Lectures on Modern History - Faculty of Social Sciences

<strong>Lectures</strong> on Modern History/25like a thing unworthy of notice. Johannes Mueller, a great Swiss celebrity,writes that the British Constitution occurred to somebody, perhapsto Halifax. This artless statement might not be approved by rigid lawyersas a faithful and felicitous indication of the manner of that mysteriousgrowth of ages, from occult beginnings, that was never profaned bythe invading wit of man; but it is less grotesque than it appears. LordHalifax was the most original writer of political tracts in the pamphleteeringcrowd between Harrington and Bolingbroke; and in the Exclusionstruggle he produced a scheme of limitations which, in substance,if not in form, foreshadowed the position of the monarchy in the laterHanoverian reigns. Although Halifax did not believe in the plot, he insistedthat innocent victims should be sacrificed to content the multitude.Sir William Temple writes: “We only disagreed in one point, whichwas the leaving some priests to the law upon the accusation of beingpriests only, as the House of Commons had desired; which I thoughtwholly unjust. Upon this point Lord Halifax and I had so sharp a debateat Lord Sunderland’s lodgings, that he told me, if I would not concur inpoints which were so necessary for the people’s satisfaction, he wouldtell everybody I was a Papist. And upon his affirming that the plot mustbe handled as if it were true, whether it were so or no, in those pointsthat were so generally believed.” In spite of this accusing passage,Macaulay, who prefers Halifax to all the statesmen of his age, praiseshim for his mercy: “His dislike of extremes, and a forgiving and compassionatetemper which seems to have been natural to him, preservedhim from all participation in the worst crimes of his time.”If, in our uncertainty, we must often err, it may be sometimes betterto risk excess in rigour than in indulgence, for then at least we do noinjury by loss of principle. As Bayle has said, it is more probable thatthe secret motives of an indifferent action are bad than good; and thisdiscouraging conclusion does not depend upon theology, for JamesMozley supports the sceptic from the other flank, with all the artillery ofthe Tractarian Oxford. “A Christian,” he says, “is bound by his verycreed to suspect evil, and cannot release himself. . . . He sees it whereothers do not; his instinct is divinely strengthened; his eye is supernaturallykeen; he has a spiritual insight, and senses exercised to discern. . .. He owns the doctrine of original sin; that doctrine puts him necessarilyon his guard against appearances, sustains his apprehension under perplexity,and prepares him for recognising anywhere what he knows tobe everywhere.” There is a popular saying of Madame de Stael, that we