Page:Protestant Exiles from France Agnew vol 1.djvu/348

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
330
french protestant exiles.

dutifully kept the rule of making the Deputy-General the medium of their communications with the king.

Thus a Deputy-General in the court of Louis XIV. was exposed to his royal master’s ill humour for being too busy, and to his co-religionists’ grumbling for not bestirring himself more. For a long time there was a monster petition, or Requéte-General, lying on the council-table unanswered. Ruvigny had not signed it until much pressed to do so. At last it had been presented. Weary of delay, the deputies resolved to print it, and Ruvigny did not object. For the offence of printing, two deputies were imprisoned. Ruvigny had to supplicate for their release. Then Du Bosc tried to get a new hearing by dressing up the Requéte-General in different words. This document was deposited with Ruvigny for presentation. He did present it, but waited long for a convenient time. This desultory work was interrupted by the Marquis being again sent to England. This brings us to the year 1674.

England had been led by France into unnatural warfare with Holland, war having been declared on the 17th March 1672. But it was inglorious from a military point of view, besides being originally and unchangeably unpopular with the House of Commons and the nation. In 1674 Parliament determined to stop the supplies. Ruvigny was sent to London to see if the inevitable peace between England and Holland could yet be prevented. Burnet says, that he was “a man of great practice in business and in all intrigues; he was still a firm Protestant, but in all other respects a very dexterous courtier, and one of the greatest statesmen in Europe. He had the appointment of an ambassador, but would not take the character, that he might not have a chapel, or mass said in it.” It is much to be deplored that the excellent Marquis was mixed up with the dirty work of bribery. But in those days most persons expected to be paid for everything they did; as Ralph Montague said to him, “In this world nobody does anything for nothing.” Money with other persons was the price of their abstaining from doing mischief; and this view suggests a more plausible defence of the corrupt system, which may have been Ruvigny’s defence. It was his great boast that he saved the French king’s money, and that a less dexterous ambassador would have spent three times more.

The Marquis, on his arrival in England, finding that the minds of Members of Parliament were made up, spent most of his time at court. One evening King Charles called him aside, and told him, with the strongest expressions of regret, that he had just signed a peace with the Dutch. “Sire,” replied Ruvigny, “what is done cannot be helped. But now I will show how faithfully I will serve your Majesty. My master will submit all his pretentions to you, for I doubt not that he will make you the arbiter and mediator of peace between him and Holland.” This plan gave “great joy” to Charles, and the French accepted his proffered mediation. Ruvigny also pressed him to give his parliament all satisfaction in points of religion, but the king gave to him, as formerly to Schomberg, an evasive answer, laying all the blame on la sottise de mon frère, the folly of his brother, James, Duke of York. The peace, which King Charles had signed, being in the interest of Spain, the Duke of York’s party took up the French interest strongly, according to Coleman’s Letters. Father Ferrier wrote from Paris to the Duke, that as to propositions which had regard to the Catholic religion, he must not treat with Monsieur Ruvigny. And Coleman writing to Father La Chaise, characterizes the old Marquis as “a very able man in his master’s service in things where religion is not concerned.”

We may suppose that Ruvigny often saw his relatives, the Russells; but the published letters of his niece mention him only once:— “1675. My uncle told Sir Harry Vernon yesterday he was un des incurables.” In 1676 he reported to Louis the following disagreeable truths:— “The king of England is in a manner abandoned by his ministers, even the most confidential. The Duke of York is entirely in your Majesty’s interest. All England is against your interests; and there is only the King and the Duke of York who embrace them with affection.” In May of that year a new French Ambassador was sent. Burnet says, “Ruvigny stayed but two years in England. For though he served his master’s interests but too well, yet the Popish party could not bear the want of a chapel in the ambassador’s house, so he was recalled.” His place of worship was the French Church in the Savoy, and his powers of negotiation were successfully employed in accommodating a difference between Richard Du Maresq, one of the ministers, and the Bishop of London (Dr. Compton), both being anxious for the mediation of their mutual friend.

He had been much missed by his co religionists at home. Remarking on his absence, Benoist notes that French ministers of State were really accessible to