infamy and obscurity; alike hating, and hated by each other4°. Sir Jervis Elvis, and the inferior criminals, suffered the punishment due to their guilt. LETTER II. ENGLAND AND SCOTLAND, FROM THE RISE OF BUCKINGHAM TO THE DEATH OF JAMES 1. IN 1625. THE fall of Somerset, and his banishment from court, opened the for way a new favourite to rise at once to the highest honours. George Villiers, an English gentleman, of an engaging figure, and in all the bloom of twenty-one, had already attracted the eye of James; and, at the intercession of the queen, had been appointed cup-bearer'. This office, so happily suited to youth and beauty, but which, when they become the cause of peculiar favour, revives in the mind certain Grecian allusions, might well have contented Villiers, and have attached him to the king's person; nor would such a choice have been censured, except by the cynically severe2. But the profuse bounty of James induced him, in the course of a few years, contrary to all the rules of prudence and politics, to create his minion viscount Villiers, earl, marquis, and duke of Buckingham, knight of the Garter, master of the horse, chief justice in Eyre, warden of the Cinque-Ports, master of the King's-Bench, steward of Westminster, constable of Windsor, and lord high admiral of England3. 40 Kennet. 1. Rushworth, vol. i. 2, James, who affected sagacity and design in his most trifling concerns, insisted we are told, on the ceremony of the queen's soliciting this office for Villiers, as an apology to the world for his sudden predilection in favour of that young gentleman. Coke. p. 46. 3. Franklin, p. 39. Clarendon, vol. i. This rapid advancement of Villiers, which rendered him forever rash and insolent, involved the king in new necessities, in order to supply the extravagance of his minion. A price had been already affixed to every rank of nobility, and the title of Baronet invented, and currently sold for one thousand pounds, to supply the profusion of Somerset. Some new expedient must now be suggested; and one very A. D. 1616. unpopular, though certainly less disgraceful than the former, was embraced: the cautionary towns were delivered up to the Dutch for a sum of money. These towns, as I have formerly had occasion to notices, were the Brill, Flushing, and Ramakins; three important places, which Elizabeth had got consigned into her hands by the United Provinces, on entering into war with Spain, as a security for the repayment of the money which she might disburse on their account. Part of the debt, which at one time amounted to eight hundred thousand pounds, was already discharged: and the remainder, after making an allowance for the annual expence of the garrisons, was agreed to be paid on the surrender of the fortresses. This seems to have been all that impartial justice could demand, yet the English nation was highly dissatisfied with the transaction; and it must be owned, that a politic prince would have been slow in relinquishing possessions on whatever conditions obtained, which enabled him to hold in a degree of subjection so considerable a neighbouring state as the republic of Holland. 4. Franklin, p. II. 5. Part I. Let. LXIX. 6, Winwood, vol. ii. Rushworth, vol. i. Mrs. Macauly thinks Elizabeth acted very ungenerously in demanding any thing from the Dutch for the assistance she lent them: "It ought by all the obligations of virtue, to " have been a free gift." (Hist. Eng. vol. i.) That the English queen took advantage of the necessities of the infant republic, to obtain possession of the cautionary towns is certain; and the Dutch, now become more opulent, took advantage of James's necessities to get them back again, Justice and generosity were in both cases, as in most transactions between nations, entirely out of the question. The A. D. 1617. The next measure in which James engaged rendered him as unpopular in Scotland as he was already in England. It was an attempt to establish a conformity in worship and discipline between the churches of the two kingdoms; a project which he had long held in contemplation, and toward the completion of which he had taken some introductory steps. But the principal part of the business was reserved till the king should pay a visit to his native country. Such a journey he now undertook. This naturally leads us to consider the affairs of Scotland. It might have been readily foreseen by the Scots, when the crown of England devolved upon James, that the independency of their kingdom, for which their ancestors had shed so much blood, would thenceforth be lost; and that, if both kingdoms persevered in maintaining separate laws and parliaments, the weaker must feel its inferiority more sensibly than if it had been subdued by force of arms. But this idea did not generally occur to the Scottish nobles, formerly so jealous of the power as well as of the prerogatives of their princes; and as James was daily giving new proofs of his friendship and partiality to his countrymen, by loading