Chapter VII (3)

A popular notion of the working of this belief in supernatural
causation may be seen in a circumstance related by Combe. He
says, that in the middle of the eighteenth century the country
west of Edinburgh was so unhealthy, 'that every spring the
farmers and their servants were seized with fever and ague.' As
long as the cause of this was unknown, 'these visitations were
believed to be sent by Providence;' but after a time the land was
drained, the ague disappeared, and the inhabitants perceived that
what they had believed to be supernatural was perfectly natural,
and that the cause was the state of the land, not the
intervention of the Deity. _Combe's Constitution of Man_, Edinb.
1847, p. 156.

[621] I say apparent mystery, because it does not at all lessen the real
mystery. But this does not affect the accuracy of my remark,
inasmuch as the people at large never enter into such subtleties
as the difference between Law and Cause; a difference, indeed,
which is so neglected, that it is often lost sight of even in
scientific books. All that the people know is, that events which
they once believed to be directly controlled by the Deity, and
modified by Him, are not only foretold by the human mind, but are
altered by human interference. The attempts which Paley and
others have made to solve this mystery by rising from the laws to
the cause, are evidently futile, because to the eye of reason the
solution is as incomprehensible as the problem; and the arguments
of the natural theologians, in so far as they are arguments, must
depend on reason. As Mr. Newman truly says, 'A God uncaused and
existing from eternity, is to the full as incomprehensible as a
world uncaused and existing from eternity. We must not reject the
latter theory as incomprehensible; for so is every other possible
theory.' _Newman's Natural History of the Soul_, 1849, p. 36. The
truth of this conclusion is unintentionally confirmed by the
defence of the old method, which is set up by Dr. Whewell in his
_Bridgewater Treatise_, pp. 262-5; because the remarks made by
that able writer refer to men who, from their vast powers, were
most likely to rise to that transcendental view of religion which
is slowly but steadily gaining ground among us. Kant, probably
the deepest thinker of the eighteenth century, clearly saw that
no arguments drawn from the external world could prove the
existence of a First Cause. See, among other passages, two
particularly remarkable in _Kritik der reinen Vernunft_, _Kant's
Werke_, vol. ii. pp. 478, 481, on 'der physikotheologische
Beweis.'

[622] This is tersely expressed by M. Lamennais: 'Pourquoi les corps
gravitent-ils les uns vers les autres? Parceque Dieu l'a voulu,
disaient les anciens. Parceque les corps s'attirent, dit la
science.' _Maury_, _Légendes du Moyen Age_, p. 33. See to the
same effect _Mackay's Religious Development_, 1850, vol. i. pp.
5, 30, 31, and elsewhere. See also a partial statement of the
antithesis in _Copleston's Inquiry into Necessity and
Predestination_, p. 49; an ingenious but overrated book.

[623] I much regret that I did not collect proof of this at an earlier
period of my reading. But having omitted taking the requisite
notes, I can only refer, on the superstition of sailors to
_Heber's Journey through India_, vol. i. p. 423; _Richardson's
Travels in the Sahara_, vol. i. p. 11; _Burckhardt's Travels in
Arabia_, vol. ii. p. 347; _Davis's Chinese_, vol. iii. pp. 16,
17; _Travels of Ibn Batuta in the Fourteenth Century_, p. 43;
_Journal of Asiat. Soc._ vol. i. p. 9; _Works of Sir Thomas
Browne_, vol. i. p. 130; _Alison's Hist. of Europe_, vol. iv. p.
566; _Burnes's Travels into Bokhara_, vol. iii. p. 53; _Leigh
Hunt's Autobiography_, 1850, vol. ii. p. 255; _Cumberland's
Memoirs_, 1807, vol. i. pp. 422-425; _Walsh's Brazil_, vol. i.
pp. 96, 97; _Richardson's Arctic Expedition_, vol. i. p. 93;
_Holcroft's Memoirs_, vol. i. p. 207, vol. iii. p. 197.

[624] Andokides, when accused before the dikastery at Athens, said, 'No,
dikasts; the dangers of accusation and trial are human, but the
dangers encountered at sea are divine.' _Grote's Hist. of
Greece_, vol. xi. p. 252. Thus, too, it has been observed, that
the dangers of the whale-fishery stimulated the superstition of
the Anglo-Saxons. See _Kemble's Saxons in England_, vol. i. pp.
390, 391. Erman, who mentions the dangerous navigation of the
Lake of Baikal, says, 'There is a saying at Irkutsk, that it is
only upon the Baikal, in the autumn, that a man learns to pray
from his heart.' _Erman's Travels in Siberia_, vol. ii. p. 186.

