end to the other. The elections filled the House of Commons with men pledged to the restoration of the throne, and the ancient Nobility forthwith returned to their seats in Parliament. The Nobles and the Middle Class resumed once more their co-partnership of centuries, temporarily broken up by a successful soldier whose advent their own indiscretion had provoked. They were still resolved on a due limitation of the power of the Crown; but, enlightened by misfortune, they were equally resolved to avoid the errors that had entailed such dire calamities.

The Commons had no sooner assembled than Monk announced that an Ambassador from the King was at their door with a letter from His Majesty. The Ambassador was admitted to the House, and the letter of the King read, which offered a general amnesty and liberty of conscience. The wildest acclamations resounded on all sides, and were re-echoed by the whole country as the news spread abroad The King was solemnly proclaimed at different points of London in presence of both Houses; and Committees from the Lords and Commons were sent to Holland to invite Charles to return to his vacant throne. The King entered London, May 29th, 1660, amid universal enthusiasm. From Dover where he landed, his way to the metropolis was lined with thousands of people who rent the air with cries of joy. Charles expressed his wonder and delight, whilst all marvelled at the utter disappearance of the faction which had so recently tyrannized over the land.

THE RESTORATION.

SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.

CHARLES II. was just thirty when his reign began. Guizot remarks that "Charles II. recovered his throne without foreign aid or domestic struggle, and even without the assistance of the Royalists, by the spontaneous impulse of the nation, who were thus delivered from oppression, anarchy, and revolutionary fluctuations, and only expected at the hands of the King order and stability." This is perfectly true, for all classes had suffered so much materially and morally from twenty years of political and religious agitation, and civil war, that all yearned for repose, and all believed it was to be found only in the restoration of their old institutions of King, Lords, and Commons.

If Charles II. had been an ambitious man, it would have been easy to restore the Royal power to something like the vigor it possessed under Elizabeth ; but he was of a tolerant nature, a sound understanding, and an amiable disposition. Besides, the sad fate of his father and his own misfortunes indisposed him for conflicts which might have ended in another civil war and his own dethronement. As he showed no

desire to strain his authority, the Nobles and Middle Class gave their attention to practical reforms of the most salutary character. Buckle remarks that "during

the reign of Charles II. more steps were taken in the right direction than had been taken in any period of equal length during the twelve centuries we had occupied the soil of Britain." It was called by Fox "the era of good laws and bad government."

The prudent conduct of the King gave no cause for political dissensions, but the Church of England, which was restored with the Monarchy, exhibited less moderation. Having suffered so much persecution under the régime of the Presbyterians and the Independents, the Church was eager to take revenge on both these bodies of Dissenters. But neither the Nation nor the King sympathized with their zeal for Protestantism. So ridiculous and criminal had been the excesses of fanaticism during the reign of the Independents, so disgusted were all classes with the cant and sanctified hypocrisy that prevailed under Cromwell's Government, that a reaction bordering on scepticism had ensued, and most persons, high and low, felt an utter indifference to the quarrels amongst the Clergy of whatever denomination. As for Charles himself, he was a Freethinker much more than a Protestant or Catholic, and openly professed an admiration of Hobbes, the Materialist, who was cordially hated by the Clergy. All the great intellects of this epoch were likewise impregnated with disbelief. Locke was an Unitarian, Newton a Socinian, Milton an Arian.

To this sceptical condition of the public mind must be ascribed the various schemes resorted to by the Ecclesiastics and Politicians to dissipate the political and religious lethargy prevailing, In this way may be explained one of the strangest events of this reign. The Popish plot to assassinate the King" can be regarded only as an invention to stir up the prejudices

"

of the country against the Catholics, and so bring about a religious revival. The King, on his part, never for a moment believed in the conspiracy; but such was the number of false witnesses suborned-Titus Oates amongst the rest—that the smouldering hatred of Papacy was rekindled, and before it was extinguished a number of innocent lives both noble and plebeian were ruthlessly sacrificed.*

The Politicians worked zealously to utilize the AntiCatholic fury, and to carry out their ambitious projects. Lord Russell, Algernon Sydney, and others united in bringing a Bill into the Commons to exclude James brother of the King from the throne, as he was a known Papist. The Bill being rejected by the Lords, these disappointed men entered into a conspiracy to incite an insurrection which would have entailed on England the horrors of another civil war. The Duke of Monmouth, a natural son of Charles, was at the head of this conspiracy, and aimed at the succession to his father. Lord Russell did not seek to overturn the Monarchy, but was ready to employ this odious means to redress what he considered grievances. Algernon Sydney, a son of the Earl of Leicester, aspired to found a Republic. Lord Shaftesbury, an unscrupulous Politician, fomented actively this wanton plot.

*The aged Viscount Stafford, a Catholic noble, was accused of conspiring to raise a Papal army to subdue England. This absurd accusation was sustained by false witnesses, whose statements were disproved, yet the House of Lords, under pressure of the mania prevailing, condemned him to death. The King commuted the sentence of "hanging and quartering" to that of decapitation, an exercise of prerogative which Lord Russell, in the House of Commons, called in question. The infirm old man on the scaffold protested his innocence in language so firm and pathetic that the populace forgot their insane delusions, and melted into tears. They shouted repeatedly, believe you, my lord; God bless you, my lord!". The executioner was so much affected that twice he lifted the axe, and it was only on the third attempt that the head was severed from the body.

"We

In spite of the Anti-Popery frenzy that had been aroused by such detestable means, the Nation was not at all disposed to rush into another civil war. They knew the King was not tyrannical whatever might be his other faults, and they were not so easily duped by the Politicians as the last generation had been. Thus the conspirators were obliged to postpone the intended rising till all was discovered in June, 1683. Hume remarks that, "the whole gang of spies, witnesses, informers, and suborners who had so long been supported and encouraged by the leading patriots now turned short upon their old patrons, and offered their services to the Government.” To escape arrest many fled. Monmouth absconded. Lord Russell was seized and sent to the Tower, as were also Lord Essex, Sydney, and others. Many of the conspirators confessed all; and it was made evident that a plan of insurrection had been fully settled, and that the assassination of the King was intended.

Lord Russell was tried by a jury ❝ of men of fair and reputable characters." He did not deny his share in the projected insurrection, but declared that he harbored no design against the life of the King. He was found guilty, and condemned to death. The King commuted the legal sentence of "hanging and quartering," saying, "Lord Russell shall find that I am possessed of that prerogative which, in the case of Lord Stafford, he thought proper to deny me." Great exertions were made to save Russell's life. The Earl of Bedford, his father, offered £100,000 to the Duchess of Portsmouth, who had great influence with the King, but in vain. As several of the inferior agents of the conspiracy had been executed, the King was not disposed to interfere