.
In 1712 Louisiana was leased for a stated period to Anthony Crozat,
a wealthy French merchant, under whose auspices was built Fort
Rosalie — the beginning of the present city of Natchez, in Mississippi.
In 1767 Crozat relinquished his lease; and Louisiana was for fifteen
years under the control of the Mississippi Company, which the Scotch-
man John Law had organized in France. Bienville, the governor
sent to Louisiana by this Company, founded New Orleans in 1718.
In 1729 the Natchez Indians, exasperated at the threatened encroach-
ments of the French, fell upon the French settlement at Fort Rosalie,
massacred the men and carried the women into captivity. In revenge
for this outrage, a body of French troops almost exterminated the
Natchez the following year, 1730. A few years later the French
made two unsuccessful attempts to subjugate the warlike Chickasaws,
another powerful Indian tribe. The French built a chain of forts
between Montreal and New Orleans, the most important of which were
Detroit, erected in 1701 ; Niagara, in 1726, and Crown Point, in 1730.
The greater number of French settlements in the Mississippi Valley
and on the shores of the Great Lakes were simply Jesuit mission
stations and were widely scattered over a vast extent of country, and
were not flourishing colonial establishments like those of the English
on the Atlantic coast in the East. The Jesuits had great influence
with the Indian tribes of the interior of the North American continent,
and devoted their lives to the conversion of these savages to Roman
Catholic Christianity. Even such settlements as Kaskaskia and
Cahokia, on the Mississippi, within the domain of the present Illinois,
were simply Jesuit mission stations. Others were Sault Ste. Marie, in
the present Michigan, founded in 1668; St. Esprit, in the present
Wisconsin, founded in 1666. Other French settlements or mission
stations were those in the present Minnesota by Du Luth in 1678, by
SPAIN AND PORTUGAL IX THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.
Father Hennepin in 1680 and by Perrot at Lake Pepin in 1688 ; that
on the site of Dubuque, in the present Iowa, in 1686 ; that of Arkansas
Post, in the present Arkansas, in 1705 ; Green Bay, in the present
Wisconsin, in 1745 ; two in the present Missouri, St. Genevieve in 1755,
and St. Louis in 1764 ; and that by Julien Dubuque at Dubuque, in the
present Iowa, in 1788.
SECTION IX.— SPAIN AND PORTUGAL IN THE
SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.
PHILIP III., who became King of Spain upon the death of his father Philip
Philip II., September 13, 1698, was an insignificant monarch. Spain HI., of
had now entered fairly on her decline. The bigoted policy of Philip A. D.
II. had robbed his kingdom of its power and glory, and had laid the
foundations of its ruin. Still Spain was a great and formidable king-
dom for some time longer, but she rapidly declined during the seven-
teenth century.
Philip III. continued his bigoted father's policy of ruin. In 1609 Banish-
he issued an edict banishing the oppressed Moriscoes, or Christianized d^the
Moors, from Spain. As the export of gold from Spain was forbidden, Moors
the unfortunate Moriscoes were obliged to abandon most of their
property, which was siezed by the Spanish government. The exile of
the Moriscoes was conducted with the greatest cruelty. More than
one hundred and thirty thousand embarked for Africa, but ninety-
five thousand of these perished of hunger and exhaustion on the way.
One hundred thousand others sought refuge in France, but were per-
mitted to remain in that country only on condition of embracing
Roman Catholic Christianity, which they had just rejected in Spain.
They refused to do so, and were ordered to leave France. While wait-
ing for transportation so many died in the French ports and were
thrown into the sea that the fish were supposed to be poisoned.
By this cruel act Philip III. had dealt a fatal blow to the prosperity its
of his own kingdom. Miles of fertile fields that had been rich in the
olive and the vine lay waste for want of tillage; and Spain has not
yet recovered from the ruinous effects of the banishment of the Moris-
coes, which was to her what the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes was
to France.
Philip III. died in March, 1621, and was succeeded as King of Philip
Spain by his son PHILIP IV., who was then only sixteen years old, and jg^-
who was superior to his father in many respects. Under Philip IV. 1665.
the decay of Spain's greatness went on very rapidly. We have already
alluded to the part which Spain took in the Thirty Years' War in
5-32
90*0
P&ANCfl AND THE AOE OF LOUIS XIV.
Spain
in the
Thirty
Years'
War.
Revolts
in Biscay
and Cat-
alonia.
Fiench
Aid to
the Cat-
alonian
Rebels.
Success-
ful Revolt
of
Portugal
under the
Duke of
Braganza.
Portu-
guese
Declara-
tion of
Independ-
ence.
Revolt of
Naples
under
Masan-
iello.
Germany. She gained nothing by that struggle, all her earlier ad-
vantages having been wrested from her during the progress of the war.
While the war was in progress Spain was confronted with revolts
in Catalonia, Portugal and Naples.
The home forces of Spain were occupied for some time by the revolt
of the provinces of Biscay and Catalonia. The intolerable outrages
committed by a Spanish army quartered in those provinces during the
campaign of 1639— '40 against the French exasperated the inhabitants.
Bands of half -savage mountaineers, who were on their way to Barce-
lona to hire themselves out for labor in the fields, caught the fury ; and
by a sudden impulse all Castilians or foreigners in the city were
massacred. The Catalonian insurgents sent to all the European
powers a statement of their grievances against the Spanish government,
and by a formal treaty Louis XIII. engaged to provide a military
force to aid the Catalans. A Spanish army of twenty thousand men
was already on its march to the frontier of Catalonia, marking its route
by fire and blood; and the rebels soon transferred their allegiance to
France.
Spain suffered a more serious and permanent loss in the liberation
of Portugal, in 1640. During her sixty years' union with Spain,
Portugal had been oppressed, humiliated and impoverished by her
Spanish conquerors. Portuguese commerce with the East and West
Indies was crippled, the Portuguese navy was destroyed, and the Por-
tuguese people were crushed with taxes which defrayed the cost of erect-
ing unnecessary palaces for the Kings of Spain. When commanded
to march against the revolted Catalans the Portuguese nobles and
officers resolved to follow the example of those rebels. The Spanish
guards of Lisbon and the vice-queen's palace were cut down. The
Duke of Braganza, a descendant of the former Kings of Portugal,
was proclaimed King of Portugal with the title of John IV., thus
completing the revolution, A. D. 1640.
With the single exception of Ceuta, in North-western Africa, the
Portuguese colonies overpowered their Spanish garrisons ; and the Por-
tuguese Cortes which assembled at Lisbon in 1641 declared the right of
every nation to renounce the rule of a tyrant, even if he were a
legitimate sovereign, and not a usurper like the King of Spain. This
dynasty still reigns over Portugal, and a branch of it reigned over
Brazil while that country was an empire.
In 1647 Naples also revolted against Spain, the insurrection in that
Italian dependency of the Spanish Hapsburgs being under the leader-
ship of the fisherman Masaniello. Although Ferdinand the Catholic
and the Emperor Charles V. had promised the Neapolitans that no
taxes should be levied upon them without the consent of the Estates of
SPAIN AND PORTUGAL IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.
Naples, the Spanish kings were accustomed to disregard their promises,
as they looked upon their Italian possessions simply as an inexhaustible
source of revenue. The Spanish viceroy of Naples neglected to sum-
mon the Neapolitan Estates, and levied taxes at his own pleasure. All
the simplest necessaries of life were taxed heavily ; and in 1647 an im-
post was levied upon fruit, the chief article of food that hitherto had
escaped this burden. This caused the insurrection of the poor of
Naples, who had already suffered severely from the oppressive taxes.
Under the leadership of the young Amalfi fisherman Masaniello, the
insurgents of Naples obtained possession of the city of Naples, burned
the custom-house and forced the viceroy to take refuge in the Castle
of St. Elmo. About the same time the inhabitants of Palermo rose in
arms against the Spanish viceroy of Sicily. The viceroy of Naples
succeeded in gaining over many of the rebels by promises which he
never intended to fulfill, and caused their leader Masaniello to be
assassinated, thus ending the revolt.
Another revolt broke out at Naples in August, 1647. The rebels
compelled Don John of Austria, the illegitimate son of King Philip
IV. of Spain, to recall his army after several days of street-fighting;
but they appeared utterly helpless since the assassination of Masaniello,
in whom they reposed the most implicit faith. They selected Gen-
naro Annesi for their leader, and by his advice they invited the Duke
of Guise to place himself at their head and to assist them in founding
a republic.
The Duke of Guise came promptly, as he expected to recover the
possessions of the House of Anjou, from which he was descended; but
the Neapolitans soon saw through his design and became discontented.
The duke mortally offended Gennaro Annesi, who gratified his revenge
by betraying the city to the Spaniards, thus ending the revolt. The
Spaniards executed Gennaro Annesi and many others of the popular
party, and crushed the spirit of the Neapolitan people by a series of
barbarous cruelties. The revolt in Sicily was ended more easily. The
Spanish viceroy disarmed the rebels by a liberal proclamation of
amnesty, and then shot down many of them in the streets.
The revolt of Naples, and the great strain put upon the resources of
Philip IV. by the Thirty Years' War, reduced him to the necessity of
concluding the Peace of Miinster with the Dutch Republic, in January,
1648 ; thus acknowledging that vigorous young state as an independent
power among the nations of the earth, and ceding to it the towns of
Dutch Flanders and the Dutch conquests in the East Indies, in Africa
and in the New World.
As we have seen, the Peace of Westphalia, October 24, 1648, which
ended the Thirty Years' War, did not end hostilities between Spain and
Betrayal
and
Assassi-
nation of
Masan-
iello.
Another
Revolt in
Naples
under
Gennaro
Annesi.
Submis-
sion and
Punish-
ment
of the
Rebels.
Independ-
ence of
the Dutch
Republic.
Continued
War with
Franc*.
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Peace
of the
Pyrenees.
Charles
II., A. D.
1665-
1700.
War
of the
Spanish
Succes-
sion and
House of
Bourbon.
Philip V.,
A. D.
1700-
1746.
Portugal
during
Her
Sixty
Years'
Union
with
Spain.
Brazil
during
that
Period.
France, which continued eleven years longer, until ended by the Peace
of the Pyrenees, November 7, 1659, by which Spain was obliged to
cede to France the county of Roussillon, north of the Pyrenees, and the
county of Artois, in the Spanish Netherlands. Spain retained the rest
of the Spanish Netherlands, and also Franche-Comte, the Duchy of
Milan and the Kingdom of Naples and Sicily. By the Treaty of the
Pyrenees, Spain surrendered the last vestige of supremacy which she
had exercised in Europe since the reign of Philip II. ; and she rapidly
sunk into insignificance.
Philip IV. died in September, 1665, and was succeeded as King of
Spain by his son CHARLES II., the child of a second marriage. Ex-
cepting the wars with Louis XIV. of France, the reign of Charles II.
was uneventful. He was the last of the dynasty of the Spanish Haps-
burgs, who had reigned over the Spanish dominions for almost two
centuries, beginning with Charles I., the Emperor Charles V. of Ger-
many, in 1516.
As Charles II. was childless, his death in 1700 gave rise to a contest
for the Spanish dominions, which brought on the general European
struggle known as the War of the Spanish Succession, A. D. 1702—
1714, which placed the French House of Bourbon on the Spanish
throne, in the person of Duke Philip of Anjou, who became PHILIP V.
By the Peace of Utrecht, in 1713, Spain ceded the Spanish Nether-
lands, Milan, Naples and Sicily to the Emperor Charles VI. of Ger-
many, the head of the Austrian House of Hapsburg and the competitor
of Philip of Anjou for the Spanish throne; while Gibraltar and
Minorca were ceded to England, and Spain and Portugal resumed
their former boundaries.
During the sixty years' subjection of Portugal to the Spanish
crown the greatness of Portugal steadily declined. The Portuguese
possessions in North-western Africa passed into the hands of Spain,
and Ceuta was thus permanently lost to Portugal. The Dutch became
formidable rivals of the Portuguese on the western coast of Africa, and
deprived them of much of their commerce in that quarter. In the
East Indies the Dutch also seized .many of the Portuguese possessions
and absorbed the Portuguese trade, thus giving the death-blow to the
Portuguese supremacy in that part of the world, and placing the re-
maining Portuguese settlements in Southern and Eastern Asia in great
peril. At the same time the English laid the foundations of their em-
pire in India, which was destined eventually to overshadow both the
Portuguese and Dutch dominions in that quarter.
During the same period the European enemies of Spain also at-
tacked Brazil, which Portuguese dependency also had fallen into the
hands of Spain. The Portuguese settlements in Brazil were often at-
SPAIN AND PORTUGAL IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY. 3Q23
tacked and plundered by French, English and Dutch fleets. In 1612
the French seized Maranhao and founded the city of Sao Luiz do
Maranhao, but in 1615 the Portuguese expelled the French from that
town. In 1623 a Dutch fleet captured Bahia, but in 1625 the Dutch
garrison in that town was forced to surrender to the Portuguese. In
1629 the Dutch captured Pernambuco; after which they rapidly ex-
tended their conquests in Brazil, so that by 1645 they had possession
of all Brazil north of Pernambuco, except Para.
The Portuguese universally detested the Spaniards ; and the Spanish
rule was so oppressive that the popular discontent in Portugal steadily
increased, until 1640, when the Portuguese rose in revolt and pro-
claimed the Duke of Braganza King of Portugal with the title of
JOHN IV. France, England and Holland at once recognized the in-
dependence of Portugal under the House of Braganza, France and
Holland being engaged in hostilities with Spain during the progress
of the Thirty Years' War. John IV. successfully resisted the efforts
which Spain made during his entire reign to reconquer Portugal.
During the reign of John IV. the Portuguese gradually drove the
Dutch from Brazil, and recovered that entire dependency by 1654.
Brazil was erected into a principality, and the heir-apparent to the
crown of Portugal was invested with the title of Prince of Brazil. In
the meantime Brazil had prospered steadily, in spite of the struggles
with the Dutch and the exactions of the home government. The pros-
perity of the province was based on agriculture.
King John IV. died in 1656, and was succeeded on the throne of
Portugal by his second son, ALFONSO VI., whose elder brother had died
some time before. In 1660 Holland concluded a treaty with Portugal
renouncing all her claims to Brazil. In 1661 a treaty of alliance was
concluded between Portugal and England; by which the Princess
Catharine of Braganza, the daughter of King Alfonso VI., was married
to King Charles II. of England; while Portugal ceded Tangier, in
North-western Africa, and Bombay, in Hindoostan, to England as
Catharine's dowry. This treaty was the beginning of intimate rela-
tions between Portugal and England which lasted a long time and had
a marked effect upon the fortunes of Portugal.
King Alfonso VI. was so weak and contemptible a monarch that the
Spaniards felt encouraged to prosecute hostilities against the Por-
tuguese with increased vigor; but the Portuguese were victorious, the
Spaniards being decisively defeated at Almexial in 1663 and at Villa-
viciosa in 1666. The battle of Villa viciosa virtually secured the inde-
pendence of Portugal, though Spain still refused to acknowledge it.
The Portuguese had become so disguested with Alfonso VI. that the
Portuguese Cortes deprived him of his authority as an imbecile, in
Revolt of
Portugal
against
Spain.
John IV.,
A. D.
1640-
1656.
Portu-
guese
Recovery
of Brazil.
Alfonso
VI., A. D.
1656-
1683.
Alliance
of
Portugal
and
England.
Portu-
guese
Victories
over the
Span-
iards.
Dom
Pedro's
Regency.
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
Peace of
Lisbon
with
Spain.
Peace of
The
Hague
with
Holland.
Pedro II.,
A. D.
1683-
1706.
John V.,
A. D.
1706-
1737-
Weak-
ness and
Decay of
Portugal.
Loss of
Portu-
guese
Colonies.
1667, and made his brother Dom Pedro regent. A dispensation was
obtained from Pope Clement IX. annulling Alfonso's marriage; and
his divorced queen, Mary of Savoy, then married Dom Pedro. One
of the first acts of the regency was the Peace of Lisbon with Spain,
February 13, 1668, by which Spain treated with the Portuguese as
a sovereign and independent nation, and a mutual restitution of all
conquests during the war was made, with the exception of the city of
Ceuta, in North-western Africa, which remained to Spain. The sub-
jects of both nations recovered all property alienated or confiscated
during the war. By the Peace of The Hague between Portugal and
Holland, July 31, 1669, the Dutch were left in possession of all the
conquests which they had made from the Portuguese in the East Indies.
King Alfonso VI. was closely confined until his death, in 1683, when
the regent Dom Pedro ascended the throne of Portugal with the title
of PEDRO II. In 1696 gold was discovered in Brazil, and diamonds
also were found in that country about the same time. These discoveries
vastly increased the wealth of Brazil, and poured a steady stream of
wealth into the Portuguese treasury. In 1703 Portugal, by an offen-
sive and defensive alliance with England, was drawn into the War of
the Spanish Succession. During the war Pedro II. died, and was suc-
ceeded as King of Portugal by his son JOHN V., A. D. 1706, during
whose reign Spain by treaty formally acknowledged the independence
of Portugal, A. D. 1737.
The history of Portugal thenceforth is generally unimportant and
uneventful. Though the country had recovered its independence, the
restored Kingdom of Portugal lacjjjjed vigor, and has manifested the
same tendency to decay that has characterized Spain since the reign
of Philip II. Though Portugal had recovered her independence
through the growing feebleness and decline of Spain, the restored
kingdom was unable to recover more than half its old colonial empire,
most of its former possessions in the East Indies having come into
the possession of the young and vigorous Dutch Republic. Only in
Brazil and on the east and west coast of Africa and in the Azores and
Cape de Verd Islands was Portugal able to reestablish her old dominion.
SECTION X.— SEVENTEENTH CENTURY
CIVILIZATION.
Results
of the War.
teenth Pe°P^e as represented by the Commons ended in the establishment of the
Century, free constitution of England by " the Glorious Revolution of 1688."
Reformation achieved its final triumph in the Thirty Years'
The struggle in England between the Stuart dynasty and the
SfiVfiNTEliXTH CENTURY CIVILIZATION.
3036
The supremacy of France during the Age of Louis XIV. established
the ascendency of the French language, tastes, fashions, manners, and
habits of thought among the cultivated and intellectual classes through-
out Europe. The revival of learning and science begun in the six-
teenth century was continued during the seventeenth, which was signal-
ized by great scientific discoveries, improvements in philosophy, strong
literatures and an improved condition of the masses.
FRANCIS BACON (1561-1626) — the great English philosopher,
known better as Lord Bacon (Baron Verulam, Viscount St. Albans) —
founded the inductive system of philosophy ; and his great works were
his Essays, the Advancement of Learning and Novum Organum.
DESCARTES (1596-1650) — the eminent French philosopher — had
great influence on the method of philosophizing in the seventeenth cen-
tury. He was the tutor of Queen Christina of Sweden.
