being only subscribed by him, and not | isters, Buckingham, Ashley Cooper, holograph, and the subscription being and Lauderdale, should be brought to proved per comparationem literarum; be parties to it:-"Can there be a which were very hard in other cases," stronger proof (asks Serjeant Hey&c.-(Mackenzie's Criminals, first edit. wood), that they were ignorant of the P. 524. Part II. tit. 25. § 3.) Now this, same treaty made the year before, and we conceive, is nothing more nor less remaining then in force?" Historical than a solemn professional report of research is certainly not the peculiar the case, and leaves just as little room talent of Mr. Rose; and as for the for doubt as to the fact, as if the official accuracy of which he is so apt to eriginal record of the trial had been boast, we would have Mr. Rose to rerecovered. member, that the term official accuracy has of late days become one of very ambiguous import. Mr. Rose, we can see, would imply by it the highest possible accuracy-as we see office pens advertised in the window of a shop, by way of excellence. The public reports of those, however, who have been appointed to look into the manner in which public offices are conducted, by no means justify this usage of the term; Mr. Rose next objects to Mr. Fox's assertion, that "the King kept from his Cabal Ministry the real state of his connection with France- and from some of them the secret of what he was pleased to call his religion ;" and Mr. Fox doubts whether to attribute this conduct to the habitual treachery of Charles, or to an apprehension, that his ministers might demand for themselves some share of the French money; which he was unwilling to give them. In answer to this conjecture, Mr. Rose quotes Barillon's Letters to Lewis XIV. to show that Charles's ministers were faly apprised of his money transactions with France. The letters so quoted were, however, written seven years after the Cabal Ministry were in power-for Speaking of the early part of James's Barillon did not come to England as reign, Mr. Fox says, it is by no means ambassador till 1677—and these letters certain that he had yet thoughts of were not written till after that period. obtaining for his religion any thing more Poor Sir Patrick-It was for thee and than a complete toleration; and if Mr. thy defence this book was written!!!! Rose had understood the meaning of Mr. Fox has said, that from some of the French word établissement, one of the ministers of the Cabal the secret of his many incorrect corrections of Mr. Charles's religion was concealed. It Fox might have been spared. A system was known to Arlington, admitted by of religion is said to be established when Mr. Rose to be a concealed Catholic; it is enacted and endowed by Parliawas known to Clifford, an avowed ment; but a toleration (as Serjeant Catholic: Mr. Rose admits it not to Heywood observes) is established when have been known to Buckingham, it is recognised and protected by the though he explains the reserve, with supreme power. And in the letters of pect to him, in a different way. He Barillon, to which Mr. Rose refers for has not, however, attempted to prove the justification of his attack upon Mr. that Lauderdale or Ashley were con- Fox, it is quite manifest that it is in Baked-on the contrary, in Colbert's this latter sense that the word établisseLetter of the 25th August, 1670, cited ment is used; and that the object in by Mr. Rose, it is stated that Charles view was, not the substitution of the proposed the traité simulé, which Catholic religion for the Established hould be a repetition of the former one Church, but merely its toleration. In in all things, except the article relative the first letter cited by Mr. Rose, James to the King's declaring himself a says, that "he knew well he should Catholic, and that the Protestant Min- never be in safety unless liberty of con and we are not without apprehensions, that Dutch politeness, Carthaginian faith, Boeotian genius, and official accuracy, may be terms equally current in the world; and that Mr. Rose may, without intending it, have contributed to make this valuable addition to the mass of our ironical phraseology. had science for them should be fully esta- | would inflame the people against the blished in England." The letter of the Catholic religion, so long as it should 24th of April is quoted by Mr. Rose, not be more fully established. The French as if the French King had written, the expression is, tant qu'elle ne sera pas establishment of the Catholic religion; plus pleinement établie; and this Mr. whereas, the real words are, the esta- Rose has had the modesty to translate, blishment of the free exercise of the Ca-till it shall be completely established, and tholic religion. The world are so in- to mark the passage with italics, as of veterately resolved to believe, that a the greatest importance to his arguman who has no brilliant talents must ment. These false quotations and be accurate, that Mr. Rose, in referring translations being detected, and those to authorities, has a great and decided passages of