the reign of Charles the first. The commissioners instantly proceeded against the bishop and the doctor, and, by a majority of votes, suspended both from their functions.

His majesty then attempted to impose a catholic president on Magdalen college in Oxford, and to procure seven bishops, who had presented a petition to him against some of his measures, to be condemned for the libel supposed to be expressed by the petition. This completed the alienation of the public mind.

Finally, he issued a proclamation, by which he suspended all the penal laws in ecclesiastical affairs, and granted a general liberty of conscience to all his subjects*. Hume,-but for this he cites no

It is idle to contend, that these acts were justifiable in consequence of a dispensing power inherent in the monarch, as part of his legal and constitutional prerogative.

No respectable advocates for the existence of this power ever contended, that the exercise of it was lawful except on extraordinary occasions, when the public welfare rendering such an exercise of it necessary, it was justified by this very necessity, and limited to the occasion: they also admitted, that it could only be exercised in favour of particular persons, in particular instances, and for a particular time. Such a general exercise of it, as amounted to a total repeal of an existing law, they considered inadmissible: it evidently was a violation of the first principle of our constitution, by which powers of legislation cannot be exercised by the king, without the two houses of parliament. Most of its advocates allowed that the king could not dispense with the common law; most of them also contended that he could dispense with those statutory provisions only, which concerned his own profit and interest. Those who wish to have an accurate notion of this important question, may usefully peruse the case of Thomas

and

authority, asserts that the catholics, at this time, were scarcely the hundredth part of the people,

against Sorrell, in Vaughan's Reports, 330; sir Edward Hale's case, the case of the Seven Bishops, in the State Trials :and the treatises written on the subject by lord chief baron Atkins and Mr. Atwood.

In 1767, an important question on the dispensing power became a subject of parliamentary discussion. A scarcity of wheat in the preceding summer induced the late king, by the advice of the privy council, to issue a proclamation against the importation of corn till the advice of the ensuing parliament could be taken. The conduct of the ministers in advising this proclamation was severely arraigned in parliament. The necessity of the measure was allowed, and the minister justified its legality by the statute of the 15 Charles II, which permits a prohibition of the exportation of corn and grain, when they are under a certain specified price. But doubts being entertained on the construction of this act, it became necessary to justify the measure on the broad ground that," whenever the 'public is in imminent danger, and the concurrence of parlia"ment cannot be obtained, the king has an inherent discre"tionary legal prerogative of suspending or dispensing with "the law." This doctrine, or something certainly which sounded very like it, was avowed by lord Chatham, and, which was thought more surprising, by lord Camden. It was opposed by lord Mansfield: he showed, with equal power of eloquence and argument, that according to the true principles of the constitution, the king has no power, absolutely discretionary, of suspending or dispensing with the laws of the country; that, in the supposed case of imminent danger, he ought to exert such a power, and the constitution authorizes him to exert it; but that he then exerts the power at the peril of the ministers, who advise the measure; and that it is for parliament afterwards to determine whether the danger existed, and the public safety rendered the exercise, which was made of the prerogative, a measure of necessity on their being satisfied of the necessity, they should indemnify both those

and that the protestant non-conformists were little more than the twentieth. If this calculation be even tolerably exact, it is evident, that, even though James had possessed every talent, which he wanted, his means for the accomplishment of his object would still have been very inadequate.

It should also be observed, that none-disapproved of the arbitrary measures of the monarch, more than the catholics themselves. "All judicious per

sons of the catholic communion," says Hume, "were disgusted with those measures; and foresaw "their consequences. Lord Arundell, lord Powis, " and lord Bellasyse, remonstrated against them, "and suggested more moderate councils."-The Spanish ambassador, and even the pope himself, pointed out to James the indiscretion of his proceedings. When lord Tyrconnel disclosed his plans for catholicising Ireland, lord Bellasyse declared, "he was fool and madman enough to ruin "ten kingdoms."

by whom it was advised, and those by whom it was executed; but still, that, until this indemnity is obtained, all concerned in the proceeding are legally punishable.

It was universally admitted, that lord Mansfield, who had often showed an unwillingness to combat with his noble adversaries singly, obtained on this occasion a complete triumph over their united powers. His lordship's speech was printed separately, and is inserted in Almon's Parliamentary Debates of the year 1767. The result was an act of indemnity: the preamble expressly recited, "that the embargo could not be “justified in law." This was one of the most important constitutional adjudications that have occurred in our history.

Yet, with all his misconduct, James had an English heart :-his exclamation, at the sea-fight of La Hogue, will ever be remembered.-Seeing the seamen in swarms scrambling up the lofty sides of the French ships from the boats, he cried, "Ah! none but my brave English could do so "brave an action!"

Who, therefore, that reflects on these, and on some other passages, in the monarch's life, does not sympathize in his agonizing woe, when he was told, that Churchill, whom he had raised from a page to a high rank in the army, and on whom he had conferred a peerage, had fled,-taking with him to the prince of Orange, the princess Anne, whom the monarch tenderly loved?" Oh my "God!" exclaimed the afflicted father, "what will "become of me! even my own children have for"saken me!"-On one occasion, sir Charles Littleton observed before him, that "he was ashamed "to say, his son was with the prince of Orange." -James gently interrupted him with these words: "Alas! sir Charles, why ashamed! are not my daughters with him too?"

66

LXVI. 3.

The Visit of James to the Monastery of La Trappe.

THE subsequent history of the exiled Stuarts, sir John Dalrymple has comprised in a few words. Retiring from the view of the battle of La Hogue, the monarch said,-Heaven fought against him! "All his attempts, and those of his family after

wards, to recover the throne of their ancestors, were either disappointed by the insincerity of "French friendship, or were the mere efforts of despair."

66

"The attempt," says Voltaire*, "to make, or "to establish a state religion, is sometimes very easy. By different methods, and without encountering any dangers, Constantine, Clovis, "Gustavus Vasa, and queen Elizabeth, established a new religion, in their several kingdoms: but, "for such changes two things are absolutely necessary, great political talents, and favourable cir"stances: James the second had neither."

The complete triumph of the British fleet at the sea-fight of La Hogue, was a death wound to the hopes of James: "Slowly and sadly," says sir John Dalrymplet, "he returned to bury the remem"brance of his former greatness in the monastery " of La Trappe."

The following account of his visit to that celebrated monastery, is given by a contemporary French writer of eminence.

"James had heard of La Trappe, in the days of "his prosperity. After his misfortune, he resolved "to visit a solitude, he had so long felt a curiosity

"to see.

"As soon as M. de Rancé heard of his arrival, "he advanced to meet him, at the door of the

* Siècle de Louis XIV. c. 15.

+ Memoirs of Great Britain, vol. i. p. 509.

↑ Marsollier, "Vie de Jean Baptiste Armand. de Rancé "abbé de la Trappe."