SPINOZA (1622-1677) — a Jew of Holland and likewise a great
philosopher — carried forward the new system of philosophy founded
by Bacon and Descartes, and was a famous Pantheist.
THOMAS HOBBES (1588-1679) — a famous English philosopher —
was early associated with Galileo and Descartes ; and his principal works
are the Leviathan and Behemoth. JOHN LOCKE (1632-1704) — a
celebrated English philosopher — wrote an Essay on the Human Under-
standing.
GALILEO (1564-1642) — the distinguished Italian astronomer —
adopted the Copernican theory of the solar system and invented the
telescope, with the aid of which he discovered the satellites of Jupiter,
the rings of Saturn and the moonlike phases of Venus. He was twice
brought before the Inquisition to renounce the theory of the earth's
rotation which he published in his System of the World. His second
incarceration brought on an affection of the eyes terminating in
blindness.
KEPLER (1571-1630) — the eminent German astronomer, called " the
Legislator of the Heavens " — discovered what are known as Kepler's
Three Laws, which laid the foundations of mathematical astronomy.
Kepler was one of the greatest thinkers of any age. He combined the
inspiration of a prophet and the creative genius of a poet with the
method of a mathematician. Persecuted by religious bigots, he led a
melancholy life in the most abject poverty.
SIR ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727) — the illustrious English astrono-
mer, mathematician and philosopher, who was then professor of mathe-
matics at Cambridge University — discovered the law of universal gravi-
tation, by which the earth and all the heavenly bodies are kept in their
respective places. Newton's theory of light and colors is the founda-
tion of the science of optics; and his Latin Work, Principia, is the
Lord
Bacon.
Descartes.
Spinoza.
Hobbes
and
Locke.
Galileo.
Kepler.
Sir Isaac
Newton.
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS
Leibnitz.
Other
Great
Scientists
and
Their
Discov-
eries.
Great
French
Drama-
tists.
Other
Great
French
Writers.
basis of all natural philosophy, or physics. Newton also discovered
that important instrument of mathematics, the Calculus.
LEIBNITZ (1640—1716) — an eminent German philosopher, meta-
physician, mathematician, historian, jurist and scholar — was the
founder of the eclectic system of German philosophy, and discovered
the Calculus about the same time as Newton.
Besides the great scientific discoveries by Galileo, Kepler, Newton
and Leibnitz — the four great scientific lights during the seventeenth
century — there were numerous other discoveries in mathematics, as-
tronomy and natural science. LORD NAPIER (1550—1617) — a Scotch-
man— invented logarithms, thus abridging calculation. WILLIAM
HARVEY (1578—1657) — a great English physician and surgeon — dis-
covered the circulation of the blood, which he first announced in 1615
and published in 1628. The Italian TORRICELLI (1608-1647), of
.Florence, invented the mercurial barometer, the basis of hydraulics.
ROEMER (1644—1710), a Dane, invented the thermometer bearing his
name. OTTE GUERICKE (1602-1686), a German, invented the air-
pump. The German chemist BRANDT accidentally discovered phos-
phorus in 1669. ROBERT BOYLE (1627-1691) — a famous Irish-Eng-
lish philosopher, noted for his piety — also made chemical discoveries.
MARIOTTE (1620-1684) and DELISLE (1675-1726) were distinguished
French physicists. HUYGHENS (1629-1695) — a Dutch astronomer —
discovered Saturn's rings and one of his satellites. CASSINI (1625-
1712) — an Italian astronomer — discovered four satellites of Saturn.
His son, James Cassini, discovered the divisions in Saturn's ring. The
renowned English astronomer, EDMUND HALLEY (1656-1742), made
important discoveries highly serviceable to navigation, and discovered
the comet bearing his name. The English Royal Society incorporated
by Charles II., the French Academy of Sciences instituted by Richelieu,
and similar institutions in other European countries, advanced physics
and chemistry.
The Age of Louis XIV. — the Augustan Age of French Literature —
shone resplendent with the names of great dramatists, satirists and
divines. CORNEILLE (1606—1684) — a great dramatist — excelled in
tragedy, as The Cid. RACINE (1639-1699) — the greatest French
dramatist — was noted for his tragedies. MOLIERE (1622—1673) —
also a great dramatist — surpassed in comedy.
PASCAL (1623—1662) — a great philosopher and scientist — wrote
against the Jesuits in his Provincial Letters. LA ROCHEFAUCAITLD
(1613-1680) was noted for his Moral Maxims. LA FONTAINE
(1621-1705) — the "Modern ^Esop " — was celebrated for his Fables.
FENELON (1651-1715) — Archbishop of Cambray — was celebrated for
his romance, Telemaque. FLEURY (1642-1723) — a church historian
SEVENTEENTH CENTURY CIVILIZATION.
— wrote Histoire Ecclesiastique. BATUE (1647—1706) was a cele-
brated Huguenot writer. BOILEAU (1637-1711) was a great critic
and satirical poet. MADAME DE SEVIGNE (1627-1696) was famed for
her delightful letters to her daughter.
BOSSUET (1627-1704) — Bishop of Meaux — was a great preacher. Great
BOURDALOUE (1632-1704) was also a famous pulpit orator. MAS- Divines
SILLON (1663—1742) was likewise renowned for pulpit eloquence.
In English literature we find many dramatists who were cotempora- Great
ries and successors of Shakespeare, who died in 1616. BEN JONSON Dnima.
(1574-1637) — poet-laureate under James I. — was the greatest tists.
dramatist after Shakespeare. Other great dramatic poets were
FRANCIS BEAUMONT (1585-1615) and JOHN FLETCHER (1576-1625),
who were associated in their writings; and PHILIP MASSINGER (1584—
1640).
JOHN MILTON (1608-1674) — the great epic poet of England — Other
who had been Oliver Cromwell's Latin secretary, wrote Paradise Lost English
and Paradise Regained, in poverty and blindness, after the Stuart Res- Poets,
toration in 1660. SAMUEL BUTLER (1612—1680) wrote Hudibras, a
satirical poem on the Puritans. JOHN DRYDEN (1631—1700) — poet-
laureate under Charles II. — wrote dramas and satirical poems, and
translated Virgil's JEne'id.
JOHN BUNYAN (1628-1688) — a tinker of Bedford and a Baptist Great
TTnfflioli
preacher — was imprisoned twelve years for preaching, during which Divines
he wrote Pilgrim's Progress, the most famous allegory in the English
language, and which has been translated into all languages. JEREMY
TAYLOR (1613—1667) — a great divine and theologian — wrote such
works as Liberty of Prophesying, Holy Living and Holy Dying.
EDWARD HYDE, EARL OF CLARENDON (1608-1673) — the great Other
statesman and Prime Minister of Charles II. — described the civil war writers,
between Charles I. and Parliament in his History of the Rebellion.
SIR MATTHEW HALE (1609-1676) was a famous English jurist and
writer.
Spain produced two great dramatic poets during the seventeenth Spanish
century. LOPE DE VEGA (1562-1635) wrote a thousand dramas. tists.
CALDERON (1600—1681) wrote about five hundred dramas.
The three greatest artists of the seventeenth century were natives Great
of the Netherlands. PETER PAUL RUBENS (1577-1640)— the most
celebrated of the Flemish painters — flourished at Antwerp, and painted
four thousand pictures, of which the most noted are the Descent from
the Cross, the Last Judgment and Peace and War. VANDYKE (1599—
1641) — a pupil of Rubens and a great portrait painter — was a native
of Antwerp, but spent most of his life in England, where he painted the
portraits of Charles I. and Strafford, and a historical painting, The
5028
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
French
Painters.
Spanish
Painters.
English
Archi-
tects.
George
Fox
and the
Quakers
in
England.
Quaker
Doc-
trines.
Crucifixion. REMBKANDT (1606-1669) — a native of Leyden — was
the third great painter of the Flemish school.
POUSSIN (1594-1655) was a famous French painter, whose chief
paintings are the Death of Germanicus, the Taking of Jerusalem and
the Last Supper. CLAUDE LORRAINE (1600-1682) and LEBRUN
(1619—1690) were also celebrated French painters.
MURILLO (1618—1682) — the great Spanish painter — painted scenes
of humble life and religious pieces, such as Madonnas, holy families
and others ; and died from the effects of a severe fall while painting the
interior of a church. VELASQUEZ (1599-1660) was also a great
Spanish painter. SALVATOR ROSA (1615—1673) was a famous Italian
painter and poet.
INIGO JONES (1596-1652) and SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN (1632-
1723) were great English architects; the latter being the architect of
St. Paul's Cathedral in London, the largest Protestant church in the
world. CLAUDE PERAULT (1613-1703) and MANSARD (1645-1708)
were noted French architects.
As we have seen, the extreme Puritan sect of Friends, or Quakers, was
founded in England by George Fox during the civil wars. George
Fox early bewailed the wickedness of the world, and when asked into a
booth at a fair by some professors of religion, who then began to drink
healths, he left them and went home in great affliction ; and, being
unable to sleep that night, he walked up and down and prayed to the
Lord. In 1643 he left his home and relatives, and traveled from place
to place, his mind being in great distress. He sought comfort from
priests and professors of religion, but found none. Only the " inward
light " comforted him. He traveled about in leather costume, fasted,
walked abroad in solitary places, many days took his Bible and sat in
hollow trees and lonely places until the approach of night, and fre-
quently walked mournfully by himself all night. He began to preach
in 1648, and suffered much persecution, his meetings being broken up,
himself being stoned and frequently imprisoned.
George Fox condemned war as a sin in which no Christian man
should engage either by military service or the payment of taxes to
support an army ; advocated equal rights for women, allowing them to
speak and preach in public; condemned slavery, intemperance, judicial
oaths, capital punishment, imprisonment for debt, extravagance and
waste, vanity and idle luxury, the senseless changes of fashion, and all
falsehood in act or speech; denounced a hireling ministry; rejected
Baptism and the Lord's Supper; and made the authority of the Bible
subordinate to that of the " universal inner light " in men's hearts.
The Quakers were a peculiar sect in their dress and in all their
social habits and customs. Their zeal was tried by cruel persecution.
SEVENTEENTH CENTURY CIVILIZATION.
53029
They were cast into prison and mad-houses; they were pilloried; they
were whipped ; they were burned in the face ; and their tongues were
bored with red-hot irons ; but nothing could overcome their fortitude
and constancy or quench their enthusiasm. Those who were driven
out of England vainly sought an asylum among their former brethren
in affliction, the Puritans of New England, by whom also they were
persecuted; but under William Penn they found a refuge in the wilds
of Pennsylvania.
The maritime enterprises of the Portuguese during the fifteenth and
sixteenth centuries, which had given that nation the greatest commercial
influence, gave way to the superior vigor and enterprise of the Dutch
in the seventeenth century. The famous Dutch East India Company,
chartered in 1602, caused a union of the interests and efforts of the
rival cities of the Netherlands. The military and naval power of the
Dutch East India Company was enormous. This great commercial
corporation had a formidable army, and a navy of one hundred and
fifty vessels carrying from twenty to sixty guns, besides fifty smaller
vessels. The States-General of Holland at various times subsidized the
Company in order to enable it to carry on its wars.
The center of the Dutch East India Company was at Batavia, in
the island of Java — a city called the " Pearl of the East," and which
had a population of one hundred and sixty thousand at the close of
the seventeenth century. The Dutch gained the supremacy by their
conflicts with the Portuguese, and the Dutch colonies soon became
numerous and important.
The French also established an East India Company for trade in
India, and there was also a Danish East India Company in the seven-
teenth and eighteenth centuries. The English East India Company,
chartered by Queen Elizabeth, December 31, 1600, has been alluded to.
Its first factory was erected at Surat in 1612. It obtained the city
of Madras by grant from its native sovereign in 1639. It obtained
Bombay by cession from the Portuguese in 1662. In 1699 an English
settlement was made at Calcutta.
Henry IV. of France encouraged various kinds of commerce and
manufactures ; and during the reign of Louis XIV., under Colbert's
administration, every dppartment of industrial and commercial enter-
prise received its greatest impulse in France. Colbert established
companies to trade in the East and West Indies, thus forming a rival
to the Dutch. He promoted the manufacture of fine cloths, fostered
the cultivation of mulberry -trees, and encouraged the art of making
plate-glass, which had previously been imported into France from
Venice. From that period date the manufacture of porcelain at
Sevres and the world-renowned Gobelin tapestry. Colbert imported
Persecu-
tion
of the
Quakers.
Dutch
Com-
merce.
Dutch
East
India
Company.
Dutch
Colony of
Batavia.
French,
Danish
and
English
East
India
Compa-
nies.
French
Com-
merce
and
Manufac-
tures.
FRANCE AND THE AGE OF LOUIS XIV.
English
Com-
merce.
English
Manufac-
tures.
French
Archi-
tecture.
from England machinery for weaving stockings, and introduced lace-
making from Flanders and Venice. He also vastly promoted com-
merce by the construction of the Canal of Languedoc, connecting the
Atlantic Ocean with the Mediterranean, A. D. 1664-1681.
Commerce and navigation flourished greatly in England during the
reign of Charles I., when a large trade was carried on with Guinea,
the Levant and the East Indies ; while immense quantities of cloth were
exported annually from England to Turkey, and the English possessed
almost a monopoly of the traffic with Spain. English commerce was.
interrupted during the civil wars, but soon recovered after the Stuart
Restoration, in 1660, and received additional encouragement from the
losses which befell the Dutch. England soon acquired a considerable
trade with her colonies in North America, about five hundred vessels
being employed in trade with those colonies and with the West Indies
at the end of the seventeenth century. Some of these vessels were
engaged in the slave-trade. Tea and coffee were brought to England
from the East, and were so expensive for a time that they were then
used only as luxuries. In spite of The Counterblaste to Tobacco,
written by King James L, who greatly disliked the use of that article,
tobacco became an important article of commerce. English whale-
ships visited Greenland and Spitzbergen ; while Madras and Bombay,
in Hindoostan, became the great centers of trade of the English East
India Company.
Next to London, Bristol was the chief sea-port of England; and
Norwich was, next to London, the principal manufacturing city of the
kingdom. The present great manufacturing centers of England —
Manchester, Birmingham, Sheffield and Leeds — were then small towns ;
and Liverpool had less than two hundred seamen. But manufactur-
ing industry then began its present prominence in England. The cot-
ton manufacture at Manchester commenced, and the art of dyeing
woolen cloths was introduced into England from Flanders, thus saving
large sums of money to the English. New manufactures of iron, brass,
silk and paper were also established in England. The manufacture of
oil-cloth in England began in 1660. The Duke of Buckingham intro-
duced glass-making from Venice.
Architecture flourished in France during the seventeenth century.
Henry IV. completed the splendid palace of St. Germains and the
Hotel de Ville, both of which had been begun by Francis L, and erected
many other magnificent structures. Louis XIV. completed the Palais
Royal, begun by Richelieu, and adorned Paris with many parks and
public edifices ; but the most splendid of his works were the famous
palace and gardens of Versailles. The fine arts flourished in England
under the Stuarts.
MILITARY AND CIVIL EQUESTRIAN COSTUMES, END OF SIXTEENTH CENTURY
CHAPTER XXXVI.
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
SECTION I.— WARS OF DENMARK, SWEDEN AND
BRANDENBURG (A. D. 1599-1679).
DURING the sixty years reign of CHRISTIAN IV., A. D. 1588—1648, Christian
Denmark was prosperous, notwithstanding her disastrous wars. The j)en^Tk
Danish monarchy embraced all of Denmark and Norway, with the A. D.
seven southern provinces of Sweden ; while Iceland and Greenland were
among its foreign possessions. In 1611 Christian IV. began a foolish
and useless war with the King of Sweden; but this war was ended by His Wars
the Peace of Siorod in 1613, through the mediation of England. The
part which Christian IV. took in the Thirty Years' War as an ally of
the German Protestants, which ended in his defeat and which was
closed by the Peace of Liibeck in 1629, has already been alluded to;
as has also his disastrous war with Sweden in 1644, which was ended
by the Peace of Bromsebro, in August, 1645.
Upon the death of Christian IV., in 1648, his son FREDERICK III. Frederick
became King of Denmark and Norway. In 1657 Frederick III. be- D ' °7-
came involved in a war with Charles X. of Sweden, which was ended A. D.
by the Peace of Roskild in 1658. A second war with Charles X. of
Sweden, begun in 1658, was ended by the Peace of Copenhagen in
1660. In 1660 Frederick III. accomplished a peaceful revolution by His Wars
which he changed the constitution of Denmark, thus converting his
kingdom from an elective and limited monarchy into an absolute and
hereditary one. Thus the Danish nobility were deprived of their great
privileges and revenues by the Royal Law, which conferred unlimited Royal
power upon the king. The nobles thus lost their former power and Law-
independent position, and were bound very closely to the throne by
titles and orders.
Frederick III. died in 1670, and was succeeded on the Danish throne Christian
by his son CHRISTIAN V., who engaged in a war with Charles XI. of V'J6A^_D'
Sweden in 1675, which was ended in 1679 through the intervention of 1699.
Louis XIV. of France. Upon the death of Christian V., in 1699, his
VOL. 9—15 3031
3032
STATES-SYSTEM IX NORTH AND EAST.
Frederick
IV., A. D.
1699-
Charles
IX. of
Sweden,
A. D.
1599-
1611.
His Wars.
Gustavus
Adol-
phus,
A. D.
1611-
1632.
Axel Ox-
enstiern
Gustavus
Adolphus
as a
Warrior.
His Wars
with
Denmark
and
Russia.
Peace of
Stolbova.
His war
with
Poland.
Truce of
Altmark.
son FREDERICK IV. became King of Denmark and Norway. He
reigned until his death in 1730.
CHARLES IX. of Sweden was engaged during part of his reign of
twelve years, A. D. 1599-1611, in a war with his nephew and pre-
decessor, King Sigismund III. of Poland, who still claimed the Swedish
crown after his deposition by the Swedish Diet. A few months before
his death, in 1611, Charles IX. became involved in a war with Chris-
tian IV. of Denmark. Among the causes of complaint of the two
kings was one that each bore upon his shield three crowns symbolizing
the three Scandinavian kingdoms.
Upon the death of Charles IX., in the fall of 1611, his son, the
illustrious GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS — " the Lion of the North " — became
King of Sweden at the age of sixteen. He chose for his Prime Minister
the famous Axel Oxenstiern, a man of profound wisdom and good judg-
ment, a model statesman and diplomatist, and the prime mover in
Swedish affairs for a long series of years.
Gustavus Adolphus had served his apprenticeship in the art of war
in the struggle with Christian IV. of Denmark, and he was destined
to become not only one of the most famous of military heroes, but also
the founder of a new system of warfare and army organization, which
in the course of time superseded the closely-serried ranks of the Swiss
pikemen and the Spanish lancers.