early writers, from which advantage. He is, however, in point Mr. Fox had made up his opinion, of fact, as lax and incorrect as a poet; brought to light, it is not possible to and it is absolutely necessary, in spite doubt, but that the object of James, of every parade of line, and page, and before Monmouth's defeat, was, not the number, to follow him in the most destruction of the Protestant, but the minute particular. The Serjeant, like a toleration of the Catholic, religion; and, bloodhound of the old breed, is always after the execution of Monmouth, Mr. upon his track; and always looks if Fox admits, that he became more bold there are any such passages in the page and sanguine upon the subject of reliquoted, and if the passages are accu-gion. rately quoted or accurately translated. Nor will he by any means be content with official accuracy, nor submit to be treated, in historical questions, as if he were hearing financial statements in the House of Commons. We do not consider those observations of Serjeant Heywood to be the most fortunate in his book, where he attempts to show the republican_tendency of Mr. Rose's principles. Of any disposition to principles of this nature, Barillon writes, in another letter to we most heartily acquit that right Lewis XIV.-"What your Majesty honourable gentleman. He has too has most besides at heart, that is to say, much knowledge of mankind to believe for the establishment of a free exercise their happiness can be promoted in the of the Catholic religion." On the 9th stormy and tempestuous regions of reof May, Lewis writes to Barillon, that publicanism; and, besides this, that he is persuaded Charles will employ all system of slender pay, and deficient his authority to establish the free exer- perquisites, to which the subordinate cise of the Catholic religion: he men- agents of Government are confined in tions also, in the same letter, the Par-republics, is much too painful to be liament consenting to the free exercise thought of for a single instant. of our religion. On the 15th of June he writes to Barillon-"There now remains only to obtain the repeal of the penal laws in favour of the Catholics, and the free exercise of our religion in all his states." Immediately after Monmouth's execution, when his views of success must have been as lofty as they ever could have been, Lewis writes"It will be easy to the King of England and as useful for the security of his reign as for the repose of his conscience, to re-establish the exercise of the Catholic religion." In a letter of Barillon, July 16th, Sunderland is made to say, that the King would always be exposed to the indiscreet zeal of those who We are afraid of becoming tedious by the enumeration of blunders into which Mr. Rose has fallen, and which Serjeant Heywood has detected. But the burthen of this sole executor's song is accuracy-his own official accuracy and the little dependence which is to be placed on the accuracy of Mr. Fox. We will venture to assert, that in the whole of his work he has not detected Mr. Fox in one single error. Whether Serjeant Heywood has been more fortunate with respect to Mr. Rose, might be determined, perhaps with sufficient certainty, by our previous extracts from his remarks. for some indulgent readers, these may But not seem enough: and we must proceed | same mistake again in p. 147. of his in the task, till we have settled Mr. own book; and after this, he makes Rose's pretensions to accuracy on a Mr. Fox the person who selected the still firmer foundation. And if we be Appendix to Barillon's papers; whereas thought minutely severe, let it be re- it is particularly stated in the Preface membered that Mr. Rose is himself an to the History, that this Appendix was accuser; and if there be justice upon selected by Mr. Laing. earth, every man has a right to pull stolen goods out of the pocket of him who cries," Stop thief!" Mr. Rose affirms, that compassing to levy war against the King was made high treason by the statute of 25 Edward III.; and, in support of this affirmation, he cites Coke and Blackstone. His stern antagonist, a professional man, is convinced he has read neither. The former says, compassing to levy war is no treason.” (Inst. 3. p. 9.); and Blackstone, "a bare conspiracy to levy war does not amount to this species of treason." (Com. iv. p. 82.) This really does look as if the Serjeant had made out his assertion. a In the story which Mr. Rose states of the seat in Parliament sold for tive pounds (Journal of the Commons, VOL. v.), he is wrong, both in the sum and the volume. The sum is four pounds; and it is told, not in the fifth volume, but the first. Mr. Rose states, that a perpetual excise was granted to the Crown, in lieu of the profits of the Court of Wards; and adds, that the question in favour of the Crown was carried by a majority of two. The real fact is, that the half only of an excise Of the bill introduced in 1685 for upon certain articles was granted to the preservation of the person of James Government in lieu of these profits; II., Mr. Rose observes-"Mr. Fox has and this