1822.] 
ture of our constitution, a vast fund of 
information is supplied from the papers 
officially laid before parliament; and 
to the liberality of private individuals 
we are indebted for the posthumous 
publication of many interesting manu- 
seripts. Hume remarks upon the eb- 
ligation which English history owes to 
the celebrated Chancellors Bacon and 
Clarendon ; to whom he might have 
added two other great men of ihe same 
order, the Lord Keeper Whitiocke, and 
the Chancellor Somers. The Marquis 
of Halifax, the Lords Delamere, Moles- 
worth, Bolingbroke, and many other 
noble writers might be enumerated ; 
and of those who were actively engaged 
in affairs, we have likewise Winwood, 
Ludlow, Temple, the Walpoles, &c. 
As the heart-rending story of Lord 
Russell’s trial and execution has been 
so often repeated, itswas natural to ex- 
pect that anarrative imprinted on every 
mind, and now again related with such 
strong and just feeling, should, from 
so distinguished a quarter, have re- 
ceived fresh interest by some addition 
of original matter to the general mass 
of historical information; which, it 
must be acknowledged, does not seem 
to be the case. The noble author ad- 
mits that the character ‘of the Ear] of 
Shaflesbury has been much wisrepre- 
sented and defamed, yet he appears to 
adopt all the commonly-received, and 
injurious ideas of preceding writers, 
and more especially of Hume, respect- 
ing that nobleman, except, indeed, the 
vulgar and preposterous charges of 
shutting up the exchequer, and invent- 
ing the Popish Plot. Lord Shaftesbury, 
nevertheless, incurred the same hazards 
in the same cause with Lord Russell; 
and a more candid consideration was 
surely dune to the constancy and courage 
of him who, m his advanced age was 
ready to sacrifice his life for the princi- 
ples, in defence of which he! had con- 
tended in his youth. Could'the profli- 
gate monarch whom he long and faith- 
fully served, have purchased his apos- 
tacy, it is certain that no price would 
have been thought too great. To the 
firm leader of the patriot band, to the 
eloquent and inflexible advocate of 
civil and religious liberty, to the bene- 
ficent statesman to whom the nation is 
indebted for that bulwark of freedom 
the Habeas Corpus Act, styled by King 
James in his Memoirs “a malicious 
trick of Shaftesbury to diminish the 
just power of the crown; to such a 
Montsty Maa. No. 366. 
Observations on the Life of Lord Russell. 
217 
man ought we to refuse the common 
justice of examining into the accusa- 
tions adduced by his avowed and inve- 
terate enemies, before we join in the 
sentence of condemnation ? 
As to Mr. Hume, the fashionable 
historian of the present age, after exert- 
ing every effort to exalt the character 
of the Earl of Strafford, who employed 
his great talents toenslave his country, 
the wish was natural in the same pro- 
portion to degrade the Earl of Shaftes- 
bury, who, with at Jeast equal ability, 
and the most imminent personal risk, 
exerted himself with unabated zeal to 
the end of life in the cause of liberty ; 
and whose memory has since suffered 
under a load of unparalleled misrepre- 
sentation and falsehood. 
In order that some judgment may be 
formed of the attention paid by Mr. 
Hume to facts, the most important and 
incontrovertible, a, plain tale is only 
necessary. 
1. Mr. H. asserts that the Earl of 
Shaftesbury suggested to Clifford the 
infamous advice of shutting up the ex- 
chequer. This flagrant calumny, of 
which he was above a century ago ac- 
quitted even by the historian North, is 
at last. “ set at vest,’? as Lord J. R. is 
pleased to allow, by the recent testi- 
mony of Mr. Evelyn! 
2. Mr. H.. asserts. that the Lord 
Keeper, Sir Orlando Bridgman, refused 
to aflix the great seal to the Declaration 
of Indulgence, and was therefore re- 
moved from his office, and Shaftesbury 
made Chancellor for that express pur- 
pose. Whereas the Lord Keeper held 
the great seal eight months subsequent 
to the Declaration, and then retired, as 
publicly notified, “from age and in- 
firmity.”’ 
3. Mr. H. represents the Earl of 
Strafford as abandoning the court, de- 
cause the King, intimidated by the com- 
mons, had cancelled the Declaration. 
On the contrary, the King, thongh so- 
licited by Ormond and Arlington: as 
well as Shaftesbury, to give satisfaction 
to the Commons, had shewn no tokens 
of irresolution when Shaftesbury made 
his famous speech in reply to Clifford; 
and it wasin consequence of it that the 
King who was present at the debate, 
bioke theSeal ofthe Declaration with his 
own hand; and Shaftesbury continued 
in very high favour till the close of the 
year, and the commeucement of the 
ensuing session; at which period the 
King, reverting to\French and, Popish 
25 counsels, 
