princess

throne.

tended to be kept secret. And it helped not a little 1689. to bring the debates at Westminster to a speedy de- put the termination. Some were still in doubt with relation prince and to the princess. In some it was conscience: for both in the they thought the equitable right was in her. Others might be moved by interest, since, if she should think herself wronged, and ill used in this matter, she, who was like to outlive the prince, being so much younger and healthier than he was, might have it in her power to take her revenges on all that should concur in such a design. Upon this, I, who knew her sense of the matter very perfectly by what had passed in Holland, as was formerly told, was in a great difficulty. I had promised her never to speak of that matter, but by her order. But I presumed, in such a case, I was to take orders from the prince. So I asked him, what he would order me to do. He said, he would give me no orders in that matter, but left me to do as I pleased. I looked on this as the allowing me to let the princess's resolution in that be known; by which many, who stood formerly in suspense, were fully satisfied. Those to whom I gave the account of that matter were indeed amazed at it; and concluded, that the princess was either a very good or a very weak woman. An indifferency for power and rule seemed so extraordinary a thing, that it was thought a certain character of an excess of goodness or simplicity. At her coming to England, she not only justified me, but approved of my publishing that matter; and spoke particularly of it to her sister princess Anne. There were other differences in the form of the settlement. The republican party were at first for deposing king James by a formal sentence, and for

1689. giving the crown to the prince and princess by as

formal an election. But that was overruled in the beginning. I have not pursued the relation of the debates according to the order in which they passed, which will be found in the Journal of both houses during the convention. But having had a great share myself in the private managing of those debates, particularly with many of the clergy, and 822 with the men of the most scrupulous and tender consciences, I have given a very full account of all the reasonings on both sides, as that by which the reader may form and guide his own judgment of the whole affair. Many protestations passed in the house of lords in the progress of the debate. The party for a regency was for some time most prevailing and then the protestations were made by the lords that were for the new settlement. The house was very full: about a hundred and twenty were present. And things were so near an equality, that it was at last carried by a very small majority, of two or three, to agree with the commons in voting the abdication, and the vacancy of the throne: against which a great protestation was made; as also against the final vote, by which the prince and princess of Orange were desired to accept of the crown, and declared to be king and queen; which went very hardly". The poor bishop of Durham, who had ab

t The debates cannot be known from the Journals, yet I have seen my lord Somers's notes of those in the house of commons, and they agree with this author's account. O.

u I stood behind the woolsack in the house of lords, when it was carried in a committee

of the whole house, that the throne was not vacant, by king James's having abdicated the kingdom: but it was retrieved next day in the house, by some lords being prevailed upon to absent themselves, from an apprehension that if they had insisted, it must have ended in a

sconded for some time, and was waiting for a ship 1689. to get beyond sea, fearing publick affronts, and had offered to compound by resigning his bishoprick, was now prevailed on to come, and, by voting the new settlement, to merit at least a pardon for all that he had done which, all things considered, was thought very indecent in him, yet not unbecoming the rest of his life and character *.

an instru

ment about

But, before matters were brought to a full con- They drew clusion, an enumeration was made of the chief heads of king James's ill government. And in opposition it. to these, the rights and liberties of the people of

civil war. D. (The final vote, of which the bishop here speaks, was carried by a majority of twenty voices, sixty-five against forty-five. And in the next session, the minority refused, when advised and urged to it, as Echard in his History of the Revolution, p. 260, 261, reports on the authority of the noble adviser, either to enter their protests against the measure, or to quit the house in consequence of its being adopted.)

* This is too hard, though almost true. S. I have heard that he offered to resign his bishopric to this author, upon an assignation of one thousand per annum, but that he was diverted from it by his nephews, Mr. Sydney Wortley Mountague, and Mr. Charles Mountague, who were great friends to the new settlement, and brought him into it. He was always a very mean man in all respects, but had some court-skill. to whom he was great uncle told me, that by way of advice

One

to him, he said, "Nephew, do

66

as I did when I began the "world at court. Stick firm "to some one great man there. "If he falls, fall with him, and "when he rises, you are sure "to rise with him, to more ad

66

vantage than if you had left "him.' The duke of York had been his patron, but now the bishop had got his preferment. O. (Lord Montague, in his letter applying to king William to be created a duke, pleads his bringing the earl of Huntingdon, the bishop of Durham, and lord Ashley, to vote against the regency, and for William's having the crown, which, he says, was carried by those three voices and his own. See Appendix to Dalrymple's Memoirs, p. 340.

The ques

tion had been carried before
against a regency by a majority
of two voices, fifty-one against
forty-nine. In the minority
were all the bishops, with the
exception of Compton and Tre-
lawney.)

1689. England were stated. Some officious people studied to hinder this at that time. They thought they had already lost three weeks in their debates: and the doing this, with the exactness that was necessary, would take up more time: or it would be done too much in a hurry, for matters of so nice a nature. And therefore it was moved, that this should be done more at leisure after the settlement. But that was not hearkened to. It was therefore thought necessary to frame this instrument so, that it should be like a new Magna Charta. In the stating these grievances and rights, the dispensing power came to be discussed. And then the power of the crown to grant a non-obstante to some statutes was objected. Upon opening this, the debate was found to be so intricate, that it was let fall at that time only for despatch. But afterwards an act passed condemning it singly. And the power of granting a non-obstante was for the future taken away 2. Yet king James's party took great advantage from this; and said, that, though the main clamour of the nation was against the dispensing power, yet when the convention brought things to a settlement, 823 that did not appear to be so clear a point as had been pretended: and it was not so much as mentioned in this instrument of government: so that, by the confession of his enemies, it appeared to be no unlawful power: nor was it declared contrary to the liberties of the people of England". Whereas,

y Yet the words continue in patents. S.

z It is in a clause of the act, declaring the rights and liberties of the subject, &c. 1 Gul.

et Mariæ, Sess. 2. cap. 2. See Journal of the House of Commons, 7th, 8th, 11th, 12th Feb. 1688.-25th of Nov. 1689. O. a But see the declaration and

its not being mentioned then was only upon the op- 1689. position that was made, that so more time might not be lost, nor this instrument be clogged with disputable points b.

The last debate was concerning the oaths that The oaths