1685. it was pretended the plot was laid for murdering the late and the present king. He denied the truth of that conspiracy. He owned, he thought the prince was as much tied to the people, as the people were to the prince; and that, when a king departed from the legal measures of government, the people had a right to assert their liberties, and to restrain him. He did not deny, but that he had heard many propositions at West's chambers about killing the two brothers, and upon that he had said, it could have 634 been easily executed near his house; upon which some discourse had followed, how it might have been managed. But, he said, it was only talk, and that nothing was either laid, or so much as resolved on. He said, he was not for a commonwealth, but for kingly government according to the laws of England: but he did not think that the king had his authority by any divine right, which he expressed in rough but significant words. He said, he did not believe that God had made the greater part of mankind with saddles on their backs, and bridles in their mouths, and some few booted and spurred to ride the rest. Cochran had a rich father, the earl of Dundonald : and he offered the priests 5,000l. to save his son. They wanted a stock of money for managing their designs: so they interposed so effectually, that the bargain was made. But, to cover it, Cochran petitioned the council that he might be sent to the king; for he had some secrets of great importance, which were not fit to be communicated to any but to the king himself. He was upon that brought up to London: and, after he had been for some time in private with the king, the matters he had discovered were said to be of such importance, that in consi- 1685. deration of that the king pardoned him. It was said, he had discovered all their negociations with the elector of Brandenburg and the prince of Orange. But this was a pretence only given out to conceal the bargain; for the prince told me, he had never once seen him. The secret of this came to be known soon after. When Ailoffe was brought up to London, the king examined him, but could draw nothing from him, but one severe repartee. He being sullen, and refusing to discover any thing, the king said to him ; Mr. Ailoffe, you know it is in my power to pardon you; therefore say that which may deserve it. It was said that he answered, that though it was in his power, yet it was not in his nature to pardon. He was nephew to the old earl of Clarendon by marriage; for Ailoffe's aunt was his first wife, but she had no children. It was thought, that the nearness of his relation to the king's children might have moved him to pardon him, which would have been the most effectual confutation of his bold repartee: but he suffered with the rest. ment in Immediately after Argile's execution, a parliament A parliawas held in Scotland. Upon king Charles's death, Scotland, the marquis of Queensbury, soon after made a duke, and the earl of Perth, came to court. The duke As the bishop has stated the case, he had no relation to the king's children; but Ailoffe's having stabbed himself at first, and the insolence of what the bishop calls a bold repartee, inclines me to believe, he was resolved not to accept of a pardon; for certainly no man in his senses would have said such a thing to a king he expected 1685. of Queensbury told the king, that if he had any 635 thoughts of changing the established religion, he could not make any one step with him in that matter. The king seemed to receive this very kindly from him; and assured him, he had no such intention, but that he would have a parliament called, to which he should go his commissioner, and give all possible assurances in the matter of religion, and get the revenue to be settled, and such other laws to be passed as might be necessary for the common safety. The duke of Queensbury pressed the earl of Perth to speak in the same strain to the king. But, though he pretended to be still a protestant, yet he could not prevail on him to speak in so positive a style. I had not then left London: so the duke sent me word of this, and seemed so fully satisfied with it, that he thought all would be safe. So he prepared instructions by which both the revenue and the king's authority were to be carried very high. He has often since that time told me, that the king made those promises to him in so frank and hearty a manner, that he concluded it was impossible for him to be acting a part. Therefore he always believed, that the priests gave him leave to promise every thing, and that he did it very sincerely; but that afterwards they pretended, they had a power to dissolve the obligation of all oaths and promises; since nothing could be more open and free than his way of expressing himself was, though afterwards he had no sort of regard to any of the promises he then made. The test had been the king's own act while he was in Scotland. So he thought, the putting that on all persons would be the most acceptable method, as well as the most effectual, for securing the protestant religion. Therefore he proposed an instruction oblig- 1685. ing all people to take the test, not only to qualify them for public employments, but that all those to whom the council should tender it should be bound to take it under the pain of treason: and this was granted. He also projected many other severe laws, that left an arbitrary power in the privy council. And, as he was naturally violent and imperious in his own temper, so he saw the king's inclinations to those methods, and hoped to have recommended himself effectually, by being instrumental in setting up an absolute and despotic form of government. But he found afterwards how he had deceived himself, in thinking that any thing, but the delivering up his religion, could be acceptable long. And he saw, after he had prepared a cruel scheme of government, other men were trusted with the management of it: 636 and it had almost proved fatal to himself. that the The parliament of Scotland sat not long. No op- Granted all position was made. The duke of Queensbury gave king desired. very full assurances in the point of religion, that the king would never alter it, but would maintain it, as it was established by law. And in confirmation of them he proposed that act enjoining the test, which was passed, and was looked on as a full security; though it was very probable, that all the use that the council would make of this discretional power lodged with them, would be only to tender the test to those that might scruple it on other accounts, but that it would be offered to none of the church of Rome. In return for this, the parliament gave the king for life all the revenue that had been given to his brother: and with that some additional taxes were given. 1685. Severe laws Other severe laws were also passed. By one of these an inquisition was upon the matter set up. All were passed. persons were required, under the pain of treason, to answer to all such questions as should be put to them by the privy council. This put all men under great apprehensions, since upon this act an inquisition might have been grafted, as soon as the king pleased. Another act was only in one particular case: but it was a crying one, and so deserves to be remembered. When Carstairs was put to the torture, and came to capitulate in order to the making a discovery, he got a promise from the council, that no use should be made of his deposition against any person whatsoever. He in his deposition said somewhat that brought sir Hugh Campbell and his son under the guilt of treason, who had been taken up in London two years before, and were kept in prison all this while. The earl of Melfort got the promise of his estate, which was about 1000l. a year, as soon as he should be convicted of high treason. So an act was brought in, which was to last only six weeks; and enacted, that if within that time any of the privy council would depose that any man was proved to be guilty of high treason, he should upon such a proof be attainted. Upon which, as soon as the act was passed, four of the privy council stood up, and affirmed that the Campbells were proved by Carstairs's deposition to be guilty. Upon this both father and son were brought to the bar, to see what they had to say, why the sentence should not be executed. The old gentleman, then near eighty, seeing the ruin of his family was determined, and that he was condemned 637 in so unusual a manner, took courage, and said, the oppression they had been under had driven them |