Through the mediation of England, the war with Christian IV. of
Denmark was ended in two years by the Peace of Siorod, in January,
1613 ; but a war with Russia had already begun. The male line of
Rurik having become extinct, a party in Russia desired to place a
brother of Gustavus Adolphus on the Russian throne. The Swedes
gained some advantages in this war, but the greater part of the Rus-
sian nation succeeded in maintaining the right of Michael Romanoff to
the Russian crown. By the Peace of Stolbova, in 1617, Russia ceded
considerable territory to Sweden, including the site of the present city
of St. Petersburg.
In 1620 Gustavus Adolphus became involved in a war of nine years
with his cousin, King Sigismund III. of Poland, caused by the latter's
pretensions to the Swedish crown. This war was ended in 1629, by
the six years' Truce of Altmark, through the mediation of France,
whose illustrious Prime Minister, Cardinal Richelieu, was anxious to
allow Gustavus Adolphus liberty to engage in the great Thirty Years'
War in Germany. By this war with Poland, Sweden acquired Livonia
and part of Prussia ; but far more valuable were the discipline and
experience which enabled Gustavus Adolphus to assume his place as
the great leader and champion of the Protestant hosts in the Thirty
Years' War.
WARS IN DENMARK, SWEDEN AND BRANDENBURG.
3033
As we have seen, Gustavus Adolphus, upon leaving Sweden in 1630
to take part in the Thirty Years' War, placed the government of his
kingdom in the hands of a Council of Regency presided over by his
able Prime Minister, the Chancellor, Axel Oxenstiern; confiding his
infant daughter Christina to this council. Upon her valiant father's
death on the memorable field of Lutzen, in 1632, CHRISTINA was pro-
claimed Queen of Sweden ; the government being administered by Oxen-
stiern, under whose guidance Sweden became the head of the Protestant
league. The Thirty Years' War made Sweden the great military
power of the North, and gave rise to the States-System in the Northern
kingdoms of Europe.
During the young queen's minority the noble families of Sweden
improved their opportunity to increase their privileges and property.
Christina assumed the government in 1644 ; and during the first years
of her reign she displayed a wisdom, a firmness and a manifold ability
which surprised her venerable counselors, and thus proved herself a
worthy daughter and successor of Gustavus Adolphus. She exhibited
a masculine spirit and character in everything. Her influence in favor
of peace was felt in the Treaty of Westphalia.
Christina surrounded herself with a brilliant court adorned with the
society of artists and scholars from all Europe, whom she invited to
Stockholm. Her extraordinary accomplishments won the admiration
of the learned foreigners who thronged her court, among whom was
the great French philosopher Descartes.
Unfortunately, Christina's powers of mind were not properly bal-
anced and supported by steadiness of purpose. She wasted her
revenues in fantastic entertainments, and bestowed the crown-lands on
her favorites, who made use of her gifts to oppose the royal preroga-
tives in the next reign.
As the years advanced, Christina disappointed the expectations that
had been formed of her in the early part of her reign. Her taste
for art and her love for science found little encouragement in the
Protestant North, and for that reason she never found herself at
home in her kingdom. Thus becoming weary of the cares of state, and
in order to indulge her artistic and scientific tastes, she abdicated the
throne of Sweden in 1654, after a reign of ten years and in the twenty-
eighth year of her age, naming her cousin Charles Gustavus of Pfalz-
Zweibriicken as her successor, and reserving an annuity for herself.
Christina then left her native Sweden and sought freedom in a
milder climate. At Innsbruck she abjured her father's religion and
was solemnly admitted into the Roman Catholic Church. She passed
the remaining thirty -five years of her life in wandering over Europe;
traveling through the Netherlands, France and Italy, and twice re*
Gustavus
Adolphus
in the
Thirty
Years'
War.
Christina,
A. D.
1632-
1654
Her
Reign.
Her
Patronage
of
Learning.
Her
Extrava-
gance.
Her
Abdica-
tion.
Her
Wander-
ings in
Other
Lands.
3034
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Charles
X., A. D.
1654-
1660.
His
Ambition.
His
Alliance
with
Alexis of
Russia
against
Poland.
His
Tempo-
rary
Conquest
of
Poland.
His
Struggle
with the
Great
Elector of
Branden-
burg.
His
Second
Conquest
of Poland.
visiting Sweden; dividing her time between learning and vice; and
finally establishing her permanent residence in that renowned city filled
with all the splendor of art — Rome — where she ended her dissolute life
in 1689 at the age of sixty-three.
CHARLES X., the cousin and successor of Christina, upon his acces-
sion in 1654, found Sweden still exhausted by her efforts in the Thirty
Years' War, as well as by Christina's extravagant expenditures.
Nevertheless, he was ambitious of building up a great Scandinavian
empire in the North of Europe under the supremacy of Sweden, and
thus making himself the absolute master of the North. The weakness
of the neighboring kingdoms of Denmark and Poland seemed to flatter
the hopes of the ambitious King of Sweden.
As John Casimir, King of Poland, claimed the Swedish crown, the
Swedish monarch formed an alliance with the Czar Alexis of Russia,
the second of the Romanoffs, who found a pretext for war with Poland
in a revolt of the Cossacks of the Ukraine against the Polish kingdom,
to which they had been subject since 1386. In 1654 the Czar Alexis
besieged and took Smolensk, while other Russian armies occupied
Lithuania and the Ukiraine; and in 1655 two Swedish armies invaded
Poland, while the Swedish fleet blockaded the free city of Dantzic.
In August, 1655, King Charles X. of Sweden defeated King John
Casimir of Poland in the decisive battle of Sobota, after which War-
saw surrendered to the victorious Swedish king. The Polish army and
most of the Polish nobility took oaths of allegiance to the King of
Sweden. Cracow also opened its gates to the Swedish monarch; and
the province of Lithuania, occupied chiefly by his Russian allies,
acknowledged him as its sovereign. A party in the Polish Diet offered
the crown of Poland to the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany, but a
majority of the Polish nation favored Charles X.
In this emergency the Great Elector Frederick William of Branden-
burg, the ally of John Casimir of Poland, led an army into West
Prussia to protect that duchy against the Swedes ; but he was defeated
by Charles X. of Sweden, and was thus forced to acknowledge him-
self a vassal of Sweden instead of Poland. In subsequent treaties
the Swedish king's embarrassments enabled the Great Elector to secure
the sovereignty of the duchy of East Prussia, thus laying the founda-
tion of the subsequent powerful Kingdom of Prussia.
In the meantime King John Casimir of Poland mustered an army of
Poles and Tartars to recover Warsaw from the Swedes, and recaptured
that city June 21, 1656; but after a three days' battle in its vicinity
the next month, July, 1656, in which Charles X. of Sweden and his
new ally, the Great Elector of Brandenburg, were victorious, Warsaw
again surrendered to the Swedish monarch.
WARS IN DENMARK, SWEDEN AND BRANDENBURG.
$035
At this juncture Poland was saved from destruction by the lack of
harmony among her enemies ; as the Czar Alexis of Russia had now
grown jealous of the Swedes, and invaded the Swedish province of
Livonia with one hundred thousand men, while he sent another army
to ravage the Swedish provinces of Ingria, Carelia and Finland, on the
east side of the Baltic. The Emperor Leopeld I. of Germany and
King Frederick III. of Denmark also became alarmed and offended by
the progress of Charles X. of Sweden, and became the allies of John
Casimir of Poland in opposing the " Pyrrhus of the North," A.
D. 1657.
Oliver Cromwell, the Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of Ens;-
land, favored Sweden, though he offered her 110 active aid ; but George
Ragotzky, Prince of Transylvania, enterec mto a close offensive alii-
ance with the King of Sweden, in the hope oi obtaining the crown of
Poland, or at least the Polish provinces of Ued Russia, Podolia, Vol-
hynia and a large territory in the South of the Polish kingdom. The
Great Elector Frederick William of Brandenburg retired from the
Swedish army with his contingent force ; anc1 by the Peace of Welau
with Poland, September 19, 1657, he was guaranteed his title of
Sovereign Duke of Prussia and the possession of hat duchy as an in-
dependent state.
As the Czar Alexis of Russia, King John Casimir of Poland, King
Frederick III. of Denmark, the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany,
the Great Elector Frederick William of Brandenburg and the Dutch
Republic united in 1657 in an alliance to compel King Charles X. of
Sweden to relinquish his conquests, the Swedish king at once retired
from Poland and made a sudden dash at Denmark, overrunning the
duchies of Schleswig and Holstein without opposition, and sending a
formidable detachment under General Wrangel to occupy the duchy
of Bremen.
The King of Sweden took Frederiksodde by siege, October 24, 1657 ;
and, as soon as a winter of unusual severity, even for those Northern
regions, had covered the Baltic with ice, he commenced a remarkable
series of maneuvers among the islands of the Sound by crossing the
two Belts on the ice with his cavalry and artillery, capturing Fiinen,
Langeland, Laaland and Falster, and finally passing over into the
island of Zealand and placing Copenhagen at his mercy. The Danish
capital was poorly fortified and utterly taken by surprise.
The threatened intervention of the Great Elector Frederick William
of Brandenburg and of the Dutch Republic in favor of Denmark, and
the mediation of France and England, led to the Peace of Roskild, in
March, 1658, by which Denmark ceded some of her most important
islands to Sweden and abandoned all her offensive alliances.
5-33
His War
t>wit^
Germany
His
A 11 *
Ragotzky,
8yiVania
The
as Duke
p .
Coalition
Charles
X., of
His
Inva|lon
Denmark.
His
Denmark.
Peace of
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
His
Am-
bitious
Design.
His
Second
Invasion
of
Denmark.
Denmark
Saved
by the
Dutch,
the Poles
and the
Great
Elector
of Bran-
denburg.
Foreign
Inter-
vention.
Charles
XL, of
Sweden.
Peace of
Oliva
and of
Copen-
hagen.
f Swedish
War with
Branden-
burg and
Denmark.
Battle of
Fehr-
bellin.
Swedish
Disaster!*.
The ambition of Charles X. of Sweden had grown by indulgence;
and he now not only contemplated the founding of a great Scandina-
vian empire in the North of Europe, but also of marching southward
into Italy with an overwhelming host, and, like Alaric the Goth more
than twelve centuries before, establishing a Gothic kingdom in that
sunny land of Southern Europe.
Early in August, 1658, Charles X. of Sweden renewed the war
against King Frederick III. of Denmark, on the pretext that the
Danish monarch had not faithfully executed all the conditions of the
Treaty of Roskild. The Swedish king took Kronenborg, September
5, 1658, after a siege which gave the Danes time to strengthen the
fortifications of Copenhagen, so that it would be enabled to hold out
until the arrival of a Dutch fleet which was sent to aid the Danes
in the defense of their capital.
The Swedes then turned the siege of Copenhagen into a blockade,
but they themselves were besieged before the Danish capital by the
Dutch and Danish fleets which guarded the sea; while the Great
Elector Frederick William of Brandenburg also came to the relief of
Denmark with a combined army of Poles, Austrians and his own sub-
jects, driving the Swedes from the peninsula of Jutland and capturing
most of the towns in Swedish Pomerania. Thorn surrendered to the
Poles in December, 1658, after a siege of eighteen months; and Elbing
and Marienburg were the only towns in Prussia that still remained in
possession of the Swedes.
England, France and Holland, whose commerce was embarrassed by
the closing of the Baltic ports, now intervened to put a stop to the
war; but the main cause of disturbance was removed by the sudden
death of Charles X. of Sweden, in February, 1660. His son and
successor, CHARLES XI., was a child of four years. The queen-regent
of Sweden, with her Council of State, at once commenced negotia-
tions with the hostile powers, and concluded the Peace of Oliva with
Poland in May, 1660 ; the Peace of Copenhagen with Denmark in
July, 1660, and the Peace of Cardis with Russia in July, 1661.
In 1675 Charles XI. of Sweden, as an ally of Louis XIV. of France,
became involved in a disastrous war with the Great Elector Frederick
William of Brandenburg and King Christian V. of Denmark, who
were aided by a Dutch fleet. The Swedes invaded Brandenburg, but
were defeated by the Great Elector's forces twice within four days at
Rathenow and Fehrbellin, in June, 1675. The brilliant victory of
the Great Elector in the battle of Fehrbellin, June 28, 1675, was the
foundation of Prussia's greatness.
In 1675 the Danes and the Dutch also defeated the Swedes at sea
several times. The Danes conquered the island of Riigen from the
THE GREAT ELECTOR AT FEHRBELLIN
From the Painting by \V. Camphausen
WARS IN DENMARK, SWEDEN AND BRANDENBURG.
3037
Swedes ; and Stettin, in Swedish Pomerania, surrendered to the Great
Elector of Brandenburg after a siege of six months.
In 1676 the Swedes defeated Christian V. of Denmark at Halm-
stadt, and the still-severer but indecisive battle of Lunden so disabled
him that he was obliged to remain inactive during the remainder of
the year 1676. In the summer of 1677 Christian V. was disastrously
defeated by the Swedes at Landscrona, but the Danish navy was vic-
torious over the Swedish fleets. In 1678 the Swedes invaded the Great
Elector's duchy of East Prussia, but were there defeated, and suffered
so severely that only fifteen hundred men of their army of sixteen
thousand were able to make their way to Riga, in their Baltic province
of Livonia.
This war in the North lasted until 1679, when the intervention of
Louis XIV. of France compelled the Great Elector Frederick William
of Brandenburg by the Peace of St. Germain-en-Laye, and Christian
V. of Denmark by the Peace of Lund, to restore to the Swedes all
the territory wrested from them. Thus, by the interference of her
ally, the King of France, Sweden emerged from a disastrous war with-
out any loss of territory ; but the return of peace found her in a
greatly-crippled condition, her navy being destroyed and her finances
almost ruined ; so that it was very evident that she could not have main-
tained herself without foreign aid.
In this condition of depression, a change in the government was de-
manded by all classes in Sweden, except the nobility, who had acquired
great power and influence during the long minority of Charles XL
Accordingly, a peaceful revolution in 1680 entirely changed the char-
acter of the Swedish government. In that year the Swedish Diet at
Stockholm, representing the clergy, the citizens and the peasants,
adopted a new constitution conferring absolute and irresponsible power
upon the king.
The Swedish Diet of 1682 required a strict account from all who
had administered the finances during the king's minority, and from all
who had held leases of crown-lands since the death of Gustavus
Adolphus. Thus a thorough reform was introduced into all branches
of the public service; and the prudent and energetic measures of
Charles XL during the last half of his reign of thirty-seven years,
A. D. 1660-1697, so far retrieved the resources of Sweden that his
kingdom was able to resume its old position of supremacy in the North
during the brilliant reign c -" his renowned son and successor, CHARLES
XIL, who became King of Sweden upon his father's death, in 1697.
In Germany the long reign of the Emperor LEOPOLD I., A. D.
1658—1705 — who was chosen to the imperial throne after an inter-
regnum of sixteen months following the death of his father, Ferdinand
Con-
tinued
Swedish
Defeats.
Peace of
St. Ger-
main-en-
Laye and
Peace of
Lund.
Sweden's
New Con-
stitution.
Reforms
in
Sweden.
Charles
XII of
Sweden,
A. D.
1697-
1718.
Emperor
Leopold I
of Ger-
many.
3038
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
The
Great
Elector
of Bran-
denburg.
His Ter-
ritorial
Acquisi-
tions.
His Wars
with
France
and
Sweden.
His
Great
Reign.
His Son
and Suc-
cessor,
the First
King of
Prussia.
III., in 1657 — was mainly occupied by his wars with Louis XIV. of
France and with the Turks ; but during this period there was a far
abler and greater prince in Germany than the Emperor Leopold I.
himself — FREDERICK WILLIAM, the Great Elector of Brandenburg,
who laid the foundation of the Kingdom of Prussia, which was destined
to become mistress of Germany and to make Germany the leading
power of Continental Europe.
Frederick William became Elector of Brandenburg and Duke of
Prussia in 1640, and reigned forty-eight years, dying in 1688. By
the Treaty of Welau, in 1657, he liberated Prussia from her vassalage
to Poland; and in 1666 the duchy of Cleve and the countries of Mark
and Ravensberg were annexed to the dominions of the Brandenburg
House of Hohenzollern. The Great Elector's part in the wars against
Louis XIV., as an ally of Holland, have already been related; as have
also his participation in the wars against Charles X. and Charles XL
of Sweden. We have seen that by his great victory over the Swedish
invaders of his dominions at Fehrbellin, June 28, 1675, he laid the
foundation of Prussia's greatness. He followed up that victory by
wresting almost all of Pomerania from Sweden, thus greatly enlarging
his territory.
After the restoration of peace with Sweden and France the Great
Elector devoted himself to the promotion of the interests of his do-
minions. He encouraged art, science, literature, agriculture, manu-
factures and commerce. He encouraged foreign immigration into his
dominions, and his liberality towards the twenty thousand Huguenot
refugees from France proved beneficial to the rising young state. He
secured the lofty position of his state by the formation of a con-
siderable army. His son and successor, FREDERICK III., was crowned
the first King of Prussia, at Konigsburg, in 1701, with the title of
FREDERICK I. Thus the two leading powers in Germany were Aus-
tria, under the imperial House of Hapsburg, and Prussia, under the
House of Brandenburg, or Hohenzollern.
Poland
and
Russia.
SECTION H.— POLAND'S DISSENSIONS AND DECLINE
(A. D. 1506-1696).
POLAND and Russia, the two Slavonic monarchies of Eastern Europe
—like the Scandinavian kingdoms in the North — still formed no part
of the European States-System; and their history is therefore un-
connected with that of Central, Western and Sou 'hern Europe. Both
these nations were powerful and had able sovereigns during the six-
teenth century.
POLAND'S DISSENSIONS AND DECLINE. 3939
One of the best of the Kings of Poland was SIGISMTJND THE GREAT, Sigis-
who reigned forty-two years, A. D. 1506—1548, and who was a son of "th
Casimir IV., as were his two immediate predecessors. He was a wise Great,
and able sovereign; and Poland enjoyed more prosperity during his ISO&1
long reign than it had ever experienced before, as he patronized learn- 1548.
ing and industry, and preferred the blessings of peace to the glories
of war. After vainly endeavoring to check the progress of the Refor-
mation in Poland, Sigismund the Great wisely abandoned the attempt,
and contented himself with excluding Protestants from all public offices.
During this period there were at least fifty printing-presses in Cracow His
alone, and books were printed in more than eight towns in the kingdom. Great
Poland was then the only European country which permitted freedom
of the press. Copernicus, the great astronomer, flourished during
the reign of Sigismund the Great, and was a native of Thorn, then in
Poland, but now in Prussia. King Sigismund the Great labored for
the welfare of his subjects, who loved him. He was forced into war
with Russia, in which he lost Smolensk ; but he was partly compensated
for this loss by obtaining the lordship over Moldavia.
