IX. 1686. parliament was unexpectedly changed. A secret BOOK opposition was encouraged by the example of the English parliament. An abhorrence of popery was revived by controversies, in which the learning and eloquence of the protestant divines were suc cessfully displayed; and the revocation of the edict of Nantz produced an indelible impression on the minds of men. The French protestants were dispersed through Europe; their outcries, and the representations of their sufferings, increased the horror entertained at popery, and the arrival of fifty thousand refugees in England, afforded a real argument; and a spectacle of its cruel and persecuting spirit, which it was impossible to resist. Under a prince more intolerant and bigoted than Louis XIV. the episcopal party began to apprehend, that the same persecution which they had inflicted on fanatics, was reserved for themselves; and as the repeal of the penal laws was sufficiently understood, the parliament, of late so devoted to the crown, became equally tenacious of the rights of the established church. When the king's let- April 23 ter was read, and enforced by the commissioner's speech; when, in return for his offer of a free intercourse of trade with England, and an ample indemnity for state offences, he demanded that his innocent and loyal subjects of the catholic persuasion might be restored to the protection of the laws, and released from obligations inconsistent with their faith; the estates replied, in respectful 29 IX. BOOK yet equivocal terms, that they would proceed as far for the relief of the papists as their conscience would permit !?. 1086. Repeal of the penal laws and the test at The expression used by James, implied the removal of every disability; and as the offer of a tempted. Commercial intercourse with England was deemed irresistible, the court party proposed the repeal both of the penal laws, and of the test so adverse to the king's designs. They represented that the penalties attached to the Romish worship, confiscation and corporal punishment for the first offence, banishment for the second, and the pains of treason for the third, were unworthy of a christian or even of a civilized state; that it was a small concession to gratify the king by the repeal of laws too severe and sanguinary ever to be executed; that the exemption of his catholic subjects from the test, was due to those of his own persuasion, from whose loyalty no danger could result to the throne; that the refusal of a just and moderate relief, might provoke the king to inflict an unforeseen and incurable wound; that without the violation of a single law, the protestants might be displaced at once, by the absolute prerogative with which he was invested, and the papists substituted in every department of the church and state; and that as the nation was bound by religion and duty never to resist the 17 Wodrow, ii. 591. App. 158. , exercise of his divine right, nothing, but the merit BOCK of an obsequious submission would remain 18. IX. 1686. The episcopal party, as if awakened from a deep opposed, lethargy, discovered in these interminations, the full extent of the despotism which they had concurred to rear. Ashamed of their former unguarded servility, they maintained that their obedience belonged to the king, but their conscience to God; that in the test which James himself had proposed, they had sworn to admit of no alteration injurious, though remotely, to the protestant religion; and that without a violation of their oath, they could never consent to the repeal of the penal laws, enacted as a safeguard for the estab lished church; that as these were never executed, but reserved to deter an active, insidious enemy, intent on its destruction, the sudden outcries against their inhuman rigour must appear pecu, liarly unreasonable, when capital punishments were multiplied against fanatics in every session; that in these times, when protestants were persecuted and reduced so low abroad, no security should be remitted at home: that when papists, remained unmolested, disquieted by none, and 18 It may seem strange that the bigotry of men should resort for argument to the most pernicious and absurd extremes to which their principles can be pushed. L'Estrange, then employed in Edinburgh to write for the court, had at large share in these arguments. IX. 1686. BOOK deprived of nothing but a public establishment, for what purpose did they demand the repeal, but to grasp at all offices of emolument, authority, and trust; to invade each department in the state; to propagate their worship with impunity through the church; and in due time, when their strength was confirmed, and when their designs were mature for execution, to supplant the protestant religion, and to re-establish their own 19 ? and re fused. The attempt to introduce popery was too direct, and too gross to succeed. But the parliament was studiously protracted, and every allurement was offered, every intimidation was employed, to obtain its consent. Ross, the primate, and Paterson, bishop of Edinburgh, endeavoured to procure the concurrence of the prelates, but an honourable opposition was maintained by Atkins, the venerable bishop of Galloway; by Cairncross, archbishop of Glasgow, and Bruce of Dunkeld, who were both displaced. Lord Pitmedin, the only judge who opposed the repeal, was removed from the bench, and Mackenzie, the king's advocate, was dismissed for Dalrymple. Lockhart, the president, proposed a limited toleration; the duke of Hamilton, a general indulgence to presbyterians and papists; but the commissioners of shires and burrows, who adhered together, continued, without a leader among the nobility, firm and united in their opposition to the court. The 19 Fount. Mem. Wodrow, ii. App. 118. IX. 1686. indulgence of popish worship in private families, BOOK was the last attempt: but the commissioner, after a violent debate, despaired of a concession which the king despised. The protestants, conscious of their strength, and disgusted at a long session, threatened to impeach the bishop of Edinburgh, or to ratify the penal laws; and the parliament, June 15, which had granted nothing to ministry but gifts of forfeitures, was adjourned, and soon after dissolved by the king 20. Dispensing powers. The application to parliament, according to the principles, and indeed the language of James, was a gracious offer to accept of its dutiful and submissive consent to his demands. His prerogative was fully equal, at least in his own opinion, to the repeal or suspension of the penal laws, which the estates had refused. The dispensing powers, which he prepared to assert in England, might be exercised in Scotland, where they were least likely to be disputed; but he used the precaution to purge the council of eleven members, the earls of Mar, Dumfries, Glencairn, and others, who had opposed his designs in parliament, and to substitute some popish lords in their stead. His pleasure was then Sept. 14. signified to the obsequious board; that his protection should be extended to all catholics, against the severity of the laws which the judges and magistrates were forbidden to execute; that the free exercise of the popish religion should be indulged 20 Wodrow, ii. 594. App. 160. Fount. Mem. |