[625] In Europe, in the tenth century, an entire army fled before one of
those appearances, which would now scarcely terrify a child:
'Toute l'armée d'Othon se dispersa subitement à l'apparition
d'une éclipse de soleil, qui la remplit de terreur, et qui fut
regardée comme l'annonce du malheur qu'on attendait depuis
longtemps.' _Sprengel_, _Hist. de la Médecine_, vol. ii. p. 368.
The terror inspired by eclipses was not finally destroyed before
the eighteenth century; and in the latter half of the seventeenth
century they still caused great fear both in France and in
England. See _Evelyn's Diary_, vol. ii. p. 52, vol. iii. p. 372;
_Carlyle's Cromwell_, vol. ii. p. 366; _Lettres de Patin_, vol.
iii. p. 36. Compare _Voyages de Monconys_, vol. v. p. 104, with
_Hare's Guesses at Truth_, 2nd series, pp. 194, 195. There
probably never has been an ignorant nation whose superstition has
not been excited by eclipses. For evidence of the universality of
this feeling, see _Symes's Embassy to Ava_, vol. ii. p. 296;
_Raffles' Hist. of Java_, vol. i. p. 530; _Southey's Hist. of
Brazil_, vol. i. p. 354, vol. ii. p. 371; _Marsden's Hist. of
Sumatra_, p. 159; _Niebuhr_, _Description de l'Arabie_, p. 105;
_Moffat's Southern Africa_, p. 337; _Mungo Park's Travels_, vol.
i. p. 414; _Moorcroft's Travels in the Himalayan Provinces_, vol.
ii. p. 4; _Crawfurd's Hist. of the Indian Archipelago_, vol. i.
p. 305; _Ellis's Polynesian Researches_, vol. i. p. 331;
_Mackay's Religious Development_, vol. i. p. 425; _Works of Sir
W. Jones_, vol. iii. p. 176, vol. vi. p. 16; _Wilson's Note_ in
the _Vishnu Purana_, p. 140; _Wilson's Theatre of the Hindus_,
vol. i. part ii. p. 90; _Montucla_, _Hist. des Mathématiques_,
vol. i. p. 444; _Asiatic Researches_, vol. xii. p. 484; _Ward's
View of the Hindoos_, vol. i. p. 101; _Prescott's Hist. of Peru_,
vol. i. p. 123; _Kohl's Russia_, p. 374; _Thirlwall's Hist. of
Greece_, vol. iii. p. 440, vol. vi. p. 216; _Murray's Life of
Bruce_, p. 103; _Turner's Embassy to Tibet_, p. 289; _Grote's
Hist. of Greece_, vol. vii. p. 432, vol. xii. pp. 205, 557;
_Journal Asiatique_, I^e série, vol. iii. p. 202, Paris, 1823;
_Clot-Bey_, _de la Peste_, Paris, 1840, p. 224.

In regard to the feelings inspired by comets, and the influence
of Bayle in removing those superstitions late in the seventeenth
century, compare _Tennemann_, _Gesch. der Philosoph._, vol. xi.
p. 252; _Le Vassor_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. iii. p. 415;
_Lettres de Sevigné_, vol. iv. p. 336; _Autobiography of Sir S.
D'Ewes_, edit. Halliwell, vol. i. pp. 122, 123, 136.

[626] On the peculiar complications which have retarded meteorology, and
thus prevented us from accurately predicting the weather, compare
_Forbes on Meteorology_, in _Second Report of British
Association_, pp. 249-251; _Cuvier_, _Progrès des Sciences_, vol.
i. pp. 69, 248; _Kaemtz's Meteorology_, pp. 2-4; _Prout's
Bridgewater Treatise_, pp. 290-295; _Somerville's Physical Geog._
vol. ii. pp. 18, 19. But all the best authorities are agreed that
this ignorance cannot last long; and that the constant advance
which we are now making in physical science will eventually
enable us to explain even these phenomena. Thus, for instance,
Sir John Leslie says, 'It cannot be disputed, however, that all
the changes which happen in the mass of our atmosphere, involved,
capricious, and irregular as they may appear, are yet the
necessary results of principles as fixed, and perhaps as simple,
as those which direct the revolutions of the solar system. Could
we unravel the intricate maze, we might trace the action of each
distinct cause, and hence deduce the ultimate effects arising
from their combined operation. With the possession of such data,
we might safely predict the state of the weather at any future
period, as we now calculate an eclipse of the sun or moon, or
foretell a conjunction of the planets.' _Leslie's Natural
Philosophy_, p. 405: see also p. 185, and the remarks of Mr. Snow
Harris (_Brit. Assoc. for 1844_, p. 241), and of Mr. Hamilton
(_Journal of Geog. Soc._ vol. xix. p. xci.) Thus, too, Dr.
Whewell (_Bridgewater Treatise_, p. 3) says, that 'the changes of
winds and skies are produced by causes, of whose rules "no
philosophical mind" will doubt the fixity.'

[627] This connexion between ignorance and devotion is so clearly
marked, that many nations have a separate god for the weather, to
whom they say their prayers. In countries where men stop short of
this, they ascribe the changes to witchcraft, or to some other
supernatural power. See _Mariner's Tonga Islands_, vol. ii. pp.
7, 108; _Tuckey's Expedit. to the Zaire_, pp. 214, 215; _Ellis's
Hist. of Madagascar_, vol. ii. p. 354; _Asiatic Researches_, vol.
vi. pp. 193, 194, 297, vol. xvi. pp. 223, 342; _Southey's Hist.
of Brazil_, vol. iii. p. 187; _Davis's Chinese_, vol. ii. p. 154;
_Beausobre_, _Hist. de Manichée_, vol. ii. p. 394; _Cudworth's
Intellect. Syst._ vol. ii. p. 539. The Hindus refer rain to
supernatural causes in the _Rig Veda_, which is the oldest of
their religious books; and they have held similar notions ever
since. _Rig Veda Sanhita_, vol. i. pp. xxx. 10, 19, 26, 145, 175,
205, 224, 225, 265, 266, vol. ii. pp. 28, 41, 62, 110, 153, 158,
164, 166, 192, 199, 231, 258, 268, 293, 329; _Journal of Asiatic
Soc._ vol. iii. p. 91; _Coleman's Mythol. of the Hindus_, p. 111;
_Ward's View of the Hindoos_, vol. i. p. 38. See further two
curious passages in the _Dabistan_, vol. i. p. 115, vol. ii. p.
337; and on the 'Rain-makers,' compare _Catlin's North-American
Indians_, vol. i. pp. 134-140, with _Buchanan's North-American
Indians_, pp. 258, 260: also a precisely similar class in Africa
(_Moffat's Southern Africa_, pp. 305-325), and in Arabia
(_Niebuhr_, _Desc. de l'Arabie_, pp. 237, 238).