Sigismund the Great's son and his successor as King of Poland was Sigis-
SIGISMUND AUGUSTUS, who reigned twenty-four years, A. D. 1548—
1 572, and was also a great monarch. During his reign many abuses tus, A. D.
were rectified, and the extraordinary privileges of the higher nobles
were curtailed or abolished. Under Sigismund Augustus, Lithuania
was permanently united with Poland, the united realm thenceforth Perma-
having but one Diet; but each country retaining its own army, titles, Annexa-
treasury and laws ; Lithuania being also reduced in size by the an- ti?n °f
nexation of Podlachia, Volhynia and the Ukraine to Poland. Poland ama..
conquered Livonia from the Knights of the Sword, and seemed destined
to become the most wealthy and powerful nation of Eastern Europe.
During the reign of Sigismund Augustus the Dukedom of Prussia Livonia
became a feudal dependency of Poland, and with his death ended the
dynasty of the Jagellos and the greatness of Poland, whose popula-
tion almost doubled itself during the brilliant reigns of the two illus-
trious Sigismunds.
At this time Poland's dominions embraced Great Poland and Little Poland's
Poland, comprising GaHcia, Podolia, the Ukraine and other provinces ; Domin-
along with Livonia and Lithuania, including Samogitia, Black Russia, *on8'
White Russia, Polesia and Tchernigov; also Pomerelia, Erme^nd,
Courland, Prussia, Bukowina, Moldavia, Wallachia and Bessarabia;
all of which were either integral parts of Poland or subject to it.
Poland had been partially an elective kingdom for almost two cen- End
turies, but during that entire period the Polish sovereign had been
chosen from the family of the Jagellos. Upon the death of Sigis-
3040
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EA3T.
Henry of
Valois,
A. D.
1573-
1574.
His
Abdica-
tion and
Flight.
Stephen
Batnori,
A. D.
1575-
1586.
Sigis-
mund
I.,A.
1587-
1632.
War with
Sweden.
Poland's
Decline.
Civil and
Foreign
Wars.
Polish
Society.
Nobles
and
Serfs.
mund Augustus, in 1572, the Polish crown became entirely elective,
without regard to hereditary descent.
After an interregnum of some months, HENRY OF VALOIS was chosen
King of Poland by the Polish Diet in 1573; but he accepted that
dignity with great reluctance ; and upon the death of his brother, King
Charles IX. of France, the next year, 1574, he abdicated the throne
of Poland, and returned to Paris and became King Henry III. of
France. When he left the Polish capital he carried the Polish crown
jewels with him, and was pursued on horseback for many miles by
many of the Polish nobles, who vainly endeavored to persuade him
to return.
After another short interregnum, the Polish Diet chose STEPHEN
BATHORI, the voiwode of Transylvania, to the vacant Polish throne in
1575. He defeated the Russians in the attempt to sieze Livonia, drove
them into their own country and forced them to make peace. He also
subdued the semi-independent Cossacks of the Ukraine and partially
civilized them. He died in 1586; and in 1587, after another brief
interregnum, the Diet of Poland elected SIGISMUND III., who also be-
came King of Sweden by inheritance upon the death of his father, John
III. of Sweden, in 1592. Sigismund III. lost the Swedish crown in
1599, but reigned over Poland forty-five years, dying in 1632. His
deposition in Sweden led to a war between Sweden and Poland, which
lasted for some years, and which will be noticed in the history of the
seventeenth century.
The elective kingdom of Poland — or the Republic of Poland, as
the Poles themselves called it — was gradually declining during the
seventeenth century. Every election of king by the Polish Diet was a
scene of violent contention ; and the unfortunate country was con-
stantly torn by domestic dissensions and civil wars, and involved in wars
with the Swedes, the Russians, the Cossacks, the Turks and the Tartars,
by which Poland was successively deprived of large portions of her
territories.
The constitution and state of society in Poland was not such as
tended to develop civilization and political freedom and to promote
peace and prosperity. Poland had no middle class, the only palladium
of liberty in a monarchical country. The only liberty which existed
in Poland was the power of the nobles to quarrel with each other, to
tyrannize over the serfs upon their estates and to vote for a puppet
king. Poland had only nobles and serfs — the former full of false
pride and buried in selfishness and luxury, and the latter in abject
slavery and ignorance without any legal existence. This state of
society was the cause of the political evils from which Poland was suf-
fering. The two Chambers of the Polish Diet were the Senate and
POLISH COSTUMES OF THE SIXTEENTH AND SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES
Upper Section: Costumes of the Middle Class and Workmen
1,3. Officers of the King's Guards 2. Commander-in-chief
4-8. Officers and Soldiers of the Regiment of Janizaries
POLAND'S DISSENSIONS AND DECLINE.
304*1
the Chamber of Nuncios, the former composed of the chief nobles, and
the latter consisting of representatives of the inferior nobles.
An election of King of Poland was a matter of the greatest excite-
ment. All the palatines and the chief nobility from every part of
Poland repaired to Warsaw, which had now become the Polish capital ;
each one coming armed and on horseback, and attended by a numer-
ous retinue of vassals, consisting of all the gentlemen in his palatinate.
Warsaw and its environs presented an animated scene, and occasionally
swords were drawn in support of the various candidates, who were not
permitted to be present themselves. The Pacta Conventa — Poland's
Magna Charta — for the new king's signature, was drawn up in a
temporary structure on the plain of Wola, near Warsaw; and addi-
tions were made to its conditions at every election, until the king was
shorn of almost every prerogative.
Troops of horsemen assembled on the day of election on the plain of
Wola, which was scarce^ large enough, though twelve miles in circum-
ference. The Senators and the Nuncios took their seats, and the nobles
of each palatine were ranged in S'.-parate bodies under their respective
banners. The names of the various candidates for the honors of
royalty were then declared by the Archbishop of Warsaw, who, kneel-
ing, repeated a prayer, and afterward went round on horseback to
collect the votes, which were counted in the Senate ; and the candidate
for whom the most votes had been cast was immediately proclaimed
King of Poland.
SIGISMUND III., who was elected King of Poland in 1587, as already
noticed, had been deposed in Sweden in 1599. He refused to relinquish
the Swedish crown, and waged war against his uncle, King Charles
IX. of Sweden, and with the latter's son and successor, the great
Gustavus Adolphus, from 1620 to 1629. The Swedes conquered
Livonia with Riga from 1605 to 1621, and part of Prussia in 1629 ;
while Brandenburg won its complete independence of Polish rule during
this period. Sigismund III. also prosecuted hostilities against Russia,
and in 1611 the Poles took and burned Moscow. From 1620 to
1622 war raged between Poland and Turkey, and the Turks subdued
Moldavia and Wallachia. The Turks defeated the Poles with great
loss at Jassy, in Moldavia, in September, 1620; but in 1621 the Turks
were defeated with the loss of eighty thousand men.
King LADISLAS VII., who was elected to the Polish throne upon the
death of his father, Sigismund III., in 1632, defeated the Russians at
Smolensk, and by the Peace of Wiasma in 1634 he wrested Smolensk,
Tchernigov and Novgorod from Russia ; but near the end of his reign
the Cossacks of the Ukraine transferred their allegiance to the Czar of
Russia. The Cossacks, who served Poland under a hetman, or corn-
Elections
of Polish
Kings.
Pacta
Conventa.
Ceremony
of
Election.
Wars of
Sigis-
mund III.
with
Sweden,
Russia
and
Turkey.
Ladislas
VII.,
A. D.
1632-
1648.
3042
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Oppres-
sion
of the
Ukraine
Cossacks.
Cossack
Revolt
under
Bogdan.
John
Casimir.
A. D.
1648-
1668.
Bogdan's
Ravages.
Swedish
Invasion
of Poland.
Peace of
Oliva.
mander, as a frontier guard, had once been the most faithful friends
of Poland, but had now become by oppression her most inveterate
enemies — a result caused by the non-residence of the landholders, who
were mainly Polish nobles and themselves never visited the Ukraine,
but intrusted the charge of their estates to stewards or middlemen, who
enriched themselves by a double system of plunder from both landlords
and tenants. After one revolt of the Cossacks had been suppressed,
the Diet of Poland passed a decree annulling almost all the liberties of
those brave and warlike people, thus completely alienating them and
winning their inveterate animosity.
A comparatively private instance of tyranny brought matters to a
crisis. A Cossack named Bogdan, who dwelt on the banks of the
Dnieper, had saved the wife of the Castellan of Cracow from being
captured by the Turks ; and the castellan had rewarded him with a
windmill and a small estate adjoining, where he lived happily until
the death of the castellan, when the steward sought to deprive him of
his property. Bogdan resisted ; whereupon the steward fired his house,
and his wife and infant son perished in the flames. This outrage was
well calculated to rouse the passions of the already-excited Cossacks,
who immediately flew to arms, solicited aid from the Turks, and were
speedily reinforced by an army of forty thousand Tartars of the
Crimea. Bogdan assumed the position of hetman of this Tartar army,
and made himself master of the entire Ukraine; after which he led
his army into Poland, where his troops perpetrated the most horrible
deeds of violence.
In the midst of this war King Ladislas VII. of Poland died, A. D.
1648, whereupon his brother JOHN CASIMIE was elected King of Poland
by the Polish Diet. John Casimir's reign was an unfortunate one for
his country. With the support of Sultan Mohammed IV. of Turkey,
Bogdan assumed the title of Prince of the Ukraine, laid waste all of
Lithuania, and everywhere reduced the convents, the churches and the
Jesuit colleges to ashes.
John Casimir unfortunately adopted the title of hereditary King of
Sweden, thus provoking an invasion of Poland by King Charles X. of
Sweden. John Casimir fled from Warsaw, which was entered by the
Swedish monarch; but the insolence and oppression of the Swedish
soldiers incensed the Poles, who fled in large numbers to join the
standard of their fugitive king. The Czar Alexis of Russia, who
had also invaded Poland, now concluded a truce with the Poles, who
were also supported by Holland, Denmark, the Great Elector Fred-
erick William of Brandenburg and the Emperor Leopold I. of Ger-
many. By the Peace of Oliva, in 1660, John Casimir relinquished
his foolish pretensions to the crown of Sweden.
POLAND'S DISSENSIONS AND DECLINE.
3043
In the meantime Bogdan had died, and the Cossacks of the Ukraine
had returned to their allegiance to Poland on receiving guarantees for
their civil and religious liberties. But the war with Russia was re-
newed, and it continued until 1667, when the Peace of Andrussov was
concluded, by which Russia retained Smolensk, Kiev, Tchernigov and
all the country of the Cossacks east of the Dnieper. The territory
of the Cossacks west of the Dnieper was annexed to Poland, and the
Zaporog Cossacks, near the mouth of the same river, were placed under
the common jurisdiction of Poland and Russia, ready to serve against
the Turks as occasion demanded.
The resources of Poland were also exhausted by a war with the
Turks ; though this war afforded a field for the development of the
military genius of John Sobieski, " the Buckler of Christ," one of the
greatest warriors of his time, who greatly distinguished himself in
Poland's continual wars with the Cossacks, the Tartars, the Swedes, the
Russians and the Turks, and who obtained the dignity of Grand
Marshal of Poland. One of his most memorable exploits was the great
victory which he won with only twenty thousand men over one hundred
thousand Cossacks and Tartars in a series of battles lasting seventeen
days, in 1667, thus saving Poland from destruction.
During John Casimir's unfortunate reign the elegances of civilized
;ife were introduced into Poland by intercourse with France, but the
destructive wars with the Cossacks and the Tartars had injured com-
merce and retarded the progress of education.
The Liberum Veto — a dangerous innovation introduced into the
Polish Diet about this time — enabled any one member of the Diet to
defeat any measure to which he was opposed, to stop the proceedings
and even to dissolve the Diet. Scarcely any measure could be pro-
posed in an assembly of four hundred persons which would receive the
approbation of every one of them ; and every member was thus enabled
to prevent the passage of even the most important laws when he was
influenced by passion, by private interest or by bribery from foreign
sources. This absurd custom, so pregnant with disorders, hastened the
ruin of Po'and, which the want of a middle class was destined to bring
on sooner or later.
Finally John Casimir, worn out by misfortunes, and seeing his do-
minions depopulated by constant wars and pestilence, which he was
unable to avert without great sacrifices, began to sigh again for the
seclusion of the prelacy which he had exchanged for the Polish throne.
Twenty years of his life had been imbittered by the cares and vexa-
tions of government when he resolved to radicate his royal dignity.
He therefore convened the Polish Diet in ^638, announced his reso^-
tion in an affecting speech, bade farewell to his subjects and his
Cossack
Submis-
sion.
Peace of
Andrus-
sov with
Russia.
John So-
bieski's
Victories
over the
Turks.
Polish
Civili a-
tion.
Literum
Veto.
John
Casimir's
Abdica-
tion.
3044
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Michael
Wiesno-
wiski,
A. D.
1669-
1673.
War with
the Cos-
sacks,
Tartars
and
Turks.
John So-
bieski's
Victory
over the
Turks.
John
Sobieski,
A. D.
1674-
1696.
Peace of
Zarowno.
John So-
bieski's
Relief of
Vienna.
country, and retired into France, where he was kindly received by King
Louis XIV., and where he lived in a style suitable to his rank until
his death, in 1672.
John Casimir's abdication was followed by an interregnum of seven
months ; after which MICHAEL WIESNOWISKI was elected King of Po-
land in a stormy session of the Polish Diet, and was compelled to ac-
cept the Polish crown against his will. He had passed his previous
life in a monastery, and was extremely poor and wholly unfit for his
royal duties. His entire reign of four years, A. D. 1669—1673, was
a period of internal dissension and virtual anarchy. Four Diets were
dissolved in less than four years.
In the midst of these domestic troubles the war with the Cossacks
was renewed ; and the Turks and Tartars, the allies of the Cossacks, in-
vaded Poland, seized the city of Kaminiec in 1672, and gained pos-
session of the Ukraine, in spite of the prodigies of valor and military
skill of John Sobieski. King Michael Wiesnowiski, in a state of great
alarm, concluded a humiliating peace with the Turks, ceding to them
the city of Kaminiec and the province of Podolia, and even agreeing
to pay to them an annual tribute of twenty-two thousand ducats. The
Ukraine west of the Dnieper was relinquished to the Cossacks, who were
to be placed under the protection of the Turks. The Polish Diet re-
fused to ratify this treaty, as it preferred to continue the war. The
day after King Michael Wiesnowiski's death, John Sobieski with a
small force gained a brilliant victory near Kotzim over eighty thousand
Turks, who fled, leaving forty thousand dead upon the field, November
11, 1673 — a victory which electrified all Christendom.
After an interregnum of some months, JOHN SOBIESKI was elected
King of Poland by the national Diet at Wola in 1674, and was
crowned at Cracow with unusual magnificence. He had the arduous
task of raising his kingdom from a condition of extreme depression
and embarrassment. By extraordinary exertions he augmented the
military force of his kingdom, and by his prowess he rescued two-
thirds of the Ukraine from the Turks in 1676. By the Peace of
Zarowno, October 26, 1676, the Turks were allowed to retain the city
of Kaminiec, a part of the Ukraine and Podolia ; but Poland was re-
lieved from the tribute promised by Michael Wiesnowiski, and re-
tained that part of the Ukraine wrested from the Turks.
King John Sobieski attracted the attention of all Europe by his
relief of Vienna from the besieging host of two hundred thousand
Turks under Kara Mustapha in 1683, thus immortalizing his name
and throwing a great splendor over the waning glories of Poland ; but
this splendor was only temporary, and did not for a moment arrest
the rapid decline of the Polish kingdom,.
FIRST CZARS AND EARLIER ROMANOFFS IN RUSSIA.
3045
John Sobieski's talents were confined to brilliant military exploits.
He was a great soldier, but no statesman. He could preserve Poland
from her foreign foes, but was utterly unable to reduce the turbulent
Polish nobility to order, or to put an end to the internal dissensions
which distracted his unhappy kingdom.
By the Treaty of Leopold, or Lemberg, in 1686, which John
Sobieski signed with tears in his eyes, the hero-king was obliged to
cede Smolensk, Kiev, Tchernigov, Little Russia and other territories,
and the exclusive sovereignty of the territory of the Zaporog Cossacks,
to the Czar of Russia, in order to obtain the Czar's alliance and aid
against the Turks and the Tartars.
John Sobieski's last years were rendered sad by his failure to intro-
duce reforms into the Polish government. The nobles invariably in-
terposed their Liberum Veto ; and at the close of a stormy session of
the Diet, i:i 1688, the unhappy king confessed with tears in his eyes
that he was unable to save Poland. John Sobieski reigned as a mere
crowned cipher until his death, in 1696; and with him ended the
greatness of Poland.
After an interregnum of some months, the Elector Frederick Au-
gustus II. of Saxony was elected King of Poland in 1697 with the
title of FREDERICK AUGUSTUS I. By the Peace of Carlowitz, in 1699,
Poland recovered Kaminiec, Podolia and that part of the Ukraine
ceded to the Turks by the Peace of Zarowno in 1676.
His
Failure
as King.
Peace of
Lemberg
with
Russia.
John So-
bieski's
Last
Tears.
Frederick
Augustus
I., A. D.
1697-
1733-
SECTION III.— FIRST CZARS AND EARLDZR ROMANOFFS
IN RUSSIA (A. D. 1505-1702).
VASSILI V., who became Autocrat of all the Russias upon the death
of his illustrious father, Ivan the Great, in 1505, carried out his father's
policy firmly and successfully. In 1510 he annexed Pskov to his
dominions, thus extinguishing the last of the semi-independent prin-
cipalities of Russia. The Tartars of Kazan revolted against him ; but
they were utterly routed in battle in 1524, and again in 1530, when
they were made tributary to Russia. Vassili V. engaged in many
wars with the Poles and the Lithuanians, without accomplishing any
important results. He further enlarged and consolidated the Russian
dominions by his abilities as a warrior and a statesman. After a reign
of twenty-eight years, he died in 1533.
IVAN IV., THE TERRIBLE, the son and successor of Vassili V., was
only a child when the death of his father made him Autocrat of all
the Russias. His mother Helena assumed the regency, contrary to
Russian custom, and held her position four years, crushing all opposi-
Vassili
V., A. D.
1505-
1533-
His Wars
with the
Tartars
and with
Poland.
Ivan IV.,
the
Terrible,
A. D.
1533-
1584.
S046
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Helena
and
Shuiski.
Tyranny
and
Misrule
of the
Shuiski
i' amily.
Over-
throw
of the
Shuiski
Family.
Cruel
Death of
Andrew
Shuiski.
Cruel and
Tyranni-
cal Rule
of the
Glinski
Family.
tion with despotic cruelty. She was poisoned in 1537 ; whereupon the
regency was seized by the Shuiski, a powerful boyar family, whose
chief was the president of the supreme council of boyars.
