A. C. 1680. retorted the practice of petitions upon their antagonifts. They took care to provide a great number of addreffes to his majefty, expreffing their abhorrence of the licentious freedom which had been taken in demanding a parliament. One fide was diftinguished by the name of Petitioners; the other acquired the appellation of Abhorrers. As their mutual animofity increased, they reviled each other in the most opprobrious terms. The party in the oppofition compared the courtiers to the Irish banditti, called Tories; and they, on the other hand, expreffed their contempt of the anticourtiers, by claffing them under the title of Whigs, a term of reproach formerly given to the rigid covenanters of Scotland, who were fuppofed to live upon a kind of buttermilk called Whig in that country. From these beginnings were derived the famous names of Whig and Tory, which still ferve to distinguish the factions of England, though they have strangely varied from their original fignification.

The king's

with regard

The whigs were headed by the earl of Shaftsbury, declaration who was bent upon the ruin of the duke of York, to the ille in oppofition to whom he fet up the duke of Mongitimacy of mouth. He not only conducted him in the road to popularity, but circulated a report that the king

Monmouth.

had been actually married to Mrs. Walters the duke's mother; and that the contract of marriage was in a black box, intrusted to the care of Mr. Gilbert Gerard. The king, in a council affembled for the purpofe, declared this rumour was falfe; and defired that a minute inquiry might be fet on foot, to discover the author of fuch malicious flander. Gerard being fummoned to appear, declared upon oath, that he never had any fuch contract in his hands, and never heard that any fuch writing exifted. At laft the king published a declaration, that he never was married, nor contracted to Mrs. Walters, or Barlow, mother to the duke of Mon

mouth,

mouth, nor to any perfon whatsoever, but queen A. C. 1689. Catharine. This declaration, attefted by all the privy-counsellors then prefent, was entered upon. record in the court of chancery. In the fummer, the earl of Castlemain, and Cellier the midwife, were tried on account of the meal tub plot, and acquitted; and the grand-jury threw out the bill of indictment against the countess of Powis.

Bedloe the

Bedloe died in Auguft at Bristol, and not only Death of infifted upon the truth of his evidence against the informer. jefuits, but alfo accused the duke and the queen of having been concerned in the defign of introducing popery into England. He likewife declared he had many other circumftances to difcover, of importance to the king and nation; and befought the chief-juftice North, who vifited him in his illness, to intercede with his majefty for fome allowance on which he could fubfift. This folicitation plainly proves he did not think himself dying, and invalidates the credit which is fuppofed due to a deathbed confeffion. Befides, if he was really guilty of the blood of fo many innocent persons, he must have been hardened in a long courfe of villainy, beyond all fenfe of penitence and remorfe.

Though the court-party had of late gained ground, thofe in the oppofition made strong efforts to retain their influence in the nation. Clayton the mayor of London, having named a perfon for fheriff, who was difagreeable, to the faction, the common-hall rejected him, and chofe Bethel and Cornifh, two noted independents and republicans, who facrificed their religion to their intereft, fo far as to take the oaths and the facrament, and renounce the covenant, to qualify themfelves for this employment. Then the common-council defired the mayor to petition the king to affemble the parlia ment and a proclamation was in a few days publifhed, to inform the public that the parliament

M 3

would

fented as a

fant.

A. C. 1680. would affemble on the twenty-first day of October. Shaftsbury, attended by the earl of Huntington, the lords Ruffel, Cavendish, Grey, Brandon, Sir Henry York pre- Caverly, Sir Gilbert Gerard, and Sir William popith recu Cooper, appeared in Westminster-hall, and prefented to the grand-jury of Middlesex a bill of indictment against the duke of York, as a popish recufant. Before the jury fixed on any determination concerning this unexpected prefentment, they were fuddenly difmiffed by the chief juftice. This ftep in Shaftsbury was a declaration of eternal war against the duke of York, by which he afcertained his inviolate attachment to his party. Charles, alarmed at their prefumption, thought proper to do fomething to render the parliament lefs implacable. He infifted upon his brother's returning to Scotland, until the ftorm should be overblown, af furing him he would never abandon his intereft and the duke, though not without reluctance, com plied with his request.

