CHAP. jurors or not; in other words, almost the whole XII. 1722. nation was to be summoned to swear allegiance to the Government. Nor was it explicitly stated 66 66 what would be the consequence of this refusal, but a sort of vague threat was hung over them; and it seemed a trap in which, when once caught, men might hereafter be subjected not only to the largest fines, but even to forfeiture and confiscation. "I saw a great deal of it," says Speaker Onslow, "and it was a strange, as well as ridi"culous, sight to see people crowding at the Quarter Sessions to give a testimony of their allegiance to a Government, and cursing it at the "same time for giving them the trouble of so doing, "and for the fright they were put into by it; and "I am satisfied more real disaffection to the King "and his family arose from it than from any thing "which happened in that time." Some of the Jacobites consulted their Prince as to the course which they should pursue in this emergency, but he prudently avoided any positive answer.* It was thought very desirable that they should act together as a body, in one course or the other, but no such general arrangement could be compassed. The greater number were inclined to swear, and did so, saying that they had rather venture themselves in the hand of God than of such men as they had to do with. Yet they still retained all * Mr. Lockhart to James, Sept. 10. 1723. James's answer, Nov. 24. 1723. XII. 1722. their first principles; and the oath, however it might CHAP. torture their consciences, did not influence their conduct. Such is, I fear, the inevitable result of any oath imposed by any government for its security. Examples of that kind are too common in all countries. Swearing allegiance to King George did not shut out all the Jacobites from Parliament; swearing allegiance to King Louis Philippe does not shut out all the Carlists from the Chambers. Nay more, so far may right principle be distorted by faction, that such breach of faith is not only excused but even praised by the party which it aids. The Jacobites, beyond all doubt, applauded their leader, Mr. Shippen-that worthy, public-spirited man, they probably said, who has had the courage to swear against his conscience on purpose to serve the good cause! There were, of course, numerous exceptions; but I am speaking of the general effect. And though we might reasonably infer from theory that men whom we find honourable and high-minded in private life, and in far more trifling transactions, would be scrupulously bound by the solemn and public obligation of an oath, yet experience, I apprehend, would teach the very reverse. It was not till after these preliminaries, that a Select Committee was appointed to examine Layer and others, in relation to the plot. The Report of this Committee, drawn up by Pulteney, their chairman, and read to the House on the 1st of 1723. CHAP. March is a very long and circumstantial document. XII. The evidence which it gives touching Atterbury, 1723. though founded on many trifling incidents, such as the dog Harlequin, and dark hints in intercepted letters, was yet, by their combination, as I think, more than sufficient to satisfy any candid minds. The Opposition, however, did not belong to that class; they not only asserted the innocence of Atterbury, and of the rest, but maintained that the plot itself was a chimera, devised by Ministers for the basest purposes of faction. The incident of Harlequin especially was held up to ridicule. Swift, who during the last nine years had prudently kept aloof, at Dublin, from party warfare, could not resist this tempting opportunity to resume it, and poured forth one of his happiest strains of satire on the "horrid conspiracy" discovered by a French dog, who "confessed, as plain as he could bark, "then with his forefoot set his mark!"* To this conspiracy he afterwards alluded in Gulliver's Travels, as the workmanship of persons who de"sire to raise their own character of profound politicians; to restore new vigour to a crazy "administration; to stifle or divert general discon"tents; and to fill their coffers with forfeitures."+ Such is party justice! 66 From the Report of the Committee, or the Evidence appended, it appeared that several other • Swift's Works, vol. x. p. 462. Scott's ed. + Ib. vol. xii. p. 244. XII. peers had been named in the depositions: Lords CHAP. Scarsdale, Strafford, Craven, Gower, Bathurst, Bingley, and Cowper. They all took an early 1723. occasion to repel the imputation in the House of Lords. Cowper, especially, said that after having on so many occasions, and in the most difficult times, given undoubted proofs of his zeal for the Protestant succession, he had just reason to be offended to see his name bandied about in a list of a chimerical club. It was replied by Townshend, that his Lordship's name being part of an examination, there was an absolute necessity for inserting it; but that the Committee were entirely satisfied of his innocence, and that it was only surprising that a peer of so much ability and merit should thence proceed to ridicule as a fiction a well-proved conspiracy, and from one false circumstance infer that no part of it was true. It is certain that the Jacobites had some vague hopes of Lord Cowper. I have seen, in the Stuart Papers, a letter of solicitation to him from Lord Mar and another, apparently addressed by James himself. But I found nothing whatever to show that he had accepted or even answered these overtures, and it would require strong proofs indeed to outweigh those afforded to the contrary by the whole course and tenour of his life. This is almost * Lord Mar's letter is dated Sept. 17. 1717. The Pretender's is endorsed "To Mr. Cr," and might be designed for Mr. Cæsar, though the contents render it less likely. CHAP. the last public transaction in which that eminent man XII. took part: he died the same year, on the 10th of 1723. October, of a strangury. On his death-bed, he ordered that his son should never travel.* His memory deserves high respect in him a profound knowledge of law was supported by a ready elo, quence, and adorned by elegant accomplishments; and, unlike most advocates, the light which had shone at the bar was not quenched in the closer atmosphere of the senate. And though it seems that a by-word was current of "Cowper-law to "hang a man first, and then judge him+,"-I believe that it proceeded from party resentment rather than from any real fault. After the close of the Commons' committee, one was also appointed by the Lords; but its report did not add materially to the proofs already known. Layer had been already tried at the King's Bench, and condemned to death; he was reprieved for examination before these committees; but not disclosing as much as was hoped, he was executed at Tyburn, and his head affixed at Temple Bar. In a more lenient spirit, bills of pains and penalties were introduced against Plunkett and Kelly, subjecting them to imprisonment during pleasure, and to confiscation of their property. These bills passed both Houses by large majorities. With * Spence's Anecdotes, p. 333. + See vol. i. p. 296., or the evidence at Lord Wintoun's trial, |