The Shuiski family had suffered many humiliations and much bad
treatment from the Grand Princes of Russia. They now gratified
their revenge by inflicting all kinds of indignities upon the youthfu1
Ivan IV., whose life was passed in a state of constant terror. They
plundered the national treasury and robbed the Russian people, and
the insolent regent even went so far as to throw himself on the bed of
the young Ivan IV. and rudely thrust his feet into the lap of the Au-
tocrat of all the Russias. The Shuiski family punished all opposi-
tion to their despotic power with remorseless cruelty, and Ivan IV.
saw his friends dragged from his presence and put to death with
horrible tortures in spite of his entreaties in their behalf.
In 1543, when Ivan IV. was fourteen years of age, the Shuiski were
overthrown by the Glinski, another boyar family, who siezed the
regency and were sustained by the boy sovereign himself, who in-
formed the Shuiski that he no longer needed their guidance and would
no longer submit to their encroachments on his royal prerogative.
Said he : "I ought to punish you all, for all of you have been guilty
of offenses against my person ; but I will be indulgent, and the weight
of my anger shall fall only on Andrew Shuiski, who is the worst among
you " Andrew Shuiski, the head of the family, endeavored to justify
himself; but Ivan IV. would not listen to him. Exclaimed the boy
despot : " Seize and bind him, and throw him to my dogs ! The}7
have a right to the repast!" Thereupon a pack of ferocious hounds,
which Ivan IV. took delight in rearing, were brought under the window
and irritated by every possible means ; and, when they were sufficiently
exasperated, Andrew Shuiski was thrown among them. His cries in-
creased their fury, and they tore his body to shreds and devoured it.
The Glinski pursued a course of cruelty and despotism similar to
that which had characterized the rule of the Shuiski. The only differ-
ence between the two families was this : While the Shuiski treated the
boy sovereign with the greatest indignity and contempt, the Glinski
thrust him forward as a cover for all their acts, and plundered, killed
and tortured in his name. They diligently taught Ivan IV. that the
boyars were his natural enemies instead of the chief supporters of his
throne, and that he could maintain his power and dignity only by the
most stern and cruel measures.
The Glinski applauded and encouraged the development of the boy
despot's naturally-cruel instincts. They praised him when he tor-
mented wild animals for his own amusement, and when he threw tame
ones down from the summit of his palace with the same cruel delight;
FIRST CZARS AND EARLIER ROMANOFFS IN RUSSIA.
3047
when he dashed old people to the ground in his disorderly rambles, and
when he trampled the women and children of Moscow under the hoofs
of his horses. Fourteen years of the life of Ivan IV. — from the age
of three years to that of seventeen — were passed amid these terrible
scenes, and he was kept in such constant dread and agitation that his
naturally-strong mind became warped. He thus learned to delight in
cruelty and to think that to torment his subjects was his only safety.
The rule of the Glinski lasted only three years. In 1547 the people
of Moscow, driven to desperation and despair, rose against the despotic
family, massacred them and fired the city. In the midst of the terrible
scenes which followed, a monk named Sylvester entered the palace with
the Gospels in his hands. He sternly told young Ivan IV. that the out-
break was a manifestation of the Divine vengeance for the crimes
which the Glinski had committed in his name, and exhorted him to heed
the warning and govern his subjects with justice. Appalled by the
monk's awful words, Ivan IV. promised to do better. Alexis Adashef,
a prominent boyar, also entreated Ivan IV. to rule more justly ; and th£
result was a great change in the administration of the government.
Ivan the Terrible now assumed the title of Czar, meaning " Caesar."
He submitted himself to Sylvester and Adashef, confiding the govern-
ment of the Russian dominions to the latter. Russia enjoyed the
blessings of internal peace and good government for the next thirteen
years. Order was speedily restored in the government, and justice
was administered with impartiality. A regular standing army called
the Strelitz was organized, and regularity was again restored in the
military service.
The Tartar Khan of Kazan had made himself independent during
the minority of Ivan the Terrible. In 1552 Ivan led a powerful
Russian army against Kazan, which he conquered, hopelessly breaking
the power of the Tartars of that region. In 1553 a commercial road
was opened to Archangel, on the White Sea, at that time the only port
of Russia. In 1554 the Russians conquered the Tartar Khanate of
Astrakhan, thus extending their frontier to the Caspian Sea. Fort-
resses were erected along the entire frontier to hold the Tartars in
check. In 1570 the Don Cossacks were united with the Russian Em-
pire, and in 1581-'82 a Cossack freebooter named Yermak conquered
Siberia for Ivan the Terrible.
Ivan the Terrible did much for the promotion of Russian commerce,
concluded commercial treaties with Queen Elizabeth of England, in-
duced many Englishmen and Germans to settle in the Russian do-
minions, and established a printing office in Moscow in 1569. He con-
ducted frequent wars with Sweden and Poland with varying success.
He made an unsuccessful effort to expel the Teutonic Knights from
VOL. 9—16
The
Glinski
Family
and the
Cruel
Disposi-
tion of
Ivan the
Terrible.
Over-
throw
and
Massacre
of the
Glinski
Family.
Ivan the
Terrible,
the First
Czar.
The
Sterlitz.
Russian
Conquest
of Kazan
and As-
trakhan.
The Don
Cossacks
and
Siberia.
Treaties
with
England
Wars
with
Sweden
and
Poland.
3048
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Later
Insanity
and
Cruelty
of
Ivan the
Terrible.
Tribunal
of Blood
and
Whole-
sale
Massacre
at
Novgorod.
Cruel
Massacres
at
Moscow
and Other
Russian
Cities.
Livonia, and in 1582 he was obliged to end the war by surrendering
Livonia to Sweden.
Alexis Adashef died in 1560; and Anastasia, the wife of Ivan the
Terrible, to whom her husband was tenderly attached, died soon after-
ward. Ivan himself was taken seriously ill about the same time, and
his illness came near proving fatal. After recovering his health he
exhibited symptoms of insanity, which became a settled characteristic
of his nature. He was thenceforth gloomy and suspicious. He would
break out in terrible rages, during which he did not hesitate to strike
down with his own hand any one who happened to offend him, regard-
less of his rank or station. He was perpetually tormented with fears
of a revolt of his boyars, and surrounded himself with a select body of
soldiers, for whom he made way by ruthlessly driving out the inhabit-
ants of the streets adjoining his palace. He took delight in inflicting
suffering upon his subjects, whose abject submission to his tyranny
is one of the most remarkable circumstances in history.
Ivan the Terrible hated the people of Novgorod for their free spirit ;
and in 1570, when he ascertained that they were in traitorous cor-
respondence with the Poles to surrender the city to them, he hastened
thither with his Strelitzes, closed the gates and lined the streets with
troops. A court called the Tribunal of Blood proceeded to try the
delinquent citizens of Novgorod, and this court condemned numbers
to death daily for six weeks. Grief, horror and despair reigned in
every dwelling in Novgorod, for there was no escape, no means of
resistance. The cruel despot raged like an incensed tiger during
those six terrible weeks, and sixty thousand of the Novgorodians are
said to have fallen victims to his furious rage. He himself killed a
throng of the unfortunate inhabitants and heaped their bodies in a vast
enclosure. When his strength finally failed to second his fury he
gave up the remainder to his select guard, to his slaves, to his dogs
and to the opened ice of the Volkhof, in which hundreds of those un-
fortunate beings were engulfed daily for more than a month. After
declaring that his justice was satisfied he retired from Novgorod, and
seriously recommended himself to the prayers of the survivors, who
were particularly careful to render obedience to the orders of the
tyrant.
Ivan the Terrible caused similar massacres to be perpetrated in
Tver, Pskov, Moscow and other Russian cities. He caused five hun-
dred of the most illustrious nobles of Moscow to be tortured and put
to death. Women, as well as men, perished. The cruel tyrant ordered
them to be hanged at their own doors, and forbade their husbands to
go in or out without passing under the corpses of their companions
xmtil they rotted and dropped in pieces upon them. Elsewhere hus-
FIRST CZARS AND EARLIER ROMANOFFS IN RUSSIA.
3049
bands and children were fastened dead to the places which they had
occupied at the domestic table, and their wives and mothers were forced
to sit opposite to the lifeless remains for days. The crazy tyrant
compelled sons to kill their fathers, and brothers to slay each other.
He threw his prisoners of war into boiling cauldrons, or roasted them
at slow fires which he himself stirred up. The whole Russian Empire
was filled with terror and bloodshed.
Finally some of the most faithful boyars, with the cruel despot's
eldest son at their head, mustered sufficient courage to present an
humble petition for mercy. The enraged tyrant killed his son with a
single blow from his iron-bound staff. He manifested great remorse
for this mad deed, which hastened his death in 1584.
Notwithstand his madness and tyranny, Ivan the Terrible, the first
Czar of Moscovy, did more for the greatness of Russia than any of
his predecessors. His conquests extended the territorial dominion of
Russia and strengthened its resources ; but that empire did not yet
take any part in general European affairs, as it was isolated from the
other European nations by Poland and Sweden, which two kingdoms
possessed the territory west of Russia and the Baltic shores. The
Crim Tartars occupied the country between Russia and the Black Sea.
Russia's only ports were upon the Caspian and White Seas. The
port of Archangel, on the White Sea, was founded during this reign,
and was the point from which Russia's commerce with England and the
other European countries was carried on during that period.
FEODOR I., the second son of Ivan the Terrible, was twenty-seven
years of age when he became Czar of Russia, at the time of his father's
death, in 1584. He was weak and sickly, and he took special delight
in haunting the churches and ringing the bells. He was in no way
fitted to be the sovereign of an empire. His father had been aware of
his infirmity, and had therefore left him under the care of a council of
boyars, whose leading spirit was Boris Godunof, a man of Tartar
descent and Feeder's brother-in-law. Boris Godunof soon assumed the
supreme power of Russia and administered the government according
to his own will, the weak Feodor I. being a mere instrument in his
hands. Boris caused Dimitri, the other son of Ivan the Terrible,
although but a child, to be banished to an estate which his father had
left him, where he was afterward murdered by order of Boris.
Boris Godunof did all in his power to gain the favor of the people
of Moscow, because he aspired to be his sovereign's successor on the
Russian throne; and his great abilities enabled him to carry out his
designs successfully. In 1591 the Tartar Khan of the Crimea invaded
Russia and advanced against Moscow, which was unprotected by
fortifications. The inhabitants were in despair; but Boris, with ex-
His
Murdel
of His
Son.
Russia's
Isolation.
The Port
of Arch-
angel.
Feodor
I., A. D.
1584-
1598.
Boris
Godunof.
Crim
Tartar
Attack on
Moscow
Repulsed.
3050
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
End of
the Rurik
Dynasty.
Boris
Godunof
Called.
Boris
Godunof,
A. D.
1598-
1605.
Serfdom
Estab-
lished.
Famine.
Dimitri,
the Pre-
tender.
Feodor
H., A. D.
1605.
His Over-
throw.
traerdinary energy, caused a line of fortifications to be thrown up
around the city, and manned it with a strong force of infantry and
artillery. The assault of the Tartars was repulsed, and their army
thereupon commenced a disastrous retreat homeward.
With the death of Feodor I., in 1598, ended the male line of Rurik,
which had occupied the Russian throne for seven hundred and thirty-
six years (A. D. 862-1598). The Russian nobles and people then
called Boris Godunof to the throne of Muscovy ; and, after a feigned
hesitation, he complied with their wishes, thus beginning his reign of
seven years.
BORIS GODUNOF, who was elected Czar of Russia by the Russian
nobles, upon the extinction of the male line of Rurik, in 1598, reigned
seven years, as already noticed. The chief event of his reign was the
establishment of serfdom in Russia, but on the whole his rule was bene-
ficial to his empire. He caused the laws to be administered impartially,
encouraged the arts and trades, induced many intelligent foreigners to
settle in his dominions, and in other ways promoted the civilization of
Russia. He treated the boyars with great severity, thus alienating
that class from him. The Russian peasants bitterly resented the
establishment of serfdom, and a bloody peasant outbreak was sup-
pressed with difficulty.
A terrible famine broke out in Russia in 1601, and lasted three years,
carrying off more than one hundred thousand persons in Moscow alone.
Boris Godunof exerted himself to his utmost to relieve the wants of
his subjects, but he was able to accomplish very little in the midst of
so much suffering.
In the midst of the discontent which the famine caused, an impostor
appeared in Poland, claiming to be Dimitri, the son of Ivan, whom
Boris Godunof had caused to be put to death when a child. This pre-
tended Dimitri was supported by a number of Polish noblemen, and
raised an army with which he invaded Russia in 1603. All who were
dissatisfied with Boris Godunof flocked to the impostor's standard, and
the false Dimitri soon had a considerable army. He achieved a victory
over the Czar's troops, but was at length defeated, after which he
took refuge in one of the fortified cities, where he maintained his posi-
tion.
Boris Godunof died suddenly, April 13, 1605, and was succeeded
as Czar of Russia by his son FEODOR II., a youth of sixteen years. In
the following month, May, 1605, the Russian army revolted, and pro-
claimed the false Dimitri Czar of Russia. On June 1, 1605, the
inhabitants of Moscow also proclaimed the pretended Dimitri Czar,
seized the youthful Feodor II. and shut him up in prison, where he
was assassinated shortly afterward.
FIRST CZARS AND EARLIER ROMANOFFS IN RUSSIA.
DIMITKI entered Moscow, June 20, 1605, amid the joyful acclama-
tions of the populace, and several weeks afterward he was solemnly
crowned Czar of all the Russias. He exhibited unusual talents as a
sovereign, and was a monarch of more liberal views than had ever
reigned over Russia before. His chief desire was to unite all the
forces of the Slavonic race to drive the Tartars and the Turks from
Europe, and he at once commenced preparing for this struggle. He
resolved that the clergy should bear their proper share of the expenses
of the war, and accordingly imposed a tax upon them, thus compass-
ing his own ruin.
The clergy did not intend to bear any of the public burdens, and
used their powerful influence against the Czar. They instigated a
conspiracy to dethrone him; and the plot was joined by a number of
boyars, among whom were some of those who had assisted in placing
him on the Russian throne after deserting the standard of Boris
Godunof. The leader of the conspiracy was Vassili Shuiski, a power-
ful boyar whom Dimitri had specially favored.
On May 18, 1606, the Czar Dimitri was married with great pomp
to a Polish princess, who came attended by a numerous retinue of her
own countrymen. The Czar's marriage to a princess outside of the
Greek Church mortally offended the Russian people; and the thought-
less conduct of the Poles, who manifested open disrespect for the
Greek faith, vastly increased this feeling among the Czar's subjects.
On the night of the Czar's marriage the conspirators took advantage
of the popular discontent by taking up arms against the Czar; and,
as they were joined by the people of Moscow, they forced an entrance
into the Kremlin and attacked the palace, assassinating Dimitri and
the few who defended him, while the new Czarina narrowly escaped
with her life.
Upon the assassination of Dimitri the boyars immediately pro-
claimed Vassili Shuiski Czar of Russia with the title of VASSILI VI.,
and he was crowned June 1, 1606. A part of the Russian nation re-
fused to acknowledge the rule of Vassili VI., and a rebellion soon broke
out against him. A rumor was circulated that the Czar Dimitri was
still living and that he had escaped to Poland, whence he issued com-
mands to his adherents to attack Vassili VI. Another false Dimitri
soon appeared in Russia, with the aid of a Polish army, and marched
toward Moscow.
As the Czar Vassili VI. entered into an alliance with King Charles
IX. of Sweden to resist this invasion, King Sigismund III. of Poland
espoused the cause of this second false Dimitri. Vassili VI. found his
Swedish allies wholly untrustworthy, as they soon deserted to the Poles,
so that Moscow was forced to surrender to the Poles in 1610. The
5—34
Pimitri,
A. D.
1605-
1606.
His
Views
and
Designs.
Plot
against
Him.
His
Marriage
with a
Polish
Princess
His
Assassi-
nation.
Vassili
VI., A. D.
1606-
1613.
Revolts
against
Him.
Polish
Invasion
of Russia
and
Capture
ef
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Polish
Burning
and
Massacre
of
Moscow.
Expul-
sion
of the
Poles.
Michael
Roman-
off, A. D.
1613-
1645.
His Good
Reign.
His
Peace
Treaties
with
Sweden
and
Poland.
His
Peaceful
and Pros-
perous
Reign.
ALxis,
A D.
1045-
1676.
Czar Vassili VI. was taken prisoner and was sent to a Polish fortress,
where he died the next year.
As the Poles were attacked in Moscow by the inhabitants in 1611,
they burned the city and massacred thousands of the populace. A
period of anarchy followed, during which Russia was without a sov-
ereign, while her capital was occupied by the Polish invaders. The
evident intention of the Poles to reduce Russia to the condition of a
Polish province revived the national spirit of the Russian people, and
in 1612 Pozharski and other popular Russian leaders drove the Poles
from Moscow and forced them to retire into their own dominions.
After thus delivering their country from its foreign conquerors the
Russians preceded to elect a new Czar, and their choice fell upon the
good and peaceable MICHAEL, ROMANOFF, who was proclaimed and
crowned Czar of all the Russias in 1613, thus becoming the founder
of the illustrious dynasty of the Romanoffs, who have ever since oc-
cupied the imperial throne of Russia, and under whom Russia has
emerged from Asiatic barbarism to European civilization and become
one of the rising powers of Europe. Micheal Romanoff was the son
of Feodor, Archbishop of Rostov and afterward Patriarch of Moscow,
and was a descendant of Rurik through the female line. He was only
sixteen years old when he was elected to the dignity of Autocrat of all
the Russias ; and he reigned thirty-two years, A. D. 1613—1645, dur-
ing which he restored peace to his distracted empire, relieving it of
civil and foreign wars.
By the Peace of Stolbova with King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden,
in 1617, the Czar Michael Romanoff ceded the provinces of Ingria and
Russian Carelia to Sweden. By the Truce of Divilina, in 1618, and
the Peace of Wiasma, in 1634, the Czar ceded the vast territories of
Smolensk, Tchernigov and Novgorod, with their dependencies, to Po-
land. After thus ending his wars with Sweden and Poland, Michael
Romanoff devoted all his energies to promoting the prosperity of
Russia and to the preservation of peace with her neighbors. He con-
cluded commercial treaties with England, France, Persia and China,
thus reviving the prostrate trade of Russia. In 1639 he extended the
Russian dominions eastward to the Pacific. He proved himself a wise
and able sovereign, and recovered for his empire some of its lost
prosperity.
Upon the death of Michael Romanoff, in 1645, his eldest son
ALEXIS became Czar and Autocrat of all the Russias. Alexis ener-
getically and vigorously pursued his renowned father's policy for the
civilization of Russia and for placing her among the nations of Europe.
He extended his dominion over the Don Cossacks; thus becoming in-
volved in a war with John Casimir, King of Poland, who had exer-
FIRST CZARS AND EARLIER ROMANOFFS IN RUSSIA.