Refentment

mons in the

the duke of York.

When the parliament affembled, the king in his of the com- fpeech to both houfes. informed them of his having new parlia. Concluded an alliance with Spain. He declared ment against himself ready to concur with them in all reasonable expedients for the fecurity of the proteftant religion, provided no prejudice fhould be offered to the fucceffion. He exhorted them to profecute the inquiry into the confpiracy; demanded a supply for the fupport of Tangier, which he could not maintain without their affiftance; and above all things recommended a ftrict union between them and him, as the chief article that would enfure the ftrength and profperity of the nation. The commons having chofen their speaker, began the feffion by expelling fome of their own members, who had fubfcribed the petitions of the abhorrers: for the fame reason they prefented an addrefs to the king, defiring he would remove from all public employ,

employment Sir George Jefferys recorder of Lon- A. C. 1680. don, and first judge of Chefter. They inherited all the eagerness of the laft parliament, with refpect to the confpiracy. They received the informations of the new witneffes, Dangerfield, Jennifon, Dugdale, and one Turberville; and they recommended Dr. Tongue to the king, for the first good benefice in the gift of the crown that should become vacant. The lords Ruffel and Capel expatiated upon all the steps which the government had taken to the prejudice of the nation. They imputed them wholly to the counfels of papifts; and exaggerated the dangers to which the kingdom would be exposed from a popifh fucceffor. They were feconded by a great number of members, fome of whom spoke of the duke in the most virulent terms. At length, the house renewed the votes which had paffed against him in the former parliament, when lord Ruffel moved, that a committee fhould be ap pointed to bring in a bill for excluding the duke of York from the throne. This measure, fo repugnant to the king's inclination, was espoused not only by the earl of Sunderland, but even by the dutchefs of Portsmouth, who in all probability thought, that should the duke of York be fet afide, her fon might have fome chance for the fucceffion.

for and

against the

There was now a very powerful party formed Arguments against the court, whether we respect the talents or the intereft of those that were in the oppofition; bill of ex but Charles was aflured of the church, which had clufion. ever adhered to lineal fucceffion; of all those loyalifts who detefted fanaticifm and republican principles; and of a great number, who, from a fincere regard to their country, dreaded the revival of that anarchy from which the nation had been fo lately delivered. The motion for the bill

AC 1680. of exclufion produced violent debates in the lower houfe, which were maintained with great eloquence and vivacity. It was fupported by lord Ruffel, Sir William Jones, Sir Francis Winnington, Sir Henry Capel, Sir William Pulteney, colonel Titus, Treby, Hambden, and Montague. It was opposed by Sir Leoline Jenkins fecretary of ftate, Sir John Erneley chancellor of the exchequer, Sir William Temple, Hyde, and Seymour. The exclufionifts afferted, That the king, lords, and commons of England, had a right to alter any part of the conftitution: That the lineal fucceffion to the ctown of England had been often fet afide; and that fuch an expedient was never fo neceffary as at the present junc ture, when the duke's bigotry to the church of Rome, his connexions with catholic princes, and his own arbitrary difpofition, threatened the nation with the re-establishment of popery, the perfecution, and even the extirpation of the proteftants, together with fuch acts of oppreffion as would inftigate the people to take arms in their own defence, and intail another civil war upon the kingdom. Those who oppofed the bill, argued that the right of fucceffion was deemed a fundamental principle in all European monarchies; and had never been fet afide but by fuccefsful ufurpation or abfolute tyranny that it could never be altered, without expofing the kingdom to the moft violent convulfions, unlefs the whole nation concurred in the change that a legiflature which deviates from a fundamental point of the conftitution, fubverts that very principle of authority on which itself is founded that although individuals acquiefce in common laws enacted by a majority in parliament, the cafe would 'be very different, were the lineal fucceffion to be altered. A very powerful party would oppofe this violation of the conftitution, and