22 James Muilenburg 



The futility of the embassy of Dykvelt so far as the States 

 General was concerned has already been alluded to. 85 The 

 instructions of the envoy from the Deputies were after the manner 

 of Fagel's recommendations. 86 Dykvelt was to find out the motive 

 of James's naval preparations. The difficulties of the East India 

 Company were to be settled. Some provision should be made 

 concerning the religious refugees in Holland, and negotiations 

 should be opened concerning the old debts of Holland to England. 

 But a more earnest strain was struck when the Deputies urged 

 Dykvelt to dissuade the King from hostile designs against the Low 

 Countries and to win for them the good graces of His Majesty, 

 the King of England. 



The instructions of the Prince of Orange to Dykvelt rested upon 

 two essential bases. 87 The first was to attempt a reconciliation 

 between the Prince and James II. Of course there might be 

 insuperable obstacles. The King's insistence upon his right of 

 dispensing with law, his notions about the royal prerogative, and 

 his refusal to call Parliament, — these stood in the way. The 

 second basis was much more clearly defined. 88 Bishop Burnet, 

 who wrote out the instructions for Dykvelt, 89 gives them as 

 follows: 



He was ordered to expostulate decently, but firmly, with the king upon the 

 methods he was pursuing, both at home and abroad; and to see if it was possible to 

 bring him to a better understanding with the prince. He was also to assure all 

 the church party, that the prince would ever be firm to all the church of England, 

 and to all our national interests. . . . Dykvelt had orders to press them all (the 

 dissenters) to stand off and not to be drawn in by any promises which the court 



85 Supra, p. 15. 



86 Fagel's address before the Deputies, supra, p. 11. 



87 Mazure, Historic dc la Revolution dc 1688 en Angleterre, vol. ii, p. 199. 



88 See note 67. 



89 Burnet, p. 450. "I was ordered to draw his instructions, which he followed 

 very closely." 



The Bishop could scarcely refrain from praising himself. It is interesting to 

 note in what broad terms the instructions are given. The Prince had doubtless 

 informed Dykvelt of many details in his frequent interviews with the envoy. The 

 above assertion of Bishop Burnet is amusing when considered in relation with 

 James's statement that Dykvelt was one of those ambassadors who did not cling 

 to the literal instructions of their ignorant sender. 



106 



