The king, throughout the whole period of his reign, was at variance with his Parliament. His profuse expenditure upon his mistresses obliged him to be continually applying for money, and so little could they depend upon him, that he was said to have retained a large portion of the sum which the Commons had voted for carrying on the war with Holland, and a motion was brought forward for examining the accounts. For all this he was frequently reduced to great necessity. Pepys tells us, that at one time he was actually in want of linen; and a Mr. Townsend, the wardrobe-man, told him that the linen-draper was owed 5,000l., and the grooms, being unable to get their fees, took away the king's linen at the quarter's end; and yet, at this very period, his mistress, the Duchess of Cleveland, is reported to have lost in gaming 25,000l. on a single night.

Charles, however, could jest upon his difficulties. He once asked Stillingfleet why he always read his sermons in the chapel-royal, but preached extempore everywhere else. Stillingfleet answered, that it was from awe of his audience, and begged to know why his majesty read his speeches to Parlia ment. "Odd's fish, Doctor," said the king, "'tis no difficult question. I always ask for money, and I have so often asked for it, that I am ashamed to look the members in the face."

His continual dissensions with Parliament, combined with the promptings of his brother, the Duke of York, induced Charles to endeavour to govern without one. In 1681, he accordingly dissolved it, without attempting to call a new one ; and every day, from that period, his authority made great advances. In 1683, the celebrated Rye-house conspiracy was discovered, which was followed by the melancholy execution of Lord Russell and Algernon Sidney. Innumerable applications were made to the king for the pardon of Russell. The old Earl of Bedford offered a hundred thousand pounds to the Duchess of Portsmouth, but the king was inexorable. The execution of Algernon Sidney is regarded as one of the greatest blemishes of Charles's reign. The violent and inhuman Jefferies was chief justice; and though the evidence was illegal, yet a packed jury was prevailed on to give a verdict against him. On the discovery of this plot, Evelyn says, "The public was in great consternation; his majesty very

melancholy, and not stirring without double guards; all the avenues and private doors about Whitehall and the Park shut up, few admitted to walk in it. The Papists, in the meantime, very jocund, and indeed with reason, seeing their own plat brought to nothing, and turned to ridicule, and now a conspiracy of Protestants, as they called them."

During the latter period of his reign Charles is said to have been almost absolute; but, notwithstanding the continual promptings of his brother to rivet the fetters of tyranny, he could not forget the circumstances which led to his father's execution and his own exile. He was overheard one day to say, in opposing some of the duke's hasty counsels, "Brother, I am too old to go again to my travels; you may, if you choose it." It is even said that Charles meditated giving more freedom to his subjects, and summoning a new Parliament, when he was suddenly seized with a fit resembling apoplexy, and after languishing for a few days he expired, on the 6th of February, 1685, in the fifty-fifth year of his age, and twenty-fifth of his reign; but according to Burnet and many other writers, not without a suspicion of poison. Indeed Burnet says that the Duchess of Portsmouth confessed that he was poisoned. Welwood states that this suspicion acquired weight from the following incident, which befel the king a few years before his death. One evening at Windsor, having drunk more liberally than usually, Charles retired from the company to the next room, where, wrapping himself in his cloak, he fell asleep upon a couch. A short time afterwards he arose and returned to the company, when a servant lay down upon the same couch, in the king's cloak, and was found stabbed dead with a poniard. The matter was hushed, and no inquiry was made; nor was it ever known how it happened. Hume, however, observes, “that this suspicion must be allowed to vanish like many others, of which all histories are full.”

Of the circumstances attending Charles's last illness, Evelyn relates the following:-" Feb. 4, 1675, I went to London, hearing that his majesty, on the Monday before (Feb. 2), had been surprised in his bedchamber by an apoplectic fit, so that if, by God's providence, Dr. King had not been accidentally present to let him blood, his majesty had certainly died that moment. It was a mark of the extraordinary dexterity, reso

lution, and presence of mind of the doctor, to let him blood in the very paroxysm, without staying the coming of the other physicians, which regularly should have been done, and for want of which he must have a regular pardon (which was afterwards granted). This rescued his majesty for the instant, but it was a short reprieve. On Wednesday he was cupped, let blood in both jugulars, had both vomit and purges, which so relieved him that on Thursday hopes of recovery were signified in the public Gazette. The same day the physicians thought him feverish, so they prescribed him the famous Jesuit powder, but it made him worse. Thus he passed Thursday night with great difficulty, when, complaining of a pain in his side, they drew twelve ounces more blood from him; this was by six in the morning on Friday, and it gave him relief, but it did not continue, for being now in much pain, and struggling for breath, he lay dosing, and after some conflicts, the physicians despairing of him, he gave up the ghost at half an hour after eleven in the morning, being the 6th of February, 1685.