them with riches and honours, the hope of his favour concurred with the dread of his power, in taming their fierce and independent spirits. The will of their sovereign became the supreme law in Scotland. Meanwhile the nobles, left in full possession of their feudal jurisdiction over their own vassals, exhausting their fortunes by the expence of frequent attendance upon the English court, and by attempts to imi tate the manners and luxury of their more wealthy neighbours, multiplied exactions upon the people; who durst hardly utter complaints, which they knew would never reach the ear of their sovereign, or be rendered too feeble to move him to grant them redress". Thus subjected at once to the 7. Robertson, Hist. Scot, vol. ii. Hume, Hist, Eng. vol. vi. absolute absolute will of a monarch, and to the oppressive jurisdiction of an aristocracy, Scotland suffered all the miseries peculiar to both these forms of government. Its kings were despots, its nobles were slaves and tyrants, and the people groaned under the rigorous domination of both3. There was one privilege, however, which the Scottish nobility in general, and the great body of the people, were equally zealous in protecting against the encroachments of the crown; namely, the independency of their church or kirk. The cause of this zeal deserves to be traced. Divines are divided in regard to the government of the primitive church. It appears, however, to have been that of the most perfect equality among the Christian teachers, who were distinguished by the name of Presbyters; an appellation expressive of their gravity and wisdom, as well as of their age. But the most perfect equality of freedom requires the directing hand of a superior magistrate; soon made sensible of this by experience, the primitive Christians were induced to chuse one of the wisest and most holy among their Presbyters, to execute the duties of an ecclesiastical governor; and, in order to avoid the trouble and confusion of annual or occasional elections, his office continued during life, unless in cases of degradation, on account of irregularity of conduct. His jurisdiction consisted in the administration of the sacraments and discipline of the church; in the superintendency of religious ceremonies, which imperceptibly increased in number and variety; in the consecration of Christian teachers, to whom the ecclesiastical governor or bishop assigned their respective functions; in the management of the public funds, and in the termination of 8. Before the accession of James I. to the throne of England, the feudal aristocracy subsisted in full force in Scotland. Then the vassals both of the king and of the nobles, from mutual jealousy, were courted and caressed by their superiors, whose power and importance depended on their attachment and fidelity. Robertson, Hist. Seot. vol. ii. all all such differences as the faithful were unwilling to expose to the heathen world. Hence the origin of the Episcopal hierarchy, which rose to such an enormous height under the Christian emperors and Roman pontiffs. When the enormities of the church of Rome, by rousing the indignation of the enlightened part of mankind, had called forth the spirit of reformation, that abhorrence excited by the vices of the clergy was soon transferred to their persons; and thence, by no violent transition, to the offices which they enjoyed. It may therefore be presumed, that the same holy fervor which abolished the doctrines of the Romish church, would also have overturned its ecclesiastical government, in every country where the reformation was received, unless restrained by the civil power. In England, in great part of Germany, and in the northern kingdoms, such restraint was imposed on it by the policy of their princes, so that the ancient Episcopal jurisdiction, under a few limitations, was retained in the churches of those countries. But in Switzerland and the Netherlands, where the nature of the government allowed full scope to the spirit of reformation, all pre-eminence of rank in the church was destroyed, and an ecclesiastical government established, more suitable to the genius of a republican policy, and to the ideas of the reformers. This system, which has since been called Presbyterian, was formed upon the model of the primitive church. It ought, however, to be remarked, that the genius of the reformers, as well as the spirit of the reformation, and the civil polity, had a share in the establishment of the Presbyterian system. Zuinglius and Calvin, the apostles of Swit 9. See Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, cent. i. ii. and Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity, lib. vii. et. seq. A bishop, during the first and second centuries, was only a President in a council of Presbyters, and the head of one Christian assembly; and whenever the Episcopal chair became vacant, a new president was chosen from among the Presbyters, by the suffrages of the whole congregation. Mosheim, ubi supra. zerland |