enter upon engagements very difficult of fulfilment. Buckingham. who had been restored in his offices after a serious disgrace, now acted the part of prime minister without a portfolio, and it can hardly be doubted that of pander to the vices of the king. Ashley is likewise charged by Barnet with having sought to secure the royal favour by similar means. He retained the office of chancellor of the exchequer, but his influence in the king's councils was not well established till 1670 (Christie, ii. 4). The great seal was given to Sir Orlando Bridgeman [q. v.] Arlington [see Bennet, Henry], managed foreign affairs. Lauderdale continued to attend to the business of Scotland. This was the heyday of courtiers of the stamp of Rochester, still very far from the season of his conversion; a time when the new Duchess of Cleveland (Lady Castlemaine) had many less ambitious rivals, and when the English court was given up to ways of life painted by Grammont in far too flattering colours, but more faithfullly reflected by the comic drama of the age. Such an incident as the mutilation of Sir John Coventry [q. v.] speaks for itself (Burnet, i. 495–6). The period of Buckingham's ascendency was, however, by no means wanting in signs of a political intelligence, which may in part be placed to the credit of the king. The financial retrenchments which came into effect in 1668 were indeed originated before Clarendon's downfall, and the so-called Brookhouse committee which recommended them was appointed in opposition to the court (ib. i. 490; cf. Cal. Dom. 1667, lxi.) On the other hand, the king favoured the church comprehension scheme proposed by Bridgeman and others in 1668, to which the House of Commons would not listen (Burnet, i. 476–8), and approved the unlucky ‘indulgence' to presbyterian ministers in Scotland (see Lauderdale Papers, ii. xx–xxi, 184–6; Burnet; Story, William Carstares, 32–5). It was about this time that the proposal for a union between England and Scotland was renewed, and taken up by the king with some warmth. Commissioners were actually named in 1670, but the project dropped (Burnet i. 512–15: but. cf. Lauderdale Papers, ii. 155 n.)
Without wishing either to neglect the interests or to ignore the pride of the nation, Charles aspired above all to that which at last he secured during this period, viz. the power of power of governing without having to depend upon parliament for supplies. He therefore sought French subsidies in return for promises made at different times to support the policy of France. He also desired to relieve his catholic subjects, and, should the project prove feasible, to reconcile England to Rome. In 1668 the conversion of the Duke of York became known to him; on 25 Jan. 1669 ensued the consultation in the duke’s chamber between the king and his brother in the presence of Arlington, Arundel of Wardour, and Sir Thomas Clifford, at which it was resolved to communicate the intended conversion of king and realm to Louis XIV. The French ambassador, Colbert de Croissy, was taken into confidence (Clarke, Life of James II, i. 440–2, but the temper of the people made secrecy for the time imperative.
And Charles's foreign policy was much more tortuous than these considerations implied. De Witt on the part of Holland, and Sir William Temple, whom Charles hated, on the part of England, formed with Sweden the triple alliance on 23 Jan. 1668, at the very moment that Buckingham and Arlington were, by the instructions of Charles II, carrying on negotiations with France in a directly opposite sense; while, to complete the complications, other negotiations with Spain, the arch-enemy of France, were being managed by Sandwich at Madrid. It was the refusal of France to accede to all his demands and the hesitation of Spain which induced Charles II, even at the cost of throwing over the interest of the house of Orange, to close with the Dutch proposals and sanction the triple alliance. Louis XIV consequently concluded with Spain the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle (2 May 1668), and, in his own words, dissolved the alliance against him at its very outset (Ranke, iv. 322–41; cf. Onno Klopp, i. 223). But before this Spain had recognised the independence of Portugal, and in 1670 she renounced all her claims to English possessions in the new world, including Jamaica. The policy of the triple alliance seemed so far successful; but Charles II hated a permanent league with the States-General, and he knew that the mercantile jealousy of his subjects still continued against the Dutch. who in the East Indies in particular were virtually strangling our commerce. Towards France, on the other hand, he was, as before, impelled by the mixture of powerful motives indicated above.
Louis XIV assiduously kept the door open. By way of calming English susceptibilities Colbert de Croissy was sent to England in July 1668 to conclude a commercial treaty advantageous to this country, and soon afterwards a curious attempt was made to influence Charles by an emissary of a different description, an Italian monk and dabbler in magic named Pregnani (Forneron, i. 17–19). Then came early in 1669 the opening of the secret negotiations concerning the catholic religion. Thus the reconciliation of England to the church of Rome and the overthrow of the