3053
cised jurisdiction over the Don Cossacks. In alliance with King
Charles X. of Sweden, Alexis invaded Poland in 1654; but after the
Swedish king had captured Warsaw in 1656 the Czar became jealous
and alarmed, and concluded a truce with the Polish king in order to
turn his arms against the Swedes. After the conclusion of peace be-
tween Sweden and Poland the Czar Alexis renewed his war with John
Casimir of Poland; and by the Peace of Andrussov, in 1667, he re-
covered Smolensk, Kiev, Tchernigov and all of the Ukraine east of
the Dnieper.
The Czar Alexis Romanoff died in 1676, and was succeeded on the
Russian throne by his son FEODOR III., who rendered his reign illus-
trious by the wisdom of his administration. Acting under the counsels
of his able and enlightened Minister, Prince Galitzin, the Czar Feodor
III. established the absolute power of the Czars by abolishing the
hereditary orders of the Russian nobility and the prerogatives that
were attached to them. These orders were destructive of all subordina-
tion in civil and military affairs, and were productive of numberless
controversies and litigations which were taken cognizance of by a
court named Rozrad. In a grand assembly convoked by him at Mos-
cow in 1682 the Czar Feodor III. abolished the hereditary rank of the
Russian nobles, burned the deeds and the genealogical registers upon
which the nobles based their claims, and required every noble family of
Russia to produce the extracts of these registers, which they had in
their possession, that they might also be consigned to the flames.
Upon the death of Feodor III., in 1682, his two brothers, IVAN V.
and PETER, were crowned joint sovereigns of Russia. The elder
brother, Ivan V., who was the son of Alexis by that Czar's first mar-
riage, was a poor deformed idiot, and was therefore Czar only in
name. As Peter, the son of Alexis by a second marriage, was a mere
boy, the government of Russia was intrusted to the regency of his
half-sister Sophia, the daughter of Alexis by that Czar's first marriage.
Sophia was a daring princess and herself aspired to the crown.
Peter defeated his half-sister's ambitious scheme in 1689 by seizing
the Russian throne and making himself sole Czar and Autocrat of all
the Russias at the youthful age of seventeen. Such was the beginning
of the celebrated reign of the renowned PETER THE GREAT. The
young Czar was addicted to drunkenness and to sensual pleasures ; but
he already gave evidence of the wonderful energy and strength of will
which were destined to make him one of the most remarkable characters
of history, and which eventually acquired for him the well-merited
title of the Great. He began his sole reign with the firm resolve to
make Russia one of the great powers of Europe. Russia was already
a powerful empire, but was politically isolated from the rest of Europe.
His Wars
with
Poland
and
Sweden.
Peace of
Andrus-
sov.
Feodor
II.,A.D
1676-
1682.
Absolute
Power
of the
Czars
Estab-
lished.
Iran V.
and
Peter,
A. D.
1682-
1689.
Regency
of Sophia
Peter the
Great,
A. D.
1689-
1725.
His
Great-
ness.
3054
His
Improve-
ment f
Arch-
angel.
His
Conquest
of Azov
from the
Turks.
His
Travels
^ver
Europe.
His
Work as a
Ship-car-
penter in
Holland.
Also in
England.
His Visit
to the
Emperor
Leopold I.
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Peter the Great paid great attention to the improvement of Arch-
angel, on the White Sea, then the only sea-port of Russia. He be-
lieved that his empire must have a more extended sea-coast in order
to give it the rank to which it was entitled among the European powers.
In alliance with John Sobicski, King of Poland, Peter the Great waged
war against the Turks, from whom he conquered the territory of Azov,
on the Black Sea, in 1696, annexing it to his dominions. After thus
securing a footing on the Black Sea, he resolved to create a fleet which
should enable him to hold his conquest and make Russia superior to
Turkey.
In order to found a navy for Russia, and to learn the arts of civiliza-
tion in order that he might introduce them among his subjects, the
Czar Peter the Great intrusted the administration of the Russian gov-
ernment to an old boyar, and traveled over Europe to study the in-
stitutions of other nations and to learn the industrial arts by which
those nations had acquired their prosperity. With this view of learn-
ing the practical advantages of civilization that he might become the
reformer and civilizer of his barbarous subjects, the Czar started on his
travels in 1697.
Traveling in disguise as a subordinate in one of his own embassies,
Peter the Great passed through part of Sweden and Brandenburg, and
spent several : mnths at Saardam, in Holland, where he worked as a
common ship- carpenter, receiving his wages every Saturday night, and
adopting the raiment, food and lodging of his fellow workmen in the
shop and yard, thus learning by actual experience the art of ship-
building. While in Holland the vigilant Czar observed the other
sources of that country's prosperity ; while at the same time he kept a
close watch over the affairs of Russia, being constantly informed of
events in his remote dominions. He directed the government of his
empire from his laborer's hut in Holland, and often laid down the plane
or hatchet to sign an order for the march of an army or for the arrest
of a suspected traitor.
By the invitation of King William III., Peter the Great visited Eng-
land in 1698, and was cordially received by his royal host ; but, instead
of wasting his time in court festivities, the distinguished guest visited
the dock-yards and established himself near the royal navy-yard at
Deptford, where he continued his labors in ship-building, while receiv-
ing instruction in surgery, mathematics and navigation. In this way
Peter the Great perpared himself to be the civilizer of his subjects — a
noble ambition which contributed vastly to redeem his faults.
After thus completing his studies and perfecting his knowledge of
the art of ship-building, Peter the Great paid a visit of ceremony to
the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany at Vienna; and he would have
FIRST CZARS AND EARLIER ROMANOFFS IN RUSSIA.
3055
also visited Italy had he not been recalled to Russia by intelligence of
a very formidable revolt of the Strditz, the Russian militia, the same
year, 1698.
The Strelitz had made several attempts upon Peter's life, in obedi-
ence to the orders of his half-sister Sophia ; and Peter had commenced
during his boyhood to train a body of infantry according to the Ger-
man tactics, to supersede his formidable and turbulent militia. Peter
now considered that the time had arrived for the extermination of the
Strelitz. While still abroad he gave directions to his generals, and
the ringleaders of the revolt were soon in irons. The revolt was
speedily suppressed, and seven thousand prisoners were taken. Upon
his return to Moscow, in September, 1698, the Czar caused every one
of these prisoners to be put to death, himself beheading many of them.
He thus dissolved the Strelitz forever. His half-sister Sophia, whom
the malcontents had intended to place on the Russian throne, and who
was believed to have instigated and directed the plot, was imprisoned
in a convent.
After restoring order and securing his power by his prompt and
bloody suppression of the revolt of the Strelitz, Peter the Great began
to execute his cherished plans for the civilization of his empire In-
putting in force the measures by which he hope to bring Russia into
direct intercourse with the rest of Europe and to fit her for the posi-
tion which ho intended that she should assume.
He changed the titles of the nobility, and greatly curtailed their
powers. He permitted the free circulation of the Bible among his sub-
jects, and granted perfect religious toleration. He encouraged im-
migration by inviting into Russia foreign officers, generals, mariners,
artists and literary men whose talents could assist him in tlie formation
of his plans, as well as those skilled artisans whose industries he patron-
ized and sought to introduce into his dominions. By the Czar's order,
arsenals, factories, and schools of navigation were established in Russia.
Competent experts and engineers made maps and charts of different
portions of the Russian Empire, and also a general survey of the mines.
Peter the Great found greater difficulty in introducing European
domestic customs among his subjects. The Czar himself set tlic ex-
ample by laying aside the old Russian national dress and adopting the
European costume. He required all Russians, except the priests and
the peasants, to follow his example. He imposed a heavy tax upon
beards in order to abolish them. The long robes and the unkempt
beards of the men, and the Oriental seclusion of the women, gradually
gave way to European costumes and social customs : but a brutal in-
dulgence still prevailed at the Russian court as well as among the
common people.
Revolt
and
Extermi-
nation
of the
Strelitz.
Peter's
Civilizing
Plans.
Ilia En-
lightened
Proceed-
ings.
His
Reforms
of
Russian
Domestic
Customs.
3056
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
His
Vices and
Faults.
His
Great-
ness as a
Czar.
Although Peter the Great could civilize his subjects he could not
civilize himself; and he remained a cruel barbarian all his life, devoted
to brandy and guilty of some shocking crimes. He busied himself
daily with the cares of state ; and every evening after resting from his
labors he would have a big bottle of brandy set before him, and drink
until his reason was gone for the time. He often said that he could
correct the faults of his subjects, but could not reform himself. Yet
his name stands deservedly among the first of those sovereigns who
have labored for the good of their subjects, as he did more for the
civilization and welfare of the Russian people than all his predecessors
and successors.
Decline
of the
Ottoman
Empire.
Power
of the
janiza-
ries.
Achmet
III ,A.D.
1603-
1617.
His Rule
and Wars.
Peace of
Sitvat-
orok.
Mustapha
I., A. D.
1617-
1618.
SECTION IV.— TURKEY'S WARS WITH GERMANY AND
HER ALLIES (A. D. 1603-1699).
THE Ottoman, or Turkish Empire, which had once been so formid-
able, had gradually fallen from the summit of its grandeur and steadily
declined. Its resources were exhausted, and its history was marked
only by misfortunes. The effeminacy and incapacity of the Sultans,
their contempt for the arts of the nations of Christendom, and the
evils of a purely military and despotic government, gradually under-
mined the strength of the Empire, and eclipsed its glory as a conquer-
ing power. The Janizaries became the real arbiters of the destinies
of the Empire, raising up and deposing or murdering Sultans at will ;
thus following the example of the Praetorian Guards of ancient Rome,
who made and unmade Emperors at pleasure. Most of the provinces
were ruled by pashas, who oppressed the inhabitants with burdensome
taxes for the purpose of enriching themselves.
ACHMET I., the son and successor of Mohammed III., who died of
the plague in 1603, was a youth of fifteen when he became Sultan of
Turkey, and had been shut up in prison during his father's reign.
The Hungarians and the Persians waged war against Turkey during
the reign of Achmet I., who did not lead his own troops, but passed
most of his time in his harem, which contained over three thousand
females. Achmet I. erected a stately mosque near the Church of St.
Sophia, which still constitutes one of the principal architectural orna-
ments of Constantinople. During the reign of Achmet I. the Peace
of Sitvatorok, in 1607, ended the war with the German Empire begun
in 1594.
Achmet I. died in 1617, and was succeeded as Sultan of Turkey by
his brother MUSTAPHA I., who was unfit for government, and was
therefore deposed and imprisoned by the Janizaries in 1618, after a
TURKEY'S WARS WITH GERMANY AND HER ALLIES.
3057
reign of four months. The Janizaries placed OTHMAN II., the youth-
ful son of Achmet I., upon the Turkish throne. War broke out be-
tween Turkey and Poland in 1620 ; and Sultan Othman II. defeated the'
Poles with great loss at Jassy, in Moldavia, in September, 1620 ; but
the young Sultan, presuming on his great victory to attempt the con-
quest of Poland, was defeated with the loss of eighty thousand men
in 1621, and was forced to consent to an ignominious peace. This
disastrous failure so enraged the Janizaries that they rose in insurrec-
tion at the close of the war, in 1622, and assassinated the youthfol
Othman II. by strangling him in the castle of the Seven Towers, a
state prison belonging to the Seraglio, after a reign of four years, and
when he was only eighteen years of age.
The murdered Othman's imbecile uncle, the deposed MUSTAPHA I.,
was then dragged from his dungeon and restored to his throne. The
pashas of the various provinces of the Empire took advantage of the
confusion to rebel, thus causing such a scene of anarchy that the
chief men of Constantinople met together and deposed Mustapha I.
a second time, A. D. 1623, in less than a year after his restoration of
the Ottoman throne, and again imprisoned him in the Seven Towers.
AMURATH IV., a younger brother of Othman II., was then placed
upon the Turkish throne. He was arbitrary, tyrannical, fierce and
cruel ; but he restored order to the Ottoman Empire, and punished the
rebellious Janizaries. His extravagant acts of folly have furnished
subjects for many an Oriental tale. He was immoderately fond of
wine — an indulgence expressly forbidden by the Koran. When in-
toxicated he committed all kinds of absurd and furious actions. He
sometimes traversed the streets of the Turkish capital with a drawn
sword, to kill any one whom he might see smoking — a practice which
he had forbidden, because he disliked the smell of tobacco. Occa-
sionally he amused himself by discharging arrows from a bow in all
directions, utterly regardless of whom he might kill. His attendants
trembled at the very sound of his footsteps, and the people in the
streets would conceal themselves at his approach. He defeated the
Persians, captured Bagdad, and massacred its inhabitants in 1638.
Sultan Amurath IV. died in 1640, from excessive drinking, and was
succeeded on the Turkish throne by his brother IBRAHIM, whose in-
tellect had been so impaired by the close confinement in which he had
been kept that he was wholly unable to direct the affairs of state. In
1645 the Turks began a war with Venice for the conquest of the island
of Candia, the ancient Crete, and one of the most valuable of the
possessions of the Venetian Republic. While this War of Candia vns
still in progress, Sultan Ibrahim was deposed by the turbulent Jani-
zaries, in 1649, after a reign of nine years, and was strangled.
Othman
II., A. D.
1618-
1622.
His Dis-
astrous
War with
Poland,
and
Assassi-
nation.
Mustapha
I.
Restored
and again
Deposed,
A. D.
1622-
1623.
Amurath
IV., A. D.
1623-
1640.
His
Tyranny
and
Cruelty.
Capture
and
Massacre
of
Bagdad.
Ibrahim,
A. D.
1640-
1649.
War of
Candia
with
Venice
3058
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Moham-
med IV.,
A. D.
1649-
1687.
Hunga-
rian
Revolts
against
j the
House of
Haps-
burg.
Emperor
Leopold I.
and the
Hunga-
rian Diet.
Turkish
Invasion
of
Austrian
Hungary.
Foreign
Aid to
Austria.
Ibrahim's son, MOHAMMED IV., a child of seven years, then became
Sultan of Turkey. As soon as he had arrived at an age of discretion
he removed his court to Adrianople. He supported the Cossacks of the
Ukraine in their revolt against Poland from 1647 to 1654.
The civil oppressions and religious persecutions of the Hungarians
led to frequent efforts at revolt against the House of Hapsburg. The
precautions which the Hungarian Diet at Pressburg had taken to
establish civil and religious liberty on a solid basis did not avert dis-
turbances in the Hungarian kingdom. The Hapsburgs perceived the
necessity of consolidating their dominions, whose heterogeneous ele-
ments were suffering for lack of unity, and they eagerly seized these
occasions to extend their power in Hungary, where their authority
was vastly circumscribed by the constitution and laws of that king-
dom. Thus the Hungarians complained of perpetual infringements
on the part of the court of Vienna, and thus arose repeated disturbances
in Hungary, the dominion of which was shared by Austria and Turkey.
The Turks then ruled Transylvania, as well as a great part of
Hungary. The Emperor Leopold I. of Germany, as King of Hun-
gary, granted protection to John Kemeny, Prince of Transylvania,
against Michael Abaffi, a protege of the Turks ; thus rendering a war
between the Ottoman and German Empires inevitable. Leopold I., as
King of Hungary, convened the Hungarian Diet at Pressburg in 1662
to take action in this crisis. But before giving any opinion concerning
the war with the Turks, the Hungarian Diet demanded from Leopold
I. a redress of grievances, and adjourned without any decision as to
the impending war.
The Turks profited by these dissensions in the Austrian dominions,
and a Turkish army of two hundred thousand men under the Grand
Vizier Achmet Koproli invaded Austrian Hungary in 1663, thus
bringing on another war between the Ottoman and German Empires.
The Turkish invaders speedily captured Neuhausel and several other
fortresses in Austrian Hungary, in spite of the vigorous exertions of
the famous Montecuculi, the commander of the Austrian and German
imperial forces ; while a Tartar horde ravaged Moravia almost as far as
Olmutz. Leopold I., incapable of opposing the Turks, and distrustful
of the Hungarian malcontents, appealed as Emperor to the German
Imperial Diet.
In this crisis of peril which menaced all Christendom, Sweden, France,
Pope Alexander VII. and the Italian states sent contributions of men
and money ; and, with the extraordinary supplies voted by the German
Imperial Diet, Montecuculi was enabled to take the field against the
Ottoman invaders with a formidable army, in which were six thousand
French auxiliaries under the Count de Coligni, sent by King Louis
TURKEY'S WARS WITH GERMANY AND HER ALLIES.
XIV. Montecuculi routed the Turks in the great battle of St. Gott-
hard, near the frontier of Hungary and Styria, in 1664 ; the French
auxiliaries signalizing their bravery.
Instead of making use of this advantage to prosecute hostilities with
increased energy and vigor, the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany con-
cluded the twenty years' Truce of Vasvar with the Turks, in August,
1 664 ; permitting them to retain all their conquests in Austrian Hun-
gar}7, continuing their protege and tributary Michael Abaffi in Tran-
sylvania, and even paying them a tribute of two hundred thousand
florins, disguised under the name of a gift. The Emperor Leopold I.
had been largely forced to this humiliating treaty by the enmity of
the Hungarians against the imperial House of Hapsburg.
In 1669 the Turks finally conquered the island of Candia, after a
war of twenty-four years with Venice, and after a siege of two years
and four months, during which they lost one hundred thousand lives.
The French had vainly endeavored to relieve the beleaguered island.
The island of Candia has ever since remained in the possession of the
Turks.
In 1672 the Turks invaded Poland, as allies of the revolted Cossacks,
and seized the city of Kaminiec ; but the next year an army of eighty
thousand Turks was utterly defeated with the loss of forty thousand
killed by a small Polish force under the valiant John Sobieski at
Kotzim, November 11, 1673. This brilliant victory of the Polish hero
checked the progress of the Turkish invaders of Poland, and electrified
all Christendom. By the Peace of Zarowno, October 26, 1676, the
Turks retained the city of Kaminiec with a considerable part of the
Ukraine and Podolia, but restored some portions of the Ukraine to
Poland.
The Truce of Vasvar was highly displeasing to the Hungarians, as it
had been concluded without their concurrence. The complaints of the
Hungarians against the court of Vienna grew louder. They com-
plained of the Emperor Leopold's action in quartering German troops
among them, in occupying the principal fortresses of Hungary with
German troops, and in imposing shackles on their religious liberties,
thus oppressing the Protestants of Hungary.
As Leopold I. paid no regard to their complaints, several of the
Hungarian magnates headed an armed revolt for the preservation of the
civil and religious liberties of Hungary. Leopold hoped to suppress
the Hungarian rising by severity. The magnates who led the insur-
rection were accused of holding; a treasonable correspondence with the
.
Turks, and of conspiring against the life of their king, the Emperor
Leopold I. Accordingly such magnates as the Counts Zrini, Nadas-
chdi, Frangepan and Tattenbach were condemned as guilty of high
Battle of
Gotthard.