Coming to a state of society nearer our own, we find that in the
ninth century it was taken for granted in Christian countries
that wind and hail were the work of wizards (_Neander's Hist. of
the Church_, vol. vi. pp. 118, 139); that similar views passed on
to the sixteenth century, and were sanctioned by Luther (_Maury_,
_Légendes Pieuses_, pp. 18, 19); and finally, that when Swinburne
was in Spain, only eighty years ago, he found the clergy on the
point of putting an end to the opera, because they 'attributed
the want of rain to the influence of that ungodly entertainment.'
_Swinburne's Travels through Spain in 1775 and 1776_, vol. i. p.
177, 2nd edit. London, 1787.

[628] See some remarks by the Rev. Mr. Ward, which strike me as rather
incautious, and which certainly are dangerous to his own
profession, as increasing the hostility between it and science,
in _Ward's Ideal of a Christian Church_, p. 278. What Coleridge
has said, is worth attending to: see _The Friend_, vol. iii. pp.
222, 223.

[629] M. Kohl, whose acuteness as a traveller is well known, has found
that the agricultural classes are the 'most blindly ignorant and
prejudiced' of all. _Kohl's Russia_, p. 365. And Sir R.
Murchison, who has enjoyed extensive means of observation,
familiarly mentions the 'credulous farmers.' _Murchison's
Siluria_, p. 61. In Asia, exactly the same tendency has been
noticed: see _Marsden's Hist. of Sumatra_, p. 63. Some curious
evidence of agricultural superstitions respecting the weather may
be seen in _Monteil_, _Hist. des divers Etats_, vol. iii. pp. 31,
39.

It would be easy, by an extension of these remarks, to show how the progress of manufactures, besides increasing the national wealth, has done immense service to civilization, by inspiring Man with a confidence in his own resources;[630] and how, by giving rise to a new class of employments, it has, if I may so say, shifted the scene in which superstition is most likely to dwell. But to trace this would carry me beyond my present limits; and the illustrations already given are sufficient to explain how the theological spirit must have been diminished by that love of experimental science, which forms one of the principal features in the reign of Charles II.[631]

[630] In this point of view, the opposite tendencies of agriculture and
manufactures are judiciously contrasted by Mr. Porter, at the end
of his essay on the _Statistics of Agriculture_, _Journal of the
Statist. Soc._ vol. ii. pp. 295, 296.

[631] Indeed, there never has been a period in England in which physical
experiments were so fashionable. This is merely worth observing
as a symptom of the age, since Charles II. and the nobles were
not likely to add, and did not add, anything to our knowledge;
and their patronage of science, such as it was, degraded it
rather than advanced it. Still, the prevalence of the taste is
curious; and in addition to the picture drawn by Mr. Macaulay
(_Hist. of England_, 1st edit. vol. i. pp. 408-412), I may refer
the reader to _Monconys' Voyages_, vol. iii. p. 31; _Sorbiere's
Voyage to England_, pp. 32, 33; _Evelyn's Diary_, vol. ii. pp.
199, 286; _Pepys' Diary_, vol. i. p. 375, vol. ii. p. 34, vol.
iii. p. 85, vol. iv. p. 229; _Burnet's Own Time_, vol. i. pp.
171, 322, vol. ii. p. 275; _Burnet's Lives_, p. 144; _Campbell's
Chief-Justices_, vol. i. p. 582.

I have now laid before the reader what I conceive to be the point of view from which we ought to estimate a period whose true nature seems to me to have been grievously misunderstood. Those political writers who judge events without regard to that intellectual development of which they are but a part, will find much to condemn, and scarcely anything to approve, in the reign of Charles II. By such authors, I shall be censured for having travelled out of that narrow path in which history has been too often confined. And yet I am at a loss to perceive how it is possible, except by the adoption of such a course, to understand a period which, on a superficial view, is full of the grossest inconsistencies. This difficulty will be rendered very obvious, if we compare for a moment the nature of the government of Charles with the great things which, under that government, were peaceably effected. Never before was there such a want of apparent connexion between the means and the end. If we look only at the characters of the rulers, and at their foreign policy, we must pronounce the reign of Charles II. to be the worst that has ever been seen in England. If, on the other hand, we confine our observations to the laws which were passed, and to the principles which were established, we shall be obliged to confess that this same reign forms one of the brightest epochs in our national annals. Politically and morally, there were to be found in the government all the elements of confusion, of weakness, and of crime. The king himself was a mean and spiritless voluptuary, without the morals of a Christian, and almost without the feelings of a man.[632] His ministers, with the exception of Clarendon, whom he hated for his virtues, had not one of the attributes of statesmen, and nearly all of them were pensioned by the crown of France.[633] The weight of taxation was increased,[634] while the security of the kingdom was diminished.[635] By the forced surrender of the charters of the towns, our municipal rights were endangered.[636] By shutting the exchequer, our national credit was destroyed.[637] Though immense sums were spent in maintaining our naval and military power, we were left so defenceless, that when a war broke out, which had long been preparing, we seemed suddenly to be taken by surprise. Such was the miserable incapacity of the government, that the fleets of Holland were able, not only to ride triumphant round our coasts, but to sail up the Thames, attack our arsenals, burn our ships, and insult the metropolis of England.[638] Yet, notwithstanding all these things, it is an undoubted fact, that in this same reign of Charles II. more steps were taken in the right direction than had been taken, in any period of equal length, during the twelve centuries we had occupied the soil of Britain. By the mere force of that intellectual movement, which was unwittingly supported by the crown, there were effected, in the course of a few years, reforms which changed the face of society.[639] The two great obstacles by which the nation had long been embarrassed, consisted of a spiritual tyranny and a territorial tyranny: the tyranny of the church and the tyranny of the nobles. An attempt was now made to remedy these evils; not by palliatives, but by striking at the power of the classes who did the mischief. For now it was that a law was placed on the statute-book, taking away that celebrated writ, which enabled the bishops or their delegates to cause those men to be burned whose religion was different to their own.[640] Now it was that the clergy were deprived of the privilege of taxing themselves, and were forced to submit to an assessment made by the ordinary legislature.[641] Now, too, there was enacted a law forbidding any bishop, or any ecclesiastical court, to tender the _ex-officio_ oath, by which the church had hitherto enjoyed the power of compelling a suspected person to criminate himself.[642] In regard to the nobles, it was also during the reign of Charles II. that the House of Lords, after a sharp struggle, was obliged to abandon its pretensions to an original jurisdiction in civil suits; and thus lost for ever an important resource for extending its own influence.[643] It was in the same reign that there was settled the right of the people to be taxed entirely by their representatives; the House of Commons having ever since retained the sole power of proposing money bills, and regulating the amount of imposts, merely leaving to the Peers the form of consenting to what has been already determined.[644] These were the attempts which were made to bridle the clergy and the nobles. But there were also effected other things of equal importance. By the destruction of the scandalous prerogatives of Purveyance and Preemption, a limit was set to the power of the sovereign to vex his refractory subjects.[645] By the Habeas Corpus Act, the liberty of every Englishman was made as certain as law could make it; it being guaranteed to him, that if accused of crime, he, instead of languishing in prison, as had often been the case, should be brought to a fair and speedy trial.[646] By the Statute of Frauds and Perjuries, a security hitherto unknown was conferred upon private property.[647] By the abolition of general impeachments, an end was put to a great engine of tyranny, with which powerful and unscrupulous men had frequently ruined their political adversaries.[648] By the cessation of those laws which restricted the liberty of printing, there was laid the foundation of that great Public Press, which, more than any other single cause, has diffused among the people a knowledge of their own power, and has thus, to an almost incredible extent, aided the progress of English civilization.[649] And, to complete this noble picture, there were finally destroyed those feudal incidents, which our Norman conquerors had imposed,--the military tenures; the court of wards; the fines for alienation; the right of forfeiture for marriage by reason of tenure; the aids, the homages, the escuages, the primer seisins; and all those mischievous subtleties, of which the mere names sound in modern ears as a wild and barbarous jargon, but which pressed upon our ancestors as real and serious evils.[650]

