Sayfadaki görseller
PDF
ePub

and endure every thing, but the loss of public opinion. This is no matter of speculation or theory; but the history of crime in every period and every nation will abundantly confirm it→

"Entendons discourir sur les bancs des galères,

"Ce forçat abhorré même de ses confrères;

"Il plaint par un arret injustement donné,

"L'honneur en sa personne à ramer condamné."-BOILEAU,

Without looking back to antiquity, we have two remarkable examples in our own time of the most resolute denial of guilt, in cases respecting which no honest man could entertain any doubt. The first is that of MARSHAL NEY in France, which has been alluded to before; and the second, that of LORD COCHRANE in England, who, being accused of a crime which no gentleman ought to have committed, endeavoured to falsify the evidence of disinterested witnesses, impeached the decision of a Jury, which was sworn to decide upon the evidence, and insulted a Judge who, in every man's mind but the Prisoner's, was elevated above all suspicion of any bias against him.

It was probably upon the same principle that the Jesuits, charged as they were with crimes of the deepest die, crimes which in the Professors of religion assumed greater aggravation than in the case of common men, determined on denying, to the last, the accusations which had been brought.

But further; in estimating the value of the Jesuits' “ pro "testations of innocence," it must be considered, that the interests of their own Church, and of their Brethren then in England, required that they should not avow their guilt, on

* LEVIZAC, in a note on the above passage, relates an anecdote of the Duke of Ossonia, a Vice Roy of Sicily and Naples, who, on visiting the Galleys, had the curiosity to interrogate the criminals: they all on that occasion, with one accord, declared their entire innocence of the crimes of which they had been convicted, with the exception, however, of one prisoner, who honestly admitted that he was guilty, and had deserved even a worse fate than he had experienced; upon which the Vice Roy exclaimed (releasing him from bondage), "Take that rascal

account of the scandal which would have accrued to the Romish Communion, and the danger which might have ensued to others. They might also have imagined that all necessary purposes had been answered, if they had confessed to the Priests by whom they were attended, without the addition of a public confession; which, while it could not save their own lives, would only commit their own cause*. When to these considerations are added the doctrines of casuistry which justify rebellion, and divest it of its guilt; the merit of a good intention, which sanctifies the end in view, by the use of any means to obtain it; and the duty of obedience to Papal authority; we may perhaps come to some more correct conclusions upon the importance to be attached to a Jesuit's "protestations "of innocence," than if such reflections were laid out of sight t

*The following passage from BURNET will prove that he did not value very highly the Jesuits' "protestations of innocence." " One "Serjeant, a secular Priest, who had been always on ill terms with the "Jesuits, and was a zealous Papist in his own way, appeared before "the Council, upon security given him; and he averred that Gawen "the Jesuit, who died protesting he had never thought it lawful to "murder Kings, but had always detested it, had at his last being in "Flanders, said to a very devout person from whom Serjeant had it, "that he thought the Queen might lawfully take away the King's life, "for the injuries he had done her, but much more, because he was a

Heretic: upon that, Serjeant run out into many particulars to shew "bow little credit was due to the protestations made by Jesuits even at their "death."-Burnet's Own Times, Vol. ii. p. 153, Edit. 1724.

BURNET, it appears, would not believe those who were NOT Jesuits under circumstances where their religion was opposed to their veracity" Sir Edward Hales" (says he), " a gentleman of a noble "family in Kent, now declared himself a Papist, though he had "long disguised it; and had once to myself so solemnly denied it, that "I was led from thence to see there was no credit to be given to that "sort of men, where their Church or Religion was concerned." Burnet's History of his own Times, Vol. ii. p. 379, Edit. 1724 And BAXTER was much of the same opinion; for he says, "The King" (Charles II.)" that "week, by himself and the Chancellor, acquainted them that he should "consent to any thing reasonable to secure the Protestant Religion, not

[ocr errors]

MR. DALLAS however asserts, that these "pretended plots" have been "cited against the toleration of the Ca"tholics."

It is not true that they have been cited with any such object: they have been adduced to shew, that Jesuits cannot be tolerated with safety to this country, and that Catholics cannot safely succeed to power or influence in the State; whether the argument which they afford to this point, together with the other arguments to the same point, which have been brought forward, go to establish it, let the country judge. It is the less necessary here to notice the sophistry which imputes to all those who cannot see with Mr. Dallas's eyes, a refusal to tolerate the Catholics, because that imputation has been considered before. The Catholics enjoy, and may they ever enjoy, the most ample toleration: no man who values religious freedom and loves his country, would wish that they should have less; but surely many of the best friends of Toleration may still be excused for refusing the Catholics the power to act intolerantly towards those whom they call Heretics, without at the same time being charged with refusing to tolerate the Catholics.

