Page:Diary of the times of Charles II Vol. I.djvu/211

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
THE TIMES OF CHARLES THE SECOND.
95

carry it, and who to lose it. Our friend, Colonel Birch,[1] is, I am told, not like to come in, which

    kingdomes, which should be composed of worthy persons, of known integrity and ability in their respective counties, who would still serve them generously, and as their ancestors have done, but are not able to fling away a son or a daughter's portion to bribe the votes of a drunken multitude, more resembling a Pagan Bacchanalia, than an assembly of Christians and sober men met upon the most solemn occasion that can concern a people, and stand in competition with some rich scrivener, brewer, banker, or one in some gainful office, whose face or name, perhaps, they never saw before." Lastly, he says, "Immoderate fees, tedious and ruinous delays, and tossings from court to court before an easy cause, which might be determined by honest gentlemen and understanding neighbours, can come to any final issue, may be numbered amongst the most vexatious oppressions that call aloud for redress."—Evelyn's Memoirs, ii. 276-277.

  1. "Col. Birch," says Burnet, "was a man of peculiar character. He had been a carrier at first, and retained still, even to an affectation, the clownishness of his education. He got up in the progress of the wars to be a colonel, and to be concerned in the Excise. And at the Restoration he was found to be so useful in managing the Excise, that he was. put in a good place. He was the roughest and boldest speaker in the House, and talked in the language and phrases of a carrier, but with a beauty and eloquence that was always acceptable. I heard Coventry say, he was the best speaker to carry a popular assembly before him that he had ever known. He spoke always with much life and heat, but judgment was not his talent." Of his powers of repartee and his coarseness. Lord Dartmouth gives two instances: he says, "Sir Edward Seimour reflected upon him very grossly, once in a debate, for