[632] His treatment of his young wife immediately after marriage is
perhaps the worst thing recorded of this base and contemptible
prince. _Lister's Life of Clarendon_, vol. ii. pp. 145-153. This
is matter of proof; but Burnet (_Own Time_, vol. i. p. 522, and
vol. ii. p. 467) whispers a horrible suspicion, which I cannot
believe to be true, even of Charles II., and which Harris, who
has collected some evidence of his astounding profligacy, does
not mention, though he quotes one of the passages in Burnet.
_Harris's Lives of the Stuarts_, vol. v. pp. 36-43. However, as
Dr. Parr says, in reference to another accusation against him,
'There is little occasion to blacken the memory of that wicked
monarch, Charles II., by the aid of invidious conjectures.'
_Notes on James II._ in _Parr's Works_, vol. iv. p. 477. Compare
_Fox's History of James II._ p. 71.

[633] Even Clarendon has been charged with receiving bribes from
Louis XIV.; but for this there appears to be no good authority.
Compare _Hallam's Const. Hist._ vol. ii. pp. 66, 67 note, with
_Campbell's Chancellors_, vol. iii, p. 213.

[634] _Lister's Life of Clarendon_, vol. ii. p. 377; _Harris's Lives of
the Stuarts_, vol. iv. pp. 340-344.

[635] Immediately after the Restoration, the custom began of appointing
to naval commands incompetent youths of birth, to the
discouragement of those able officers who had been employed under
Cromwell. Compare _Burnet's Own Time_, vol. i. p. 290, with
_Pepys' Diary_, vol. ii. p. 413, vol. iii. pp. 68, 72.

[636] _Harris's Lives of the Stuarts_, vol. v. pp. 323-328. The court
was so bent on abrogating the charter of the city of London, that
Saunders was made chief-justice for the express purpose. See
_Campbell's Chief-Justices_, vol. ii. p. 59. Roger North says
(_Lives of the Norths_, vol. ii. p. 67), 'Nothing was accounted
at court so meritorious as the procuring of charters, as the
language then was.' Compare _Bulstrode's Memoirs_, pp. 379, 388.

[637] The panic caused by this scandalous robbery is described by
De Foe; _Wilson's Life of De Foe_, vol. i. p. 52. See also
_Calamy's Life of Himself_, vol. i. p. 78; _Parker's Hist. of his
Own Time_, pp. 141-143. The amount stolen by the king is
estimated at 1,328,526_l._ _Sinclair's Hist. of the Revenue_,
vol. i. p. 315. According to Lord Campbell, 'nearly a million and
a half.' _Lives of the Chancellors_, vol. iv. p. 113.

[638] There is a very curious account in _Pepys' Diary_, vol. iii.
pp. 242-264, of the terror felt by the Londoners on this
occasion. Pepys himself buried his gold (p. 261 and pp. 376-379).
Evelyn (_Diary_, vol. ii. p. 287) says: 'The alarme was so
greate, that it put both country and citty into a paniq, feare,
and consternation, such as I hope I shall never see more; every
body was flying, none knew why or whither.'

[639] The most important of these reforms were carried, as is nearly
always the case, in opposition to the real wishes of the ruling
classes. Charles II. and James II. often said of the Habeas
Corpus Act, 'that a government could not subsist with such a
law.' _Dalrymple's Memoirs_, vol. ii. p. 104. Lord-Keeper
Guilford was even opposed to the abolition of military tenures.
'He thought,' says his brother, 'the taking away of the tenures a
desperate wound to the liberties of the people of England.'
_Lives of the Norths_, vol. ii. p. 82. These are the sort of men
by whom great nations are governed. A passage in _Life of James,
by Himself_, edit. Clarke, vol. ii. p. 621, confirms the
statement in Dalrymple, so far as James is concerned. This should
be compared with a letter from Louis XIV., in the Barillon
correspondence. Appendix to _Fox's James II._ p. cxxiv.

