COOPER. 



. dit for being the author of the whole conspiracy. Sir 

 - John Dalrvrnple goes so far as to allege, that papers 

 which he had seen convinced him that Shaftesbury 

 was the contriver of it, though the persons he made use 

 of as informers ran beyond their instructions. Sir 

 John adds a story of Shaftesbury, saying, when pressed 

 in regard to the absurdity of the circumstances, " It is 

 no matter ; the more nonsensical the better : if we can- 

 not bring them to swallow worse nonsense than that, we 

 shall never do any good with them." It is to be re- 

 gretted that Sir John's judgment in forming conclu- 

 sions from public documents was far inferior to his in- 

 dustry in procuring them. Shaftesbury was not likely 

 to use such words as these in company with a person 

 capable of reporting them ; and it is much more pro- 

 bable that he tented the circumstances of the plot to 

 account, than that he was the inventor of it. His per- 

 severing activity on this occasion, his ardent support of 

 the Exclusion Bill, and his subsequent protest against 

 the return of the Duke of York from abroad, rendered 

 the latter his implacable enemy. 



Shaftesbury continued at the head of the opposition 

 so long as there was 21 parliament. In 1681, Charles 

 having come to the determination of finally dispensing 

 with these troublesome assemblies, retrenched his ex- 

 pences, published an appeal to the people on the con- 

 duct of parliament, and renewed, in secret, his treaty 

 with France. By this tune the circumstances of the 

 Popish plot began to be discredited, and the court 

 ventured to proceed againt the leading members of 

 opposition. The aged Earl of Stafford was tried and 

 brought to the block. Shaftesbury was apprehended, 

 examined before the Privy Council, and committed 

 to the Tower. Here he remained more than four 

 months, and was brought to trial towards the end of 

 the year. The witnesses brought forward against him 

 were of bad character; but a paper found in his study, 

 and containing the draught of an association, was made 

 the subject of a very serious charge. As it was not 

 however in his hand-writing, and contained nothing 

 treasonable in regard to the person of the sovereign, 

 the grand jury thought proper to discharge Shaftes- 

 bury. His Lordship, when released, assumed a bold 

 tone, and brought an action against a person who in 

 conversation, had attributed to him traitorous designs 

 Such was Shaftesbury's popularity, in the metropolis, 

 that the defendant resorted to the unusual expedient of 

 moving for a trial out of Middlesex, on which the suit 

 was dropped, 



The fiction of the Popish plot was succeeded in 1682 

 by a real conspiracy, known by the name of the Rye- 

 House Plot. Lord Russel, Lord Essex, Algernon Sid- 

 ney, and other leaders of opposition, being debarred 

 from the means of making a constitutional resistance in 

 parliament, resorted to the eouivocal course of secret 

 combination. Though they disliked Shaftesbury's cha- 

 racter and still more the prospect of his assuming an 

 ascendency among them, they felt their need of his 

 powerful and daring party in the city, and did not he- 

 sitate to make him completely privy to their schemes. 

 Shaftesbury, taught by long experience, the expediency 

 of prompt exertion when engaged in so hazardous! 

 scheme as the overthrow of the executive power, was 



S«oof " g "<? time in strik5n S a blow - Michaelmas 

 0682) was first proposed as the time of insurrection, 

 but it was delayed month after month. Shaftesbury, 

 distrusting the judgment of the conspirators, and out 

 of patience with their reiterated delays, thought it ex- 

 pedient to withdraw from the power of his enemies. 



2 



197 



In November (16S2) he crossed over to Holland, and 

 took a house at Amsterdam. Here, however, his active 

 career was soon brought to a close. The gout, to which 

 he had long been subject, returned with redoubled vio- 

 lence, and attacking his stomach, put an end to his life 

 in January 1683, in the 62d year of his age. 



No character in the English history has been more 

 the subject of controversy than that of Shaftesbury. 

 Though the majority of writers are disposed to con- 

 demn him in very strong terms. The exculpatory ef- 

 forts of Mr Locke, and the discovery of his innocence 

 in two or three very suspicious transactions, have tend- 

 ed to abate, in some measure, the current of general 

 odium. There are, it is understood, in the possession 

 of the Shaftesbury family, various documents explana- 

 tory of his conduct, and calculated, it is said, to miti- 

 gate the severity of public censure. These documents 

 have been confided, with a view to publication, to se- 

 veral persons, none of whom have discharged the task. 

 Our limits do not permit us to enter on an analysis of 

 the character of this extraordinary man, and we regret 

 it the less, as a biographical account of him may, we 

 understand, be ere long expected. The brightest part 

 of his conduct was an- exemption from the influence of 

 avarice, a very prevalent vice among the ministers of 

 that age. Hence his unimpeached integrity in the ad- 

 ministration of justice. But how different must be our 

 opinion of his political proceedings, whether we regard 

 him as a member of that cabal which aimed at the over- 

 throw of the constitution, or as the leader of a popular 

 party, prosecuting the victims of a plot which he must 

 have known to be fictitious. His temper was violent ; 

 his disposition restless ; but, on the other hand, he was 

 indefatigable in business, and impressive in public 

 speaking. Unfortunately he did not scruple to set at 

 work the worst passions of mankind for the promotion 

 of his ambition, and his repeated changes from the 

 court to the people, deprive his character of all claim 

 to the influence of public principles. We conclude this 

 article by transcribing one of the latest opinions ex- 

 pressed in regard to Shaftesbury. It is contained in a 

 letter from Mr Fox to his friend, Sergeant Hey wood, 

 and forms the last document in the preface to the 

 History of the early part of she Reign of James II. 



" I am quite glad I have little to do with Shaftes- 

 bury ; for as to making him a real patriot, or friend to 

 our ideas of liberty, it is impossible, at least in my opi- 

 nion. On the other hand, he is very far from being 

 the devil he is described. Indeed, he seems to have 

 been strictly a man of honour, if that praise can be 

 given to one destitute of public virtue, and who did not 

 consider Catholics as fellow-creatures ; a feeling very 

 common in those times. Locke was probably caught 

 by his splendid qualities, his courage, his openness, his 

 party zeal, his eloquence, his fan* dealing with his friends, 

 and his superiority to vulgar corruption. Locke's par- 

 tiality might make him, on the other hand, blind to the 

 indifference with which he (Shaftesbury) espoused 

 either monarchical, arbitrary, or republican principles, 

 as best suited his ambition ; but could it make him 

 blind to the relentless cruelty with which he persecuted 

 the Papists in the affair of the Popish plot, merely, as 

 it should seem, because it suited the purposes of the 

 party with which he was then engaged ? You know that 

 some of the imputations against him are certainly false; 

 the shutting up the Exchequer, for instance. But the 

 two great blots of sitting on the Regicides, and his con- 

 duct in the Popish plot, can never be wiped off. The 

 second Dutch war is a bad business, in which he en- 



Coopcr. 