To resume the subject of THE POPISH PLOTS: Mr. DalLas, in order to shew they were only PRETENDED, refers us to "DR. MILNER'S Letters to a Prebendary," and he is certainly entitled to all the benefit which he can derive from the evidence of A POPISH BISHOP. He then passes to the assertions, or rather asseverations, of Mr. Fox, respecting the Plot of the Jesuits in the reign of Charles II: although, from the manner in which the passage is quoted, MR. DALLAS's readers are left to guess what Plot MR. Fox alludes to; and, indeed, it is

"alienating the Crown from the line of succession, and particularly "that he would consent, that till the successor" (James II.)" should "take the test, he should exercise no act of government. This offer "took much with many; but most said that it signified nothing; FOR "PAPISTS HAVE EASILY DISPENSATIONS TO TAKE ANY TESTS OR

only by reference to Mr. Fox's work that any one can disco ver. It is impossible to acquit MR. DALLAS of a reprehensible (not to say intentional) ambiguity on this subject; for, immediately after his quotation from Mr. Fox as to this Plot, he has these words: "Speaking of one of the imaginary Po"pish Plots, Mr. Fox expresses himself thus," &c.: whereas, in fact, Mr. Fox is at that moment speaking of this same Plot in the reign of Charles II. and of no other. The Plót in question is that which concerned Lord Stafford and other Catholic Peers, the Jesuits Whitebread, Fenwick, Gowan, Turner, Harcourt, Coleman, and Ireland; and the underplot connected with it, viz. the murder of Sir Edmondbury Godfrey;, in which affairs, Oates, Bedloe, Dugdale, Tongue, Turberville, and Pranse, were the principal witnesses.

It is sincerely to be wished, for the credit of Mr. Fox, that he had contented himself with a statement of the Evidence which was actually given on both sides, in some such manner as BURNET has detailed it in his History of his own Times; rather than that he should have committed himself to such an indecent attack upon "the King, Parliament, Judges, "Juries, Witnesses, and Prosecutors," for their conduct at this important juncture. Had he attended to the cautious way in which BURNET (who lived through the whole period alluded to, and possessed the best means of information), as well as others, have examined and balanced the evidence which was produced, it is almost impossible that he could have expressed himself with so much passion and vehemence as he has done the passage extracted from MR. Fox's work has rather the declamatory character of a popular harangue than that of a sober examination of an historical fact *; and a reference to the authority which has been referred to, as well as

It is remarkable that MR. Fox says of the Introduction to his History (in which Introduction this very passage is contained), "I have "at last finished my Introduction, which, after all, is more like a speech

than it should be."-See Lord Holland's Address to the Reader, prefixed to Mr. Fox's History.

[ocr errors]

of RAPIN's authority on the same subject, will satisfy every reader that MR. Fox's ardent love of liberty, in the pursuit of which favorite object he did not always preserve the greatest moderation or consistency, has transported him in this instance, as in many others, far beyond the limits of " truth and so"berness."

MR. Fox himself admits that the belief in the plot was universal (see p. 31); and expressly declares himself as much convinced as RAPIN, that there was a design or project to in ́troduce Popery, at the head of which were the King and his Brother (CHARLES II. AND JAMES II.): but MR. Fox cannot conceive how, if this were the case, the plot in question could have been real; not considering that the Papists were generally believed to have meditated the death of CHARLES II. who was only their concealed friend, in order to make way for JAMES II. who was their open and avowed friend, and who afterwards proved himself so, even to the satisfaction of MR. Fox himself *.

If, therefore, that eminent Politician and Orator, instead of quoting DRYDEN (who was a Papist), in order to prove that the plot was fictitious, had adverted to the evidence which there is for its truth, he would, in all probability, have been deterred from hazarding so positive a declaration as we find, and might have preferred even indecision itself, in a case of conflicting testimony, to the decided and dogmatical tone which he has assumed.-With how much greater dignity and decency does BURNET sum up his reflections on this whole subject, when, after a patient comparison of the contradictory evidence which had been brought forward, he observes, "These things put a man quite in the dark: and in this mist, "matters must be left till the great revelation of all secrets;

COURTIN'S Letter to Louis XIV. in 1677, is well known: "I " can answer for it to your Majesty" (says he), "that there are none "of your own subjects who wish you better success in all your under"takings than these two Princes do"-(Charles II. and James II.) See DALRYMPLE and others.

[ocr errors]
« ÖncekiDevam »