[640] _Blackstone's Commentaries_, vol. iv. p. 48; _Campbell's
Chancellors_, vol. iii. p. 431. This destruction of the writ _De
Hæretico comburendo_ was in 1677. It is noticed in _Palmer's
Treatise on the Church_, vol. i. p. 500; and in _Collier's
Ecclesiast. Hist._ vol. viii. p. 478.

[641] This was in 1664. See the account of it in _Collier's Ecclesiast.
Hist._ vol. viii. pp. 463-466. Collier, who is evidently
displeased by the change, says: 'The consenting, therefore, to be
taxed by the temporal Commons, makes the clergy more dependent on
a foreign body, takes away the right of disposing of their own
money, and lays their estates in some measure at discretion.' See
also, on the injury this has inflicted on the church, _Lathbury's
Hist. of Convocation_, pp. 259, 260. And Coleridge (_Literary
Remains_, vol. iv. pp. 152, 153) points this out as
characterizing one of the three 'grand evil epochs of our present
church.' So marked, however, was the tendency of that time, that
this most important measure was peaceably effected by an
arrangement between Sheldon and Clarendon. See the notes by
Onslow in _Burnet's Own Time_, vol. i. p. 340, vol. iv. pp. 508,
509. Compare Lord Camden's statement (_Parl. Hist._ vol. xvi. p.
169) with the speech of Lord Bathurst (vol. xxii. p. 77); and of
Lord Temple on Tooke's case (vol. xxxv. p. 1357). Mr. Carwithen
(_Hist. of the Church of England_, vol. ii. p. 354, Oxford, 1849)
grieves over 'this deprivation of the liberties of the English
clergy.'

[642] 13 Car. II. c. 12. Compare _Stephens's Life of Tooke_, vol. i.
pp. 169, 170, with _Blackstone's Commentaries_, vol. iii. p. 101.
Mr. Hallam (_Const. Hist._ vol. i. pp. 197, 198) has adduced
evidence of the way in which the clergy were accustomed to injure
their opponents by the _ex-officio_ oath.

[643] This was the issue of the famous controversy respecting Skinner,
in 1669; and 'from this time,' says Mr. Hallam, 'the Lords have
tacitly abandoned all pretensions to an original jurisdiction in
civil suits.' _Const. Hist._ vol. ii. p. 184. There is an account
of this case of Skinner, which was connected with the East-India
Company, in _Mill's Hist. of India_, vol. i. pp. 102, 103.

[644] _Hallam's Const. Hist._ vol. ii. pp. 189-192; and _Eccleston's
English Antiquities_, p. 326. The disputes between the two houses
respecting taxation, are noticed very briefly in _Parker's Hist.
of his Own Time_, pp. 135, 136.

[645] The 'famous rights of purveyance and preemption' were abolished by
12 Car. II. c. 24. _Hallam's Const. Hist._ vol. ii. p. 11. Burke,
in his magnificent speech on Economical Reform, describes the
abuses of the old system of purveyance. _Burke's Works_, vol. i.
p. 239. See also _Kemble's Saxons in England_, vol. ii. p. 88,
note; _Barrington on the Statutes_, pp. 183-185, 237; _Lingard's
Hist. of England_, vol. ii. pp. 338, 339; _Sinclair's Hist. of
the Revenue_, vol. i. p. 232; _Parl. Hist._ vol. iii. p. 1299.
These passages will give an idea of the iniquities practised
under this 'right,' which, like most gross injustices, was one of
the good old customs of the British constitution, being at least
as ancient as Canute. See _Allen on the Royal Prerogative_, p.
152. Indeed, a recent writer of considerable learning (_Spence_,
_Origin of the Laws of Europe_, p. 319) derives it from the Roman
law. A bill had been brought in to take it away in 1656. See
_Burton's Cromwellian Diary_, vol. i. p. 81. When Adam Smith
wrote, it still existed in France and Germany. _Wealth of
Nations_, book iii. chap. ii. p. 161.

[646] On the Habeas Corpus Act, which became law in 1679, see
_Campbell's Chancellors_, vol. iii. pp. 345-347; _Mackintosh_,
_Revolution of 1688_, p. 49; and _Lingard's Hist. of England_,
vol. viii. p. 17. The peculiarities of this law, as compared with
the imitations of it in other countries, are clearly stated in
_Meyer_, _Esprit des Institutions Judiciaires_, vol. ii. p. 283.
Mr. Lister (_Life of Clarendon_, vol. ii. p. 454) says:
'Imprisonment in gaols beyond the seas was not prevented by law
till the passing of the Habeas Corpus Act, in 1679.'

[647] Blackstone (_Commentaries_, vol. iv. p. 439) calls this 'a great
and necessary security to private property;' and Lord Campbell
(_Chancellors_, vol. iii. p. 423) terms it 'the most important
and most beneficial piece of juridical legislation of which we
can boast.' On its effects, compare Jones's valuable _Commentary
on Isæus_ (_Works of Sir W. Jones_, vol. iv. p. 239) with
_Story's Conflict of Laws_, pp. 521, 522, 627, 884; and _Tayler
on Statute Law_, in _Journal of Statistical Society_, vol. xvii.
p. 150.

[648] Lord Campbell (_Lives of the Chancellors_, vol. iii. p. 247) says,
that the struggle in 1667 'put an end to general impeachments.'

[649] Printing at first was regulated by royal proclamations; then by
the Star-chamber; and afterwards by the Long Parliament. The
decrees of the Star-chamber were taken as the basis of 13 and 14
Car. II. c. 33; but this act expired in 1679, and was not renewed
during the reign of Charles II. Compare _Blackstone's Comment._
vol. iv. p. 152, with _Hunt's Hist. of Newspapers_, vol. i. p.
154, and _Fox's Hist. of James II._ p. 146.

