60 James Muilenburg 



in this proposal one is bound to read a significant aspect of the 

 Shrewsbury councils. 



I confess that could there be a convenient opportunity for some of us to have 

 a personal conference with your Highnesse, that some overtures might be made 

 which would be of use to your service, and I hope from these hands your Highnesse 

 is well informed of their thoughts who are devoted to your service. For my own 

 part, I am so tied to be of that number by what I have already done. . . . 



The most enigmatic part of the letter, and a most material 

 part, presents a question of grammatical reference. 



I am glad to find that Mons. Dyckvelt, who is so able to serve your Highnesse, 

 is so well established in your confidence, as I understand by my Lord Halifax, to 

 whom you gave him such credentials as made me willing to speak much more freely 

 with him than otherwise I should have done; but yet I must confess to your High- 

 ness (which I rely upon your justice to keep to yourself), that finding his Lordship 

 who received those credentials not willing to impart some things to him which are 

 not very proper to be written, I thought it less prudent for me to say to him all 

 that I could wish your Highness were truly informed of. I say not this with the 

 least reflection upon my Lord Halifax (who, I am confident is very zealous in your 

 service) but to show our unhappiness, who dare not, by second hands, speak what 

 was necessary for your knowledge. 



Are we to infer from this letter that Danby and others were 

 reluctant in speaking to Dykvelt about their relationship to the 

 Prince? Or must we conclude that Danby is casting a thrust at 

 Halifax? It is well known, of course, that Halifax and Danby 

 were political enemies. Moreover their personalities were very 

 different. The inherent reticence and love of disquisition, so 

 peculiar to the literary Halifax, was quite foreign to the persistent 

 and ambitious nature of the conspiring Danby. Yet there are 

 many indications in the above paragraph that Dykvelt is the 

 person referred to. But why should Danby add that he means to 

 cast no reflection against Lord Halifax? 283 



The letter of Compton, Bishop of London, which he wrote 

 shortly after the departure of Dykvelt is hard to interpret in the 



283 This is, of course, a most material point. It concerns the very nature of 

 Dykvelt's embassy, and the character of his negotiations with the leaders. Fox- 

 croft, the writer and editor of The Life and Letters of Halifax, holds that the refer- 

 ence is to Dykvelt; the Editor of Mackintosh, it seems to me more plausibly, 

 contends that the reference is to Halifax. 



144 