grant was carried without a not told us for which of our modern division. An attempt was made to statutes this bill was used as a model; grant the other half, and this was nega-and it will be difficult for any one to ticed by a majority of two. The Jour- show such an instance." It might have nals are open;- Mr. Rose reads them; been thought, that no prudent man -he is officially accurate. What can would have made such a challenge, the meaning be of these most extra-without a tolerable certainty of the ordinary mistakes? ground upon which it was made. Serjeant Heywood answers the challenge by citing the 36 Geo. III. c. 7., which is a mere copy of the act of James. Mr. Rose says that in 1679, the writ de hæretico comburendo had been a dead letter for more than a century. It would have been extremely agreeable to Mr. Bartholomew Legate, if this had been the case; for, in 1612, he was burnt at Smithfield for being an Arian. Mr. Wightman would probably have participated in the satisfaction of Mr. Legate; as he was burnt also, the same year, at Lichfield, for the same offence. With the same correctness, this scourge of historians makes the Duke of Lauderdale, who died in 1682, a confidential adviser of James II. after his accession in 1689. In page 13. he quotes, as written by Mr. Fox, that which was written by Lord Holland. This, however, is a familiar practice with him. Ten pages afterwards, in Mr. Fox's history, he makes the same mistake. "Mr. For added,"-whereas was Lord Holland that added. The In the fifth section of Mr. Rose's work is contained his grand attack upon Mr. Fox for his abuse of Sir Patrick Hume; and his observations upon this point admit of a fourfold answer. 1st, Mr. Fox does not use the words quoted by Mr. Rose; 2dly, He makes no mention whatever of Sir Patrick Hume in the passage cited by Mr. Rose; 3dly, Sir Patrick Hume is attacked by nobody in that history; 4thly, If he had been so attacked he would have deserved it. The passage from Mr. Fox is this: "In recounting the failure of his expedition, it is impossible for him not to touch upon what he deemed the misconduct of his friends; and this is the subject upon which, of all others, his temper must have been most irritable. A certain description quotation from a private letter, made by the editor, to be the same as if included in a work intended for publication by the author;-then he re of friends (the words describing them are members that he is the sole executor ignominiam. Mr. Rose came into possession of the Earl of Marchmont's papers, containing, among other things, the narrative of Sir Patrick Hume. He is very severe upon Mr. Fox, for not having been more diligent in searching for original papers; and observes that if any appli cation had been made to him (Mr. Rose), this narrative should have been at Mr. Fox's service. We should be glad to know, if Mr. Rose saw a person tumbled into a ditch, whether he would wait for a regular application till he pulled him out? Or, if he happened to espy the lost piece of silver for which the good woman was diligently sweeping the house, would he wait for Argyle names neither the description of friends who were his greatest enemies, nor the two individuals who were the principal cause of the failure of his scheme. Mr. Fox leaves the blanks as he finds them. But two notes are added by the editor, which Mr. Rose might have observed are marked with an E. In the latter of them we are told, that Mr. Fox observes, in a private letter, "Cochrane and Hume certainly filled up the two principal blanks." But is this communication of a private formal interrogation before he imletter any part of Mr. Fox's history? And would it not have been equally fair in Mr. Rose to have commented upon any private conversation of Mr. Fox, and then to have called it his history? Or, if Mr. Fox had filled up the blanks in the body of his history, does it follow that he adopts Argyle's censure, because he shows against whom it is levelled? Mr. Rose has described the charge against Sir Patrick Hume to be, of faction, cowardice, and treachery, Mr. Rose has more than once altered the terms of a proposition before he has proceeded to answer it; and, in this instance, the charge of treachery against Sir Patrick Hume is not made either in Argyle's letter, Mr. Fox's text, or the editor's note, or anywhere but in the imagination of Mr. Rose. The sum of it all is, that Mr. Rose first supposes the relation of Argyle's opinion to be the expression of the relator's opinion, that Mr. Fox adopts Argyle's insinuations because he explains them; - then he looks upon a parted his discovery, and suffer the lady to sweep on till the question had been put to him in the most solemn forms of politeness? The established practice, we admit, is to apply, and to apply vigorously and incessantly, for sinecure places and pensions—or they cannot be had. This is true enough. But did any human being ever think of carrying this practice into literature, and compelling another to make interest for papers essential to the good conduct of his undertaking? We are perfectly