[650] The fullest account I have seen in any history, of this great
Revolution, which swept away the traditions and the language of
feudalism, is that given in _Harris's Lives of the Stuarts_, vol.
iv. pp. 369-378. But Harris, though an industrious collector, was
a man of slender ability, and not at all aware of the real nature
of a change, of which the obvious and immediately practical
results formed the smallest part. The true point of view is, that
it was a formal recognition by the legislature that the Middle
Ages were extinct, and that it was necessary to inaugurate a more
modern and innovating policy. Hereafter I shall have occasion to
examine this in detail, and show how it was merely a symptom of a
revolutionary movement. In the meantime the reader may refer to
the very short notices in _Dalrymple's Hist. of Feudal Property_,
p. 89; _Blackstone's Comment._ vol. ii. pp. 76, 77; _Hallam's
Const. Hist._ vol. ii. p. 11; _Parl. Hist._ vol. iv. pp. 53, 167,
168; _Meyer_, _Institutions Judiciaires_, vol. ii. p. 58.

These were the things which were done in the reign of Charles II.; and if we consider the miserable incompetence of the king, the idle profligacy of his court, the unblushing venality of his ministers, the constant conspiracies to which the country was exposed from within, and the unprecedented insults to which it was subjected from without; if we, moreover, consider that to all this there were added two natural calamities of the most grievous description,--a Great Plague, which thinned society in all its ranks, and scattered confusion through the kingdom, and a Great Fire, which, besides increasing the mortality from the pestilence, destroyed in a moment those accumulations of industry by which industry itself is nourished;--if we put all these things together, how can we reconcile inconsistencies apparently so gross? How could so wonderful a progress be made in the face of these unparalleled disasters? How could such men, under such circumstances, effect such improvements? These are questions which our political compilers are unable to answer; because they look too much at the peculiarities of individuals, and too little at the temper of the age in which those individuals live. Such writers do not perceive that the history of every civilized country is the history of its intellectual development, which kings, statesmen, and legislators are more likely to retard than to hasten; because, however great their power may be, they are at best the accidental and insufficient representatives of the spirit of their time; and because, so far from being able to regulate the movements of the national mind, they themselves form the smallest part of it, and, in a general view of the progress of Man, are only to be regarded as the puppets who strut and fret their hour upon a little stage; while, beyond them, and on every side of them, are forming opinions and principles which they can scarcely perceive, but by which alone the whole course of human affairs is ultimately governed.

The truth is, that the vast legislative reforms, for which the reign of Charles II. is so remarkable, merely form a part of that movement, which, though traceable to a much earlier period, had only for three generations been in undisguised operation. These important improvements were the result of that bold, sceptical, inquiring, and reforming spirit, which had now seized the three great departments of Theology, of Science, and of Politics. The old principles of tradition, of authority, and of dogma, were gradually becoming weaker; and of course, in the same proportion, there was diminished the influence of the classes by whom those principles were chiefly upheld. As the power of particular sections of society thus declined, the power of the people at large increased. The real interests of the nation began to be perceived, so soon as the superstitions were dispersed by which those interests had long been obscured. This, I believe, is the real solution of what at first seems a curious problem,--namely, how it was that such comprehensive reforms should have been accomplished in so bad, and in many respects so infamous, a reign. It is, no doubt, true, that those reforms were essentially the result of the intellectual march of the age; but, so far from being made in spite of the vices of the sovereign, they were actually aided by them. With the exception of the needy profligates who thronged his court, all classes of men soon learned to despise a king who was a drunkard, a libertine, and a hypocrite; who had neither shame nor sensibility; and who, in point of honour, was unworthy to enter the presence of the meanest of his subjects. To have the throne filled for a quarter of a century by such a man as this, was the surest way of weakening that ignorant and indiscriminate loyalty, to which the people have often sacrificed their dearest rights. Thus, the character of the king, merely considered from this point of view, was eminently favourable to the growth of national liberty.[651] But the advantage did not stop there. The reckless debaucheries of Charles made him abhor everything approaching to restraint; and this gave him a dislike to a class, whose profession, at least, pre-supposes a conduct of more than ordinary purity. The consequence was, that he, not from views of enlightened policy, but merely from a love of vicious indulgence, always had a distaste for the clergy; and, so far from advancing their power, frequently expressed for them an open contempt.[652] His most intimate friends directed against them those coarse and profligate jokes which are preserved in the literature of the time; and which, in the opinion of the courtiers, were to be ranked among the noblest specimens of human wit. From men of this sort the church had, indeed, little to apprehend; but their language, and the favour with which it was received, are part of the symptoms by which we may study the temper of that age. Many other illustrations will occur to most readers; I may, however, mention one, which is interesting on account of the eminence of the philosopher concerned in it. The most dangerous opponent of the clergy in the seventeenth century, was certainly Hobbes, the subtlest dialectician of his time; a writer, too, of singular clearness, and, among British metaphysicians, inferior only to Berkeley. This profound thinker published several speculations very unfavourable to the church, and directly opposed to principles which are essential to ecclesiastical authority. As a natural consequence, he was hated by the clergy; his doctrines were declared to be highly pernicious; and he was accused of wishing to subvert the national religion, and corrupt the national morals.[653] So far did this proceed, that, during his life, and for several years after his death, every man who ventured to think for himself was stigmatized as a Hobbist, or, as it was sometimes called, a Hobbian.[654] This marked hostility on the part of the clergy was a sufficient recommendation to the favour of Charles. The king, even before his accession, had imbibed many of his principles;[655] and, after the Restoration, he treated the author with what was deemed a scandalous respect. He protected him from his enemies; he somewhat ostentatiously hung up his portrait in his own private room at Whitehall;[656] and he even conferred a pension on this, the most formidable opponent who had yet appeared against the spiritual hierarchy.[657]

[651] Mr. Hallam has a noble passage on the services rendered to English
civilization by the vices of the English court: 'We are, however,
much indebted to the memory of Barbara Duchess of Cleveland,
Louisa Duchess of Portsmouth, and Mrs. Eleanor Gwyn. We owe a
tribute of gratitude to the Mays, the Killigrews, the
Chiffinches, and the Grammonts. They played a serviceable part in
ridding the kingdom of its besotted loyalty. They saved our
forefathers from the Star-chamber and the High-commission court;
they laboured in their vocation against standing armies and
corruption; they pressed forward the great ultimate security of
English freedom--the expulsion of the House of Stuart.' _Hallam's
Const. Hist._ vol. ii. p. 50.