66

Prayers were solemnly made in all the churches, especially the court chapels, where the chaplains relieved one another every half-quarter of an hour from the time he began to be in danger till he expired. Those who assisted his majesty's devotions were, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishops of London, Durham, and Ely, but more especially Dr. Ken, the Bishop of Bath and Wells. It is said they exceedingly urged upon him the receiving the Holy Sacrament, but his majesty told them he would consider of it, which he did so long till it was to late. Others whispered that the bishops and lords, except the Earls of Bath and Feversham, being ordered to withdraw the night before, Hurlston (Huddleston) the priest had presumed to administer the popish offices. He gave his breeches and keys to the Duke of York, who was almost continually kneeling by his bed-side, and in tears. He also recommended to him the care of his natural children, all except the Duke of Monmouth, now in Holland, and in his displeasure. He entreated the queen to pardon him (not without cause); who a little before had sent a bishop to excuse her not more frequently visiting him, on account of her excessive grief, and withal that his majesty

would forgive her if at any time she had offended him.

6

'Alas! poor lady,' exclaimed Charles, she beg my pardon! I beg hers, with all my heart.' He spake to the Duke of York to be kind to the Duchess of Cleveland, and especially Portsmouth, and added, "Let not poor Nelly starve.'

A page or two further, Evelyn remarks, "I can never forget the inexpressible luxury and profaneness, gaming, and all dissoluteness, and as it were total forgetfulness of God (it being Sunday evening) which this day se'nnight I was witness of, the king sitting and toying with his concubines, Portsmouth, Cleveland, Mazarine, etc., a French boy singing love songs in that glorious gallery, whilst about twenty of the great courtiers and other dissolute persons were at basset round a large table, a bank of at least 2,000l. in gold before them, upon which two gentlemen who were with me made reflections in astonishment. Six days after all was in the dust!"

Several other contemporary writers have described the death, but with some slight differences, agreeing in the main points. Burnet, however adds, that the Duchess of Portsmouth attended him, "taking care of him as a wife of a husband.”

Charles had no children by his queen, but by his mistresses he left a numerous progeny. By Lucy Walters he had James, Duke of Monmouth, born at Rotterdam, in 1649; also a daughter, Mary, married first to Mr. William Sarsfield, of Ireland, and afterwards to William Fanshaw, Esq. By Lady Castlemaine, afterwards Duchess of Cleveland, he had six children, viz. Charles Fitzroy, Duke of Southampton; HenryFitzroy, Duke of Grafton; George Fitzroy, Duke of Northumberland; Charlotte Fitzroy, married to Sir Edward Harry Lee, of Ditchley, Oxon; the Countess of Sussex; and Barbara, who became a nun at Pontoise. By Nell Gwynn he had Charles Beauclerc, Duke of St. Alban's; and a son, James Beauclerc, who died young. By Louisa Querouaille, afterwards Duchess of Portsmouth, he had Charles Lennox, Duke of Richmond. By Mary Davis he had Mary Tudor, married to Lord Ratcliffe, the son and heir of Francis, Earl of Derwentwater. By Catharine Peg, he had Charles Fitz Charles, who died at Tangier; and a daughter who died in infancy. By Elizabeth, Viscountess Shannon, he had Charlotte Boyle, alias Fitzroy; married first, James Howard,

grandson of the Earl of Suffolk, and afterwards to Sir Robert Yaston, Bart., created Earl of Yarmouth.

The following anecdotes respecting the merry monarch and his courtiers, gleaned from various contemporary writers, may not be thought inappropriate addenda to the preceding sketch: :

Charles having been accustomed during his exile to live amongst his courtiers more as a companion than a monarch, he still preserved an easy familiarity with all around him, which, combined with his love of gossiping, has not a little contributed to the innumerable stories of his wit and humour which are still preserved. Burnet says he was very fond of relating his adventures in Paris and Scotland, but would repeat them so frequently as to draw down the following severe jest from the Earl of Rochester. He said, "he wondered to see a man have so good a memory as to repeat the same story without losing the least circumstance, and yet not remember that he had told it to the same persons the very day before."

According to Burnet he was an inveterate pedestrian, and would walk so fast that it was a trouble to keep up with him ; and his brother, the Duke of York, was equally as fond of being on horseback. Anthony Wood relates that on one occasion Prince George of Denmark, who had married the king's niece (afterwards Queen Anne), complained to him that he was growing very fat. "Walk with me," said Charles, "hunt with my brother, and do justice to my niece, and you will not long be distressed by growing fat."

Charles was also extremely fond of sauntering in St. James's Park, where he would feed the birds, with which it was well stocked, with his own hands; and on these occasions very much preferred being attended by only one or two of his personal friends, rather than by a retinue. Dr. King says, that once, when attended by only two noblemen, he met the Duke of York, who had been hunting on Hounslow Heath, and was returning in his coach surrounded by his guards. The duke instantly alighted, and expressed his fears that the king's life might be endangered by so small an attendance.