WILLIAM AND MAST.

117

*1

which he ought to he called upon to answer. With the paperswas sent an abstract of the contents.*

The message was not very respectfully received. Bussellhad, at that moment, a popularity which he little deserved,but which will not surprise us when we remember that thepublic knew nothing of his treasons, and knew that he was theonly living Englishman who had won a great battle. Theabstract of the papers was read by the clerk. Russell thenspoke With great applause; and his friends pressed for an im-mediate decision. Sir Christopher Musgrave very justly ob-served that it was impossible to pronounce judgment on such apile of despatches without perusing them: but this objectionwas overruled. The Whigs regarded the accused member asone of themselves: many of the Tories were dazzled by thesplendour of his recent victory; and neither Whigs nor Torieswere disposed to show any deference for the authority of thePeers. The House, without reading the papