Page:History of the Nonjurors.djvu/58

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
40
History of the Nonjurors.

must lie on William's memory of making use of the story, a story which he did not believe, for the purpose of advancing his own designs. In the Declaration he stated, that he and the Princess were deeply concerned in that matter. It was asked just after the Revolution, "Did they write to the King about this point? Did the King refuse to satisfy them? If not, could a greater impiety or a more execrable imposture be charged against the most flagitious and profligate persons." It was stated that, before the Prince left Holland, some persons drank the health of the Prince of Wales, adding, "if he die, our business is spoiled, and we shall never stir hence, meaning the Invasion would stop."[1] The Prince was charged with a design upon the crown even as soon as he had published his Declaration. This charge was contained in a Pamphlet entitled "Some Reflections on the Declaration." A reply was immediately put forth, supposed to be from the pen of Burnet, in which the question respecting the design on the crown is evaded; but evaded in such a manner as to be considered at that time as a denial. It was Burnet's policy to evade the question, for had the design been avowed, the enterprise must have failed.[2] Sherlock appeared at this time as a writer in favour of the King, in a tract, "Reflections on the Late and Present Proceedings in England," in which he calls for proofs of the various charges contained in the Prince's Declaration.[3] The publications of the period shew, how ready many persons were to invent reasons against the legitimacy of the Prince. Thus in one of the numerous productions of the Press, it was even said, that the


  1. Somers' Tracts, i, 300, 301.
  2. Ibid. 309.
  3. Ibid. 319.