[652] Burnet (_Own Time_, vol. i. p. 448) tells us that, in 1667, the
king, even at the council-board, expressed himself against the
bishops, and said, that the clergy 'thought of nothing but to get
good benefices, and to keep a good table.' See also, on his
dislike to the bishops, vol. ii. p. 22; and _Pepys' Diary_, vol.
iv. p. 2. In another place, vol. iv. p. 42, Pepys writes: 'And I
believe the hierarchy will in a little time be shaken, whether
they will or no; the king being offended with them, and set upon
it, as I hear.' Evelyn, in a conversation with Pepys, noticed
with regret such conduct of Charles, 'that a bishop shall never
be seen about him, as the king of France hath always.' _Pepys_,
vol. iii. p. 201. Evelyn, in his benevolent way, ascribes this to
'the negligence of the clergy;' but history teaches us that the
clergy have never neglected kings, except when the king has first
neglected them. Sir John Reresby gives a curious account of a
conversation Charles II. held with him respecting 'mitred heads,'
in which the feeling of the king is very apparent. _Reresby's
Travels and Memoirs_, p. 238.

[653] On the animosity of the clergy against Hobbes, and on the extent
to which he reciprocated it, compare _Aubrey's Letters and
Lives_, vol. ii. pp. 532, 631; _Tennemann_, _Gesch. der Philos._
vol. x. p. 111; with the angry language of Burnet (_Own Time_,
vol. i. p. 322), and of Whiston (_Memoirs_, p. 251). See also
_Wood's Athenæ Oxonienses_, edit. Bliss, vol. iii. p. 1211.
Monconys, who was in London in 1663, says of Hobbes, 'Il me dit
l'aversion que tous les gens d'église tant catholiques que
protestans avoient pour lui.' _Monconys' Voyages_, vol. iii. p.
43; and p. 115, 'M. Hobbes, que je trouvai toujours fort ennemi
des prêtres catholiques et des protestans.' About the same time,
Sorbiere was in London; and he writes respecting Hobbes: 'I know
not how it comes to pass, the clergy are afraid of him, and so
are the Oxford mathematicians and their adherents; wherefore his
majesty (Charles II.) was pleased to make a very good comparison
when he told me, he was like a bear, whom they baited with dogs
to try him.' _Sorbiere's Voyage to England_, p. 40.

[654] This was a common expression for whoever attacked established
opinions late in the seventeenth, and even early in the
eighteenth century. For instances of it, see _Baxter's Life of
Himself_, folio, 1696, part iii. p. 48; _Boyle's Works_, vol. v.
pp. 505, 510; _Monk's Life of Bentley_, vol. i. p. 41; _Vernon
Correspond._ vol. iii. p. 13; _King's Life of Locke_, vol. i. p.
191; _Brewster's Life of Newton_, vol. ii. p. 149.

[655] Burnet says, they 'made deep and lasting impressions on the king's
mind.' _Own Time_, vol. i. p. 172.

[656] A likeness, by Cooper. See _Wood's Athenæ Oxonienses_, edit.
Bliss, vol. iii. p. 1208.

[657] _Sorbiere's Voyage to England_, p. 39; _Wood's Athenæ Oxonienses_,
vol. iii. p. 1208. On the popularity of the works of Hobbes in
the reign of Charles II. compare _Pepys' Diary_, vol. iv. p. 164,
with _Lives of the Norths_, vol. iii. p. 339.

If we look for a moment at the ecclesiastical appointments of Charles, we shall find evidence of the same tendency. In his reign, the highest dignities in the church were invariably conferred upon men who were deficient either in ability or in honesty. It would perhaps be an over-refinement to ascribe to the king a deliberate plan for lowering the reputation of the episcopal bench; but it is certain, that if he had such a plan, he followed the course most likely to effect his purpose. For it is no exaggeration to say, that, during his life, the leading English prelates were, without exception, either incapable or insincere; they were unable to defend what they really believed, or else they did not believe what they openly professed. Never before were the interests of the Anglican church so feebly guarded. The first Archbishop of Canterbury appointed by Charles was Juxon, whose deficiencies were notorious; and of whom his friends could only say, that his want of ability was compensated by the goodness of his intentions.[658] When he died, the king raised up as his successor Sheldon, whom he had previously made Bishop of London; and who not only brought discredit on his order by acts of gross intolerance,[659] but who was so regardless of the common decencies of his station, that he used to amuse his associates, by having exhibitions in his own house, imitating the way in which the Presbyterians delivered their sermons.[660] After the death of Sheldon, Charles appointed to the archbishopric Sancroft; whose superstitious fancies exposed him to the contempt even of his own profession, and who was as much despised as Sheldon had been hated.[661] In the rank immediately below this, we find the same principle at work. The three Archbishops of York, during the reign of Charles II., were Frewen, Stearn, and Dolben; who were so utterly devoid of ability, that notwithstanding their elevated position, they are altogether forgotten, not one reader out of a thousand having ever heard their names.[662]

[658] Bishop Burnet says of him, at his appointment: 'As he was never a
great divine, so he was now superannuated.' _Own Time_, vol. i.
p. 303.