Truce oi
Turkish
Of Candia.
Turkish
by John
'
Peace of
Continued
Hunga-
Bi0ns.
Hunga-
Revolt
***&.
Of Hunga-
_, .
Magnates.
3060
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Formid-
able Hun-
garian
Rebellion
against
Emperor
Leopold I.
Emmerik
Tekeli.
Tekeli's
Victories.
Leopold's
Conces-
sions.
Civil War
Renewed.
Turkish
Aid to the
Hunga-
rians.
Turko-
Hunga-
rian
Invasion
of
Austria.
Siege of
Vienna.
treason, and were beheaded on the scaffold in 1671. Many of the
Protestant clergy of Hungary were banished from the country or
condemned to the galleys, on the charge of complicity in the plot ; while
the chartered rights of Hungary were outraged.
But these acts of violence, instead of abating the disturbances, tended
rather to augment them, and to excite the love of freedom and the
military spirit of the Hungarians. The suppression of the dignity of
Palatine of Hungary, which occurred about the same time, along with
the cruelties and extortions practiced by the German troops, eventually
produced a general rebellion in Hungary against the Austrian House of
Hapsburg, which ended in civil war in 1677. The Hungarian rebels
at first chose Count Francis Wesselini for their leader, but he was soon
superseded by Count Emmerik Tekeli. These patriotic magnates were
secretly abetted by Louis XIV. of France and by Sultan Mohammed
IV. of Turkey.
Count Emmerik Tekeli, at the head of twelve thousand Hungarians,
defeated the Austrian and German imperial armies in Upper Hungary
in 1678, and occupied the entire region of the Carpathian mountains.
The Emperor Leopold I., as King of Hungary, then found it neces-
sary to comply; and, in the Hungarian Diet, which he convened at
Odenburg, he granted redress of most of the grievances complained of
by the Hungarians ; but, as Count Emmerik Tekeli disapproved of the
resolutions of this Diet, the civil war in Hungary continued ; and Tekeli
formed an alliance with the Prince of Transylvania and with the Sultan
of Turkey, who recognized him as tributary King of Hungary in 1682,
while Louis XIV. secretly afforded him assistance.
As the twenty years' Truce of Vasvar had now almost expired, the
Turks renewed hostilities with Austria and the German Empire in 1683,
and an Ottoman army of two hundred thousand men under the Grand
Vizier Kara Mustapha marched to the aid of the revolted Hungarians
and joined Count Emmerik Tekeli at Essek, in Slavonia. The united
Turkish and Hungarian armies, numbering two hundred thousand men,
then marched upon Vienna to make the Hapsburgs tremble in their own
capital. At the approach of the invaders, the Emperor Leopold I. and
his court fled in consternation to Linz, followed by sixty thousand
persons in a single day ; and the Austrian capital seemed doomed.
The immense Turkish hosts under Kara Mustapha laid siege to
Vienna, July 14, 1683. The inhabitants and the brave garrison under
Count Rudiger von Stahremberg withstood the siege for two months, in
spite of all assaults ; but six thousand of the garrison perished by battle
and pestilence, and the fall of the city appeared at hand.
At the earnest solicitations of the Emperor Leopold I., the valiant
John Sobieski, King of Poland, who had covered himself with glory by
TURKEY'S WARS WITH GERMANY AND HER ALLIES.
3061
his gallant defense of Poland against Cossacks, Tartars and Turks,
now came with eighteen thousand Polish veterans to the relief of
Austria's beleaguered capital. He was joined by the German imperial
army under Duke Charles of Lorraine ; and the united Polish and Ger-
man armies, numbering eighty-three thousand men, under the chief com-
mand of the Polish warrior-king, appeared before Vienna on the even-
ing of Saturday, September 11, 1683; his arrival upon the heights
of Kahlenberg being betokened by the discharge of rockets, thus
kindling new hopes in the starving citizens of the Austrian capital.
Although the besieging Ottoman hosts outnumbered the Polish and
German troops more than two to one, John Sobieski's name alone was a
terror to the Turks. The next day after the Polish king's arrival,
Sunday, September 12, 1683, was decided the question whether the
crescent of Islam or the cross of Christ was to wave on the spires of
Vienna. John Sobieski had drawn up his troops in the plain front-
ing the Ottoman camp, and ordered an assault on the Turks in their
intrenchments, exclaiming as he advanced : " Not to us, O Lord, but to
Thee be the glory ! "
Whole bands of Tartar troops in the Ottoman army broke and fled
in the wildest dismay, upon hearing the name of Poland's hero-king
repeated along the Turkish lines. An eclipse of the moon added to the
consternation of the superstitious Turks, who observed with dread the
waning crescent in the heavens. With a furious charge the Polish in-
fantry got possession of an eminence commanding the Grand Vizier's
position, and so surprised was Kara Mustapha at this unexpected onset
that he instantly gave way to despair.
The charges which were rapidly hurled upon the wavering Ottoman
lines put the Turkish hosts to rout with terrific slaughter, thus raising
the siege of Vienna. Kara Mustapha vainly endeavored to rally his
broken hosts. He asked the fleeing Khan of the Tartars : " Can you
not aid me?" The Khan replied: " I know the King of Poland, and
I tell you that with such an enemy we have no safety but in flight.
Look at the sky ! See if God is not against us !" So sudden and gen-
eral was the panic and flight of the Turks that the triumphant John
Sobieski entered the deserted camp of the enemy, who, in their flight,
had abandoned one hundred and twenty thousand tents and all their
spoils, horses, camels, artillery, baggage and camp equipage to the
victorious Christian hosts. Even the consecrated banner of Mohammed
became the prize of the victors, and was sent as a trophy to the Pope.
This memorable and decisive victory of Christendom over Islam, of
civilization over barbarism, marks the era of the final and rapid decline
of the Ottoman Empire. The intelligence of this great victory pro-
duced unbounded joy throughout Christendom; but it was unwelcome
John
Sobieski's
March
to the
Relief of
Vienna.
His
Grand
Attack
on the
Besieging
Turks.
Defeat
and Rout
of the
Turks.
Siege of
Vienna
Raised.
John
Sobieski's
Complete
Victory.
Turkey's
Decline.
S062
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Letters of
Louis
XIV.
Leopold's
Ingrati-
tude.
Continued
Turkish
Defeats.
Siege of
Buda.
Holy
League.
Recovery
of
Hungary
from the
Turks.
Siege and
Capture
of Buda
Battle of
Mohacz.
Execution
of Kara
Mustapha
and Depo-
sition of
Moham-
med IV.
Solyman
III., A. D.
1687-
1691.
Emperor
Leopold I.
and the
Hunga-
rian
Diet.
news to Louis XIV., who had secretly encouraged this Moslem invasion.
It is said that letters from the French king containing the entire plan
for the siege of Vienna were found in the Grand Vizier's tent. The
Emperor Leopold I., who was envious of the favor and applause with
which his subjects everywhere greeted the valiant King of Poland,
treated him with the meanest ingratitude.
The Polish and German imperial armies under King John Sobieski
and Duke Charles of Lorraine pursued the fleeing Turks and again
defeated them in their retreat. The fortress of Gran, which the Turks
had held for almost a century and a half, was wrested from them.
In 1684 the German imperial army under Duke Charles of Lorraine
captured Wissegrad, Waitzen and Pesth, but failed in a three months'
siege of Buda, losing twenty-three thousand men. During the same
year the Emperor Leopold I., King John Sobieski of Poland, the Vene-
tian Republic and Pope Innocent XI. entered into a Holy League
against the Turks; and the Holy War which ensued continued until
1699.
A succession of brilliant victories gained by the famous German im-
perial generals, Duke Charles of Lorraine, Prince Louis of Baden and
Prince Eugene of Savoy, recovered that part of Hungary which had
been in the possession of the Turks since the famous victory of Sultan
Solyman the Magnificent at Mohacz in 1526. The victory of the
Duke of Lorraine over the Turks at Strigova in 1685 recovered the for-
tress of Neuhausel for the Austrians. In 1686 the Duke of Lorraine
took the strong fortress of Buda by assault after a siege of three
months, and after it had been in the possession of the Turks for one
hundred and forty-five years. During the same year Russia joined
the Holy League against the Ottoman Porte.
The splendid victory of the German imperial army under Charles of
Lorraine over the Turks at Mohacz, August 12,1687 — the scene of their
great victory in 1526 — recovered Transylvania and Slavonia for Aus-
tria. These continued reverses cost the life of the Grand Vizier Kara
Mustapha, who was strangled by order of the enraged Sultan Moham-
med IV. During the same year, 1687, the many Turkish disasters
caused a mutiny in the Turkish army and a riot in Constantinople ;
and Sultan Mohammed IV. was hurled from his throne by the rebellious
Janizaries, and imprisoned in the Seven Towers; while his brother
SOLYMAN III. was raised to the dignity of Sultan of Turkey.
Encouraged by the brilliant triumphs of his arms, the Emperor
Leopold I., as King of Hungary, convened the Hungarian Diet at
Pressburg in 1687, where he demanded that, in consideration of the
extraordinary exertions which he had been obliged to make against the
Turks, the Hungarian kingdom should be made hereditary in his
TURKEY'S WARS WITH GERMANY AND HER ALLIES.
family. The magnates of Hungary seemed at first resolved to main-
tain their right of electing their sovereign ; but, as the criminal court
of Eperies had already deprived the magnates of their most enterprising
leaders and spread terror through the entire Hungarian nation, the
magnates soon yielded to the influence of authority.
Accordingly, the Hungarian Diet made a great change in the con-
stitution of Hungary by abolishing elective monarchy and making the
Hungarian crown hereditary in the Austrian House of Hapsburg; but
the magnates renewed the Golden Privilege — Hungary's Magna Charta
— which their ancestors had wrung from King Andrew II. in 1222,
excepting that clause in the thirty-first article which authorized the
magnates to take up arms against their sovereign whenever they judged
him guilty of having broken his coronation oath by infringing the
rights and liberties of Hungary.
The Diet at Pressburg also consented to the admission of German1
imperial garrisons into all the fortresses of Hungary. In return for the
concessions of the Hungarian Diet, the Emperor Leopold I. confirmed
the ancient privileges of the Hungarian nation, and granted perfect
religious toleration to all orders and sects in Hungary. His son, the
Archduke Joseph of Austria, was crowned the first hereditary King of
Hungary, December 19, 1687.
The Russians failed in their efforts to conquer the Tartars of the
Crimea; but the Venetians won brilliant victories over the Turks in
Central and Southern Greece, capturing a number of towns, among
which were Athens and Corinth. The Parthenon, the most important
architectural ornament of Athens — still as perfect in its exquisite pro-
portions as in the time of Pericles — was used by the Turks as a powder-
magazine. During the siege a bomb from a Venetian vessel fell into the
famous edifice, and its explosion shivered the finely-sculptured marbles
of the central portion to atoms. The Venetian general Morosini com-
pleted the conquest of the Morea, the ancient Peloponnesus, from the
Turks in 1690.
The Austrian arms were crowned with repeated victories, and the
humiliation of the Turks was deepened during the next two years after
their great defeat at Mohacz in 1687. The German imperial forces
took Albe-Royale, Belgrade, Semendria and Gradisca. Sultan Soly-
man III. now solicited peace; but this was refused by the Emperor
Leopold I., who hoped to annihilate the Ottoman power in Europe and
to make himself master of the dominions of the former Eastern Roman
Empire. The Emperor Leopold's ambitious hopes seemed about to be
realized in the campaign of 1689, during which his army under Prince
Louis of Baden achieved two splendid victories, one at Nissa, in Servia,
and the other at Widdin, in Bulgaria, thus Affecting the conquest of thr
VOL. 9—17
Hungary
Made a
Hered-
itary Pos-
session
of the
Eaps-
burgs.
Emperor
Leopold's
Conces-
sions.
Venetian
Victories
over the
Turks in
Greece.
Destruc-
tion of
the Par-
thenon.
Continued
Austrian
and
German
Imperial
Victories
over the
Turks.
3064
STATEi-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Turkish
Victories
over the
Austri-
ans.
Battle of
Salanke-
Solyman
III.
Deposed.
Achmet
II., A. D.
1691-
1695.
Emperor
Leopold's
Forces
Employed
against
Louis
XIV.
Venetian
and
Russian
Con-
quests.
Achmet
III.
Deposed.
Mustapha
II., A. D.
1695-
1703.
I Prince
Eugene
of Savoy.
Turkish provinces of Bosnia, Servia and Bulgaria. Prince Louis of
Baden established his winter-quarters in the tributary Turkish prin-
cipality of Wallachia.
The drooping spirits of the Turks was temporarily revived during
the campaign of 1690 by the talents and energy of their new Grand
Vizier, Mustapha Koproli, Achmet Koproli's son, who, after gaining
several victories over the Austrians, recovered the strong fortresses of
Nissa, Widdin, Semendria and Belgrade, thus reconquering Bosnia,
Servia and Bulgaria from the Austrians. The new Grand Vizier en-
tered Slavonia and defeated the Austrians at Essek, while a Turkish
detachment marched into Transylvania.
The extraordinary efforts made by the Sublime Porte for the cam-
paign of 1691 inspired the Turks with hopes of better success ; but
their expectations were doomed to bitter disappointment by the great
battle of Salankemen, in which the brave Mustapha Koproli was slain,
thus giving the victory to the Austrians under Prince Louis of Baden,
August 19, 1691. In consequence of this great disaster to the Otto-
man arms, Sultan Solyman III. was deposed by a revolt of the Jani-
zaries, and his brother ACHMET II. was raised to the Turkish throne.
For the next five years this war between the Ottoman and German
Empires languished; as the principal forces of Austria and the Ger-
man Empire were then occupied in the War of the Grand Alliance
against Louis XIV. of France, thus preventing the Emperor Leopold
I. from reaping any advantage from the great victory of his arms at
Salankemen, and obliging him to act on the defensive in Hungary dur-
ing the campaigns from 1692 to 1696.
In the meantime the Venetians made many conquests from the Turks
in Delmatia and Albania; while the Czar Peter the Great of Russia
wrested the port of Azov, on the Black Sea coast, and its neighboring
territory, from the Turks in 1696.
In 1695 Sultan Achmet II. was also driven from his throne by an
insurrection of the Janizaries, and his nephew MUSTAPHA II. was ele-
vated to the dignity of Sultan of Turkey. After the new Sultan's
accession the Ottoman arms suddenly became formidable once more to
Christendom for a brief period, and in 1696 Sultan Mustapha II. led
his hosts across the Danube and defeated the Austrians at Bega.
The danger which threatened Christendom was averted by the brill-
iant military genius of the new commander of the German imperial
forces in Hungary — Prince Eugene of Savoy, a Frenchman by birth,
but who had been offended by King Louis XIV., and who in revenge en-
tered the service of the Emperor Leopold I., the deadly enemy of the
French king. Among the first great achievements of Prince Eugene
of Savoy was his signal and decisive victory over Sultan Mustapha II.
THE GREAT NORTHERN WAR.
3065
in the great battle of Zenta, on the Theiss, in the South of Hungary,
September 11, 1697, in which the Grand Vizier, seventeen pashas and
two-thirds of the Ottoman army were left dead upon the field. The de-
feated Sultan was obliged to retreat in disorder to Belgrade.
The terrible disaster to the Ottoman arms at Zenta made the Turks
exceedingly anxious for peace. Sultan Mustapha II. had recourse to
the mediation of England, and King William III. used his great in-
fluence in favor of peace. After three months of negotiations at
Carlowitz, near Peterwardein, in Slavonia, Sultan Mustapha II. con-
cluded a treaty of peace with the Emperor Leopold I. of Germany,
King Frederick Augustus I. of Poland and the Republic of Venice,
January 26, 1699.
By the Peace of Carlowitz the Austrian Hapsburgs were left in
possession of all Hungary, Transylvania and Slavonia and part of
Croatia; while the Republic of Venice obtained six fortresses in Dal-
matia, the isles of St. Maura and ^Egina, and the peninsula of the
Morea, or Southern Greece, the ancient Peloponnesus ; and Poland re-
covered the city of Kaminiec and the provinces of Podolia and the
Ukraine ; but the Turks retained the Banat of Temesvar, in Hungary,
and the strong fortress of Belgrade, on the Danube. Turkey re-
nounced the tribute which Venice had previously paid to the Sublime
Porte for the island of Zante, and the Republic of Ragusa was guar-
anteed its independence of the Venetian Republic.
Peace was not made between Turkey and Russia for more than three
years later, as Sultan Mustapha II. was very reluctant to allow the
Czar Peter the Great to retain possession of the sea-port of Azov and
thus have a share in the Black Sea navigation. But peace was finally
made between Turkey and Russia in July, 1702, by which the Sub-
lime Porte ceded Azov, with eighty miles of the Black Sea coast, to
Russia; and Peter the Great soon made that sea-port one of the
strongest fortresses in Europe. Thenceforth the Ottoman Empire's
decline was very rapid, and the Turks were no longer formidable to
Europe.
Battle of
Zenta.
Peace of
Carlo-
witz.
Its Hu-
miliating
Terms
for the
Turks.
Cession
of Azov
to Russia.
Turkey's
Rapid
Decline.
SECTION V.— THE GREAT NORTHERN WAR
(A. D. 1700-1721).
WHILE the war of the Spanish Succession was distracting the South The War.
and West of Europe for twelve years, A. D. 1702-1714, the North
and East of the same continent were convulsed for the first twenty-one
years of the eighteenth century, A. D. 1700-1721, by the great
Northern War between the Czar Peter the Great of Russia and King
Charles XII. of Sweden.
3066
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Northern
Sover-
eigns.
Alliance
against
Charles
XII. of
Sweden.
Declara-
tion of
Charles
XII.
His
Invasion
of
Denmark
and
Siege of
Copen-
hagen.
Peter the Great, as we have already seen, had become sole Czar of
Russia in 1689. Charles XII., as we have seen, had become King of
Sweden in 1697, in the same year in which the Elector Frederick Au-
gustus II. of Saxony had been elected King of Poland with the title
of Frederick Augustus I. Frederick IV. had become King of Den-
mark in 1699, as also noticed in a preceding part of this volume.
In 1700 Charles XII., the young King of Sweden, was only eigh-
teen years of age ; and the sovereigns of Russia, Poland and Denmark
considered the time favorable for wresting from Sweden the provinces
which she had formerly conquered. Peter the Great of Russia was
desirous of the possession of some of the Swedish provinces on the east
side of the Baltic; Frederick Augustus, King of Poland and Elector
of Saxony, resolved upon seizing Livonia; and King Frederick IV. of
Denmark determined to appropriate unto himself Schleswig, which be-
longed to the Duke of Holstein, a brother-in-law of the young King
of Sweden. An alliance against Sweden was accordingly concluded
between the Czar of Russia and the Kings of Poland and Denmark,
for the purpose of obtaining the coveted provinces by force. Almost
at the same time, in the year 1700, the King of Denmark carried war
into the dominions of the Duke of Holstein, the King of Poland
marched into Livonia and fell upon Riga, and the Czar of Russia
with eighty thousand men invaded Esthonia and laid siege to Narva.
