Sir William Temple justly enjoys the character of a very elegant author; but in his political conduct and writings, he carried his notions of prerogative and paternal dominion to a very great height; and was, therefore, in his public principles directly opposite to Lord Shaftesbury. When his lordship was chancellor of the exchequer, he gave Sir William a private reason for his resentment, by opposing the king's giving him a present of plate, which he demanded upon his coming from Holland. This Mr. Stringer mentions in his manuscript, as does M. Le Clerc in his eulogium upon Mr. Locke. * To this may be added another cause of Sir William Temple's anger. Lord Shaftesbury was very free in his censures of the

"Cependant le Chevalier Temple a parlé désavantageusement de lui, dans ses mémoires, et a insinué qu'il étoit l'un des auteurs de la guerre de 1672, contre les Provinces Unies. Mais on doit savoir qu'il n'aimoit pas Milord Shaftesbury, parce que ce dernier, étant chancellier de l'échiquier, s'étoit opposé à un présent en

vaisselle d'argent, qu'il démandoit au roi, au retour de son ambassade, selon un usage, que le chancellier jugeoit très préjudiciable aux finances du

roi. Cette raison est assez forte pour ne pas se fier à Mons. Temple sur le chapitre de Milord Shaftesbury." - Le Clerc, Bibliothèque Choisie, tom. vi. p. 364.

chapel in England from the year 1660 to that date (the 12th April 1682); and that he neither was, nor ever had been, nor ever pretended to be, in the communion of the Church of Rome.

treaty of Nimeguen; he exclaimed against it openly, as it dissolved the grand alliance, which a few years before had been formed against the power of France; in forming which he had a great share. I have by me a short state of the nation which Lord Shaftesbury drew up at the meeting of the new parliament, March 6, 1668-9. In this he says, "That this treaty was concluded by the mediation, or more properly enforced by the English court: that by this treaty the crown of England received no honour, nor any visible advantage; but was left exposed, as well as the Emperor, the King of Spain, and the States General, to the mercy of the French: that all the arts imaginable were used to draw off the States from the confederacy: that notwithstanding the English nation in general, and the parliament, desired a war with France, and our court had made a league with the States to enter into one, yet these, seeing the influence which the court of France had over our councils, and being jealous of the English forces, which were sent into Flanders to amuse the parliament, and draw supplies from them, by the persuasion of our minister made a separate peace: that Spain, being thus forsaken by the Dutch, apprehensive of the English

forces, and knowing the ascendant which the French king had over the English court, signed also a dishonourable treaty: that the Emperor soon followed the example, and made a peace for himself, leaving the King of Denmark, the Elector of Brandenburgh, and other protestant princes to provide for themselves: that thus France, with the assistance of England, assured to herself the greatest part of the vast conquests and accessions she had made to her empire; and broke the strength of her enemies more effectually by the peace than she could have done by the war; it being impossible to form a new association among princes who could not have any confidence in one another." Sir William Temple and Sir Leoline Jenkins were our ministers at this treaty of Nimeguen; and though Sir William acted under positive orders from his court, yet very probably he could not easily pardon any reflections upon a work in which he had been an actor. His anger appears very plainly whenever he mentions Lord Shaftesbury; but the grounds of it are not always so obvious. His disapprobation is always general; he lays nothing particularly to his charge; and though in one place he has insinuated (as M. Le Clerc says) that his lordship was one

of the advisers of the war against the Dutch, he in other places imputes it wholly to the violent temper and counsels of Lord Clifford; as will appear in the following work.

Father Orleans gives this character of Lord Shaftesbury: "He had a vast genius, was penetrating, bold, and equally steady both on the right and wrong side; a constant friend, but an implacable enemy; and the more dangerous, as, being void of all religion and conscience, it was the easier for him to plot, because he was not deterred by the number or enormity of any crimes, when he judged them necessary to preserve himself, or destroy those who had incurred his hatred." It must be observed, that the learned

8 This passage in the original runs thus: "Antoine Ashley Cooper, Comte de Shaftsbury, et Grand Chancelier du Royaume. Cet acteur, si célèbre dans les dernières scènes que nous a données l'Angleterre, étoit le plus propre de tous à conduire une grande entreprise; aussi étoit-il l'ame de celle-ci; esprit vaste, éclairé, audacieux, intriguant, également ferme dans un bon et dans un mauvais parti, pendant que ceux à qui il s'attachoit ne lui donnoient point sujet de changer; constant ami, mais ennemi implacable; et d'autant plus dangereux, que ne ménageant rien avec la religion et la conscience, il étoit moins embarrassé à trouver les moyens de nuire; n'étant effrayé ni de la grandeur ni de la multitude des crimes, quand il les croyoit nécessaires ou pour se conserver, ou pour perdre ceux qui s'étoient attiré sa haine." The enterprise of which the reverend Jesuit thus

Jesuit had no knowledge of Lord Shaftesbury : he wrote his history from the mouth of King James the Second after the Revolution, and in the midst of that king's resentment for the loss of his crown; a loss owing to his religion, and to his perverse and strong attachment to arbitrary power, both which Lord Shaftesbury so long and so strenuously opposed in every step of their progress. This opposition, with his being such a constant enemy to France, could not entitle him to Father Orleans's good opinion.

I do not think it very material to mention Mr. Archdeacon Echard upon this occasion. It is plain that he did not make much inquiry into the character of Lord Shaftesbury, since he contented himself with copying from Father Orleans, whom he could not but know to be a prejudiced writer.

Bishop Burnet is still less favourable to Lord Shaftesbury than Father Orleans. He does not allow him any of the good qualities, and scarce one of the qualifications, which his greatest enemies have acknowledged. The bishop, indeed, owns that Lord Shaftesbury was angry with him

describes Shaftesbury to have been the soul, had as its object the rendering Charles an absolute monarch by means of foreign troops.