[659] Of which his own friend, Bishop Parker, gives a specimen. See
_Parker's History of his own Time_, pp. 31-33. Compare _Neal's
Hist. of the Puritans_, vol. iv. p. 429; _Wilson's Mem. of De
Foe_, vol. i. p. 46.

[660] In 1669, Pepys was at one of these entertainments, which took
place not only at the house, but in the presence of the
archbishop. See the scandalous details in _Pepys' Diary_, vol.
iv. pp. 321, 322; or in _Wilson's De Foe_, vol. i. pp. 44, 45.

[661] Burnet, who knew Sancroft, calls him 'a poor-spirited and fearful
man' (_Own Time_, vol. iii. p. 354); and mentions (vol. iii. p.
138) an instance of his superstition, which will be easily
believed by whoever has read his ridiculous sermons, which D'Oyly
has wickedly published. See Appendix to _D'Oyly's Sancroft_, pp.
339-420. Dr. Lake says that everybody was amazed when it was
known that Sancroft was to be archbishop. _Lake's Diary_, 30th
Dec. 1677, p. 18, in vol. i. of the _Camden Miscellany_, 1847,
4to. His character, so far as he had one, is fairly drawn by Dr.
Birch: 'slow, timorous, and narrow-spirited, but at the same time
a good, honest, and well-meaning man.' _Birch's Life of
Tillotson_, p. 151. See also respecting him, _Macaulay's Hist. of
England_, vol. ii. p. 616, vol. iii. p. 77, vol. iv. pp. 40-42.

[662] Frewen was so obscure a man, that there is no life of him either
in _Chalmers's Biographical Dictionary_, or in Rose's more
recent, but inferior work. The little that is known of Stearn, or
Sterne, is unfavourable. Compare _Burnet_, vol. ii. p. 427, with
_Baxter's Life of Himself_, folio, 1696, part ii. p. 338. And of
Dolben I have been unable to collect anything of interest, except
that he had a good library. See the traditionary account in
_Jones's Memoirs of Bishop Horne_, p. 66.

Such appointments as these are indeed striking; and what makes them more so, is, that they were by no means necessary; they were not forced on the king by court intrigue, nor was there a lack of more competent men. The truth seems to be, that Charles was unwilling to confer ecclesiastical promotion upon any one who had ability enough to increase the authority of the church, and restore it to its former pre-eminence. At his accession, the two ablest of the clergy were undoubtedly Jeremy Taylor and Isaac Barrow. Both of them were notorious for their loyalty; both of them were men of unspotted virtue; and both of them have left a reputation which will hardly perish while the English language is remembered. But Taylor, though he had married the king's sister,[663] was treated with marked neglect; and, being exiled to an Irish bishopric, had to pass the remainder of his life in what, at that time, was truly called a barbarous country.[664] As to Barrow, who, in point of genius, was probably superior to Taylor,[665] he had the mortification of seeing the most incapable men raised to the highest posts in the church, while he himself was unnoticed; and, notwithstanding that his family had greatly suffered in the royal cause,[666] he received no sort of preferment until five years before his death, when the king conferred on him the mastership of Trinity College, Cambridge.[667]

[663] His wife was Joanna Bridges, a bastard of Charles I. Compare
_Notes and Queries_, vol. vii. p. 305, with _Heber's Life of
Jeremy Taylor_, in _Taylor's Works_, vol. i. p. xxxiv. Bishop
Heber, p. xxxv. adds, 'But, notwithstanding the splendour of such
an alliance, there is no reason to believe that it added
materially to Taylor's income.'

[664] Coleridge (_Lit. Remains_, vol. iii. p. 208) says, that this
neglect of Jeremy Taylor by Charles 'is a problem of which
perhaps his virtues present the most probable solution.'

[665] Superior, certainly, in comprehensiveness, and in the range of his
studies; so that it is aptly said by a respectable authority,
that he was at once 'the great precursor of Sir Isaac Newton, and
the pride of the English pulpit.' _Wordsworth's Ecclesiast.
Biog._ vol. iv. p. 344. See also, respecting Barrow, _Montucla_,
_Hist. des Mathémat._ vol. ii. pp. 88, 89, 359, 360, 504, 505,
vol. iii. pp. 436-438.

[666] 'His father having suffered greatly in his estate by his
attachment to the royal cause.' _Chalmers's Biog. Dict._ vol. iv.
p. 39.

[667] Barrow, displeased at not receiving preferment after the
Restoration, wrote the lines:

'Te magis optavit rediturum Carole nemo;
Et sensit nemo te rediisse minus.'

_Hamilton's Life of Barrow_, in _Barrow's Works_, Edinb. 1845,
vol. i. p. xxiii.

It is hardly necessary to point out how all this must have tended to weaken the church, and accelerate that great movement for which the reign of Charles II. is remarkable.[668] At the same time, there were many other circumstances which, in this preliminary sketch, it is impossible to notice, but which were stamped with the general character of revolt against ancient authority. In a subsequent volume, this will be placed in a still clearer light, because I shall have an opportunity of bringing forward evidence which, from the abundance of its details, would be unsuited to the present Introduction. Enough, however, has been stated, to indicate the general march of the English mind, and supply the reader with a clue by which he may understand those still more complicated events, which, as the seventeenth century advanced, began to thicken upon us.

[668] Everything Mr. Macaulay has said on the contempt into which the
clergy fell in the reign of Charles II. is perfectly accurate;
and from evidence which I have collected, I know that this very
able writer, of whose immense research few people are competent
judges, has rather understated the case than overstated it. On
several subjects I should venture to differ from Mr. Macaulay;
but I cannot refrain from expressing my admiration of his
unwearied diligence, of the consummate skill with which he has
arranged his materials, and of the noble love of liberty which
animates his entire work. These are qualities which will long
survive the aspersions of his puny detractors,--men who, in point
of knowledge and ability, are unworthy to loosen the shoe-latchet
of him they foolishly attack.