astonished at Mr. Rose's conduct in this particular; and should have thought that the ordinary exercise of his good-nature would have led him to a very different way of acting. "On the whole, and upon the most attentive consideration of every thing which has been written upon the subject, there does not appear to have been any intention of applying torture in the case of the Earl of Argyle." (Rose, p. 182) If this every thing had included His the following extract from Barillon, "Mr. Rose, in his concluding paragraph, the above cited, and very disgraceful, boasts of his speaking impersonally,' and inaccuracy of Mr. Rose would have he hopes it will be allowed justly, when he been spared. "The Earl of Argyle makes a general observation respecting the has been executed at Edinburgh, and proper province of history. But the last has left a full confession in writing, in might be speaking justly, he was not speaksentence evidently shows that, though he which he discovers all those who have ing impersonally, if by that word is meant, assisted him with money, and have without reference to any person. aided his designs. This has saved him words are 'But history cannot connect from the torture." And Argyle, in his itself with party, without forfeiting its letter to Mrs. Smith, confesses he has name; without departing from the truth, made discoveries. In his very inaccuthe dignity, and the usefulness of its funcrate history of torture in the southern tions. After the remarks he has made in some of his preceding pages, and the part of this island, Mr. Rose says, that apology he has offered for Mr. Fox, in his except in the case of Felton,-in the last preceding paragraph, for having been attempt to introduce the civil law in mistaken in his view of some leading points, Henry VI.'s reign,—and in some cases there can be no difficulty in concluding, of treason in Mary's reign, torture was that this general observation is meant to be never attempted in this country. The applied to the historical work. The charge fact, however, is, that in the reign of intended to be insinuated must be, that, Henry VIII. Anne Askew was tortured the name by being connected with party; in Mr. Fox's hands, history has forfeited by the Chancellor himself. Simson and has departed from the truth, the was tortured in 1558; Francis Throg dignity, and the usefulness of its functions. morton in 1571; Charles Baillie, and It were to be wished that Mr. Rose had Banastie, the Duke of Norfolk's servant, explained himself more fully; for, after were tortured in 1581; Campier, the assuming that the application of this obJesuit, was put upon the rack; and servation is too obvious to be mistaken, Dr. Astlow is supposed to have been there still remains some difficulty with racked in 1558. So much for Mr. respect to its meaning. If it be confined to such publications as are written under Rose as the historian of punishments. the title of histories, but are intended to We have seen him, a few pages before, serve the purposes of a party; and truth is at the stake,-where he makes quite as sacrificed, and facts perverted, to defend bad a figure as he does now upon the and give currency to their tenets, we do rack. Precipitation and error are his not dispute its propriety; but, if that be foibles. If he were to write the history the character which Mr. Rose would give of sieges, he would forget the siege of him with candour, or even common justice. Troy; if he were making a list of poets, Mr. Rose has never, in any one instance, he would leave out Virgil:-Cæsar intimated that Mr. Fox has wilfully dewould not appear in his catalogue of parted from truth, or strayed from the generals;-and Newton would be over-proper province of history, for the purpose looked in his collection of eminent mathematicians. to Mr. Fox's labours, he has not treated of indulging his private or party feelings. But, if Mr. Rose intends that the observaIn some cases Mr. Rose is to be met tion should be applied to all histories, the only with flat denial. Mr. Fox does authors of which have felt strongly the influence of political connections and prinnot call the soldiers who were defend- ciples, what must become of most of the ing James against Argyle authorised histories of England? Is the title of assins; but he uses that expression historian to be denied to Mr. Hume? and against the soldiers who were murder-in what class are to be placed Echard, ing the peasants, and committing every sort of licentious cruelty in the twelve counties given up to military executon; and this Mr. Rose must have known, by using the most ordinary diligence in the perusal of the text and would have known it in any other history than that of Mr. Fox. Kennet, Rapin, Dalrymple, or Macpherson? In this point of view the principle laid down is too broad. A person, though conhistory of events which occurred a century nected with party, may write an impartial before; and, till this last sentence, Mr. Rose has not ventured to intimate that Mr. Fox has not done so. On the contrary, he has declared his approbation of a great portion |