In this crisis the young King of Sweden displayed a firmness and
energy which surprised both his enemies and his counselors. He re-
assured his Senate by the spirited declaration : " I have resolved
never to wage an unjust war, nor ever to close a just one except by
the destruction of my enemies." This sentiment may have been sincere
when uttered, but subsequent events contradicted it.
To the astonishment of all Europe, the young King of Swedon sud-
denly exhibited military talents. Having secured the alliance of Eng-
land and Holland, whose fleets were sent to his assistance, and having
determined upon carrying the war into Denmark, Charles XII. landed
with an army on the island of Zealand, and laid siege to Copenhagen.
Upon landing he put a Danish force to flight, and then for the first
time he heard the general discharge of musketry loaded with ball. He
asked Major Stuart, a British officer who stood near him, what was
the cause of that whistling which he heard. Major Stuart replied:
" It is the sound of the bullets which they fire against Your Majesty."
The young Swedish king responded : " Very well, this shall henceforth
be my music." Copenhagen was only saved from the horrors of a
bombardment by the payment of a heavy ransom. King Frederick
IV. of Denmark, having invaded Holstein-Gottorp, and being com-
pletely hemmed in by the Swedes, was completely humbled after a cam'
THE GREAT NORTHERN WAR.
paign of six weeks, and found that nothing but a disadvantageous
peace would save his kingdom from falling into the power of the
Swedes. The Peace of Travendal was accordingly concluded between Peace of
the Kings of Sweden and Denmark, by which Frederick IV. renounced en^j
his alliance with Russia and Poland, and agreed to indemnify the Duke
of Holstein-Gottorp.
After humbling the King of Denmark, Charles XII., at the head of Victory of
eight thousand. Swedish troops, marched against the Czar of Russia, xil. over
who, with eighty thousand men, was then besieging Narva. Although Peter the
the Swedish king had but one-tenth as many men as his antagonist, he Russia at
did not hesitate to attack the army of Peter the Great, who was him- Narva.
self then absent. Having broken the Russian intrenchments by a
heavy cannonade, Charles XII., on November 30, 1700, ordered a
bayonet charge ; and, under cover of a severe storm of snow, which was
driven into the faces of the Russians by the wind, he assailed the
enemy. The Russians were unable to stand their ground; and, after
a terrible battle of three hours, their works were forced on all sides.
The Russian loss was eight thousand killed and thirty thousand made
prisoners. Many were drowned in the Neva by the breaking of the
bridge. The Russians also lost all their baggage, stores and cannon.
Charles XII. entered Neva as a conqueror, thinking that this great
blow had completely broken the power of Peter the Great. The Czar,
however, was not discouraged. He said : " I knew that the Swedes
would beat us, but in time they will teach us to become their con-
querors." After his defeat Peter evacuated the Swedish provinces and
devoted his attention to disciplining his army.
Instead of following up his victory over Peter the Great, the Swedish . H*8.
king, after wintering at Narva, marched against Frederick Augustus in Poland,
of Poland, who had unsuccessfully besieged Riga the previous year.
After defeating the Polish king in the bloody battle of Duna, in July,
1701, and obtaining full possession of the provinces of Livonia and
Courland, Charles XII. marched into Poland. The Swedish monarch
entered Warsaw on May 14, 1702, and soon afterward declared that
he would not grant a peace to Poland until the Polish Diet had de-
throned Frederick Augustus and elected another king in his place. On
July 9, 1702, Augustus was defeated with heavy loss by Charles in a
desperate engagement near Clissow, in a large plain between Warsaw
and Cracow. The camp, baggage, artillery and military chest of
Augustus fell into the hands of Charles, who soon afterward took
possession of Warsaw.
While Charles XII. of Sweden was conquering in Poland, his most
powerful enemy, Peter the Great of Russia, was reducing the Swedish
provinces on the east side of the Baltic, and annexing them to the
5-35
3068
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Founding
of St.
Peters-
burg by
Peter the
Great.
Dethrone-
ment of
Augustus
II. of
Poland by
Charles
XII.
More
Victories
of
Charles
XII.
Invasion
of Saxony
by
Charles
XII.
Peace of
Altran-
itadt.
Russian Empire. Peter took Narva by storm, built the fortresses of
Schlusselburg and Cronstadt, and caused the islands at the mouth
of the Neva to be drained by serfs ; and there he laid the foundations
of a city which he named St. Petersburg, and which he intended should
be the capital of the Russian Empire. In 1703 Peter compelled three
hundred thousand people from Moscow and other Russian cities to
settle at St. Petersburg. He also encouraged foreigners to emigrate
thither. Famine and disease soon carried two hundred thousand of the
settlers of the new city to their graves. Yet Peter was not discouraged,
but he persevered in his enterprise; and, by his liberal and enlightened
policy, foreign artisans and merchants were induced to emigrate to
St. Petersburg.
Charles XII. defeated Frederick Augustus of Poland at Pultusk,
May 1, 1703, and compelled him to retreat into Saxony, his hereditary
dominions. Through the influence of the King of Sweden, Augustus
was dethroned by the Polish Diet ; and in July, 1704, Stanislas Lec-
zinski, voiwode of Posen, a creature of Charles XII., was elected to
the throne of Poland by a Diet surrounded by Swedish soldiers. Re-
solving to recover the Polish crown, Augustus returned to Poland with
an army of Saxons and took Warsaw, but was at length forced to
retire. Augustus afterward received the assistance of sixty thousand
Russians, whom Peter the Great had sent to expel the Swedes from
Poland; but Charles routed the different Russian divisions in succes-
sion, and struck such terror into their ranks by the rapidity of his
movements that the Russians retired into their own territories, A.
D. 1706.
In the meantime a victory gained by the Swedes over the forces of
Augustus opened to the Swedish monarch the way into Saxony. Ac-
cordingly, Charles XII. invaded the Saxon dominions of Augustus,
without asking permission of the Emperor of Germany, whose atten-
tion was too much engrossed by the War of the Spanish Succession
to give any heed to the movements of the King of Sweden. Notwith-
standing the strict discipline of the Swedes, they frightfully ravaged
the Saxon territories. Augustus had now no other alternative than to
consent to such terms of peace as the conquering King of Sweden chose
to dictate. Under these circumstances the Peace of Altranstadt was
concluded, September 24, 1706, on terms most humiliating to Augus-
tus, who was required to renounce the crown of Poland for himself and
his posterity, to dissolve his alliance with the Czar of Russia and to
surrender the Livonian Patkul to the Swedish monarch, who put him to
a cruel death.
In September, 1707, Charles XII., at the head of forty thousand
troops, reentered Poland, where Peter the Great had been endeavor-
TPIE GREAT NORTHERN WAR.
ing to retrieve the affairs of Augustus. As the King of Sweden ad-
vanced, the Czar retired into his own dominions. Charles resolved to
march upon Moscow ; and Peter, becoming alarmed at this bold move-
ment of his antagonist, solicited peace ; but Charles, who had deter-
mined to completely subdue his great rival, haughtily replied : " I will
treat at Moscow." Charles now advanced into Russia and directed
his course toward Moscow. Peter destroyed the roads and desolated
the country between Poland and Moscow, so that hunger, fatigue and
constant partial actions would so weaken the Swedish army that it
could not reach Moscow.
Charles XII., whose army was utterly exhausted, now resolved to
march southward into the Ukraine, whither he had been invited by
Mazeppa, Hetman of the Cossacks, who had resolved to throw off his
allegiance to the Czar. Peter discovered the plans of the rebellious
chief and thwarted them by the execution of his associates, and Ma-
zeppa appeared in the Swedish camp as a fugitive rather than as a
powerful ally.
Charles XII. had ordered a large army from Sweden, under Gen-
eral Lb'wenhaupt, to reinforce him. While on his march to join
Charles, Lowenhaupt was defeated by the Russians in three battles
with the loss of all his artillery, baggage and provisions ; and he only
succeeded in reaching the camp of Charles with a small force. The
severity of the winter of 1708— '9 reduced the Swedish army to twenty
thousand men. At one time two thousand were frozen to death before
the eyes of the hard-hearted Charles XII.
Notwithstanding the misfortunes and sufferings of his army, the
ambitious King of Sweden was still obstinately resolved upon the con-
quest of Russia. At length Charles laid siege to the strong town of
Pultowa, on the frontiers of the Ukraine. When the Czar approached,
with seventy thousand men, for the relief of the garrison, Charles
hastened with the greater portion of his army to give battle to Peter,
leaving the remainder to press the siege with vigor. On July 8, 1709,
was fought the great battle cf Pultowa, which ended forever the splen-
did career of Charles XII. of Sweden. In this battle Peter the Great
and his subjects fully proved that they had profited by the lessons of
their enemies. The Swedes charged with such impetuosity that the
Russian cavalry were forced back, but the Russian infantry held their
ground until the cavalry had rallied and again gone into the fight. In
the meantime the Russian artillery had made frightful havoc in the
Swedish ranks. Having left his heavy cannon in the morasses, Charles
could not contend successfully against his antagonist ; and, after a
terrible battle of two hours, the Swedish army was hopelessly annihi-
lated. Having been wounded during the siege of Pultowa, Charles was
InTasion
° byS8ia
Charles
the
Hetman.
Swedish
tones1"
Battle of
a
throw of
CyaTrTles
3070
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
His
Flight to
Turkey.
Renewal
of the
Alliance
against
Sweden.
Charles
XII. in
Turkey.
Short
Turko-
Russian
War.
Battle
on the
Pruth.
Obstinacy
and
Captivity
of
Charles
XII. in
Turkey.
carried about the field in a litter, which was shattered to pieces by a
cannon-ball while the battle was raging. The Czar's hat was pierced
by a musket-ball; and his favorite general, Menschikoff, had three
horses shot under him. Eight thousand Swedish troops lay dead on
the sanguinary field, and six thousand were made prisoners by the
victorious Russians ; and after retreating to the Dnieper twelve thou-
sand were compelled to surrender to the pursuing Russians, and the
once-splendid army of Charles XII. was totally destroyed. The
Swedish soldiers who were made prisoners by the Russians were dis-
persed over the vast Russian Empire, and not one of them ever re-
turned to his native land. Many perished miserably in the wilds and
mines of Siberia.
The once-conquering Charles XII. now became a helpless fugitive;
and, with three hundred of his guards, he fled to the Turkish town of
Bender, having lost in one day all that he had gained during nine
years of war. The dethroned Augustus now reentered Poland and
wrested the Polish crown from Stanislas Leczinski; and Denmark, Po-
land and Russia renewed their alliance against Sweden. King Fred-
erick William I. of Prussia laid claim to certain Swedish possessions in
Germany, and joined the coalition against Sweden, as did England
also. Peter the Great invaded the Swedish provinces on the east side
of the Baltic, the King of Denmark fell upon Schleswig, and the
Prussians seized upon Swedish Pomerania.
The Swedish monarch met with an honorable reception at the hands
of the Turks. He lived at Bender in royal splendor as the guest of
the Sultan. He did not entertain a single thought of returning to his
kingdom without having first conquered Russia. Charles made use of
all the means at his command to induce the Turks to make war on
Russia, and at length he succeeded. A Turkish army of two hundred
thousand men marched to the Pruth, where it was met by a Russian
army under the Czar Peter. After four days of hard fighting, in
July, 1711, Peter and his whole army would have been killed or made
prisoners had not his wife Catharine corrupted the Turks with Rus-
sian gold and thus brought about an honorable peace. Charles could
not repress his rage at finding all his hopes for the overthrow of his
great rival thus blasted.
The obstinate Charles XII. still determined to remain in Turkey,
even after the Sultan had ordered him to leave the Ottoman dominions ;
and the Porte found it necessary to employ forcible means to send him
away. Arming his immediate attendants, about three hundred in
number, Charles defied a Turkish army of twenty-six thousand men.
After a fierce resistance, in which many of his attendants were killed,
and the house in which he defended himself had been set on fire, Charles
THE GREAT NORTHERN WAR.
3071
was made a prisoner. The Swedish monarch remained a captive in
Turkey ten months longer, wasting his time in useless obstinacy.
In the meantime the Swedish army under General Steenbock had
defeated the Danes and the Saxons at Gadesbusch, in Mecklenburg,
and burned the defenseless town of Altona, but were afterward com-
pelled to surrender as prisoners of war to the Czar of Russia. The
Russian arms were making rapid progress in the Swedish province of
Finland ; and the Russian fleet gained a great victory over the Swedish
navy near the island of Oeland, in the Baltic sea.
When Charles XII. learned that the council which governed Sweden
in his absence was about to appoint his sister regent of the kingdom,
and make peace with Russia and Denmark, he resolved to return to
Sweden. The Swedish king left the Ottoman territories in October,
1714; and, after having traveled through Hungary and Germany, he
unexpectedly arrived at Stralsund, in Swedish Pomerania, after a
journey of fourteen days on horseback.
At length the allied Danish, Saxon and Prussian armies laid siege
to Stralsund. After a heroic defense on the part of the Swedes for
over a year, Straslund was surrendered to the besieging enemy, in De-
cember, 1715 ; whereupon the whole of Pomerania and the island of
Rugen were taken possession of by the Prussians. Charles escaped to
Sweden in a boat, and still obstinately refused to consent to a peace.
In 1716 Charles XII. invaded Norway for the purpose of humbling
the King of Denmark for violating the Peace of Travendal. Charles
soon returned to Sweden ; and his attention was now occupied with the
bold political schemes of his Prime Minister, Baron von Gortz, who
was negotiating with Peter the Great for an alliance between Russia
and Sweden, by which these two powers might dictate law to Europe,
and place the Pretender James Stuart on the throne of England.
In 1718 the Swedish monarch invaded Norway a second time, and
laid siege to the fortress of Frederikshall. Here the " Alexander of
the North " found his death. While reconnoitering the works, during
a terrific fire from the Danish batteries, on the night of December 11,
1718, Charles XII. was killed, whether by the bullet of an assassin or
by a grape-shot from the enemy is a disputed point in history.
After greatly restricting the royal power, the Swedish Diet placed
ULRICA ELEANORA, sister to Charles XII., on the throne of Sweden;
and in 1719 Baron von Gortz was barbarously executed. In 1720
Ulrica Eleanora relinquished the royal dignity fco her husband, FEED-
ERIC K of Hesse Cassel.
By the Peace of Stockholm with Poland, Prussia, Denmark and
England, in 1720, and by the Peace of Nystadt with Russia, in 1721,
Sweden surrendered most of her foreign possessions in return for an
Swedish
Defeats.
Return of
Charles
XII. to
Sweden.
Prussian
Siege and
Capture
of Stral-
sund.
Scheme
of Baron
von
Gortz.
Siege of
Frederik-
shall and
Death of
Charles
XII.
Ulrica
Eleanora
and Fred-
erick.
Peace of
Stock-
holm and
Peace of
Hystadt.
3072
STATES-SYSTEM IN NORTH AND EAST.
Russia's
New
Epoch.
Great
Achieve-
ments of
Peter the
Great.
His
Reforms
and Inno-
vations.
Reaction-
ary Policy
of Prince
Alexis.
indemnification in money. The Baltic provinces of Ingria, Esthonia
and Livonia were ceded to Russia ; the greater part of Pomerania to
Prussia, and Schleswig and Holstein to Denmark. Sweden thus lost
her rank as the great power of the North; while Russia, under the
great Peter, began to control the destinies of the North and the East.
While Sweden was almost ruined by the mad ambition of Charles
XII., Russia, under the illustrious Peter the Great, was taking her
place as a leading European power. The acquisition of the Swedish
provinces of Ingria, Esthonia and Livonia by the Peace of Nystadt
opened a new epoch for Russia. As long as Moscow had remained
the Russian capital the views of the Czars were more Asiatic than
European, and the customs and manners of the Russians were more
assimilated to those of Asia than to those of Europe; but since St.
Petersburg, which was located nearer to the civilization of the West,
had become the capital of the Empire and had risen into importance
on account of the magnificence of its plan and of its buildings,
Russia had become a European state.
Peter the Great wrote to his ambassador in Paris : " Apprentice-
ships ususally end in seven years. Ours has lasted twice as long ; but,
thank God, it is at length brought to the desired termination." The
Czar had good cause to be proud of his work. In the first twenty-one
years of the eighteenth century — the period which he had spent in
learning, mainly from his enemies, the arts of conquering and govern-
ing— he had reorganized an army and created a navy, had built a city
of palaces among the marshes of the Neva, had improved the admin-
istration of justice, had more than doubled the foreign commerce of
Russia, had caused manufactures to spring up in his dominions, had
built roads, dug canals and introduced the printing-press. By his
genius, his personal energy and industry, he had promoted the civil-
ization of Russia and placed her in the front rank among the powers
of Europe, and had become one of the greatest of European monarchs.
Peter the Great promoted learning and refinement of a higher grade
by the establishment of an Academy of Sciences. He remodeled the
government and police upon the plan of other European states, thus
increasing the Czar's power and diminishing that of the boyars. One
of the innovations of Peter the Great which was productive of the most
important consequences was the abolition of the dignity of Patriarch,
and the creation of a Holy Synod as the chief ecclesiastical court of
Russia, to which the Czar communicated his orders.
While Peter the Great was reforming his Empire he beheld witli
grief that his only son Alexis, the heir to the Russian throne, had joined
the old Russian party in opposition to his father's reforms, and that
he cherished an intention of restoring the old system and again mak-
THE GREAT NORTHERN WAR.
3073
ing Moscow the Russian capital. The Czar vainly endeavored to
bend his son's stubborn and defiant spirit and to make the prince a
friend to European civilization. Alexis held fast to his opinions, and
at length disappeared from Russia. Thereupon Peter the Great,
anxious for the permanence of his institutions, ordered the arrest of
his son, and caused him to be brought home a prisoner and condemned
to death, A. D. 1722. It is disputed whether Alexis was executed
or whether he died in prison before execution.
The Senate and Synod of Russia in solemn assembly conferred upon
Peter the Great the title of Emperor of all the Russias; and he richly
merited the title of Peter the Great, which was bestowed upon him by
all classes of his subjects, who hailed him as the Father of his Country.
During the next few years Peter the Great waged war with Persia, by
which he extended the Russian frontier on the south-east. Peter's
favorite Prime Minister, Prince Menschikoff, had risen to his high
station from the humble condition of a baker-boy. Peter's thirty-
six years' reign ended with his death, in 1725.
His
Condem-
nation
and
Death.
Peter the
Great,
Emperor
of all the
Russias.
Prince
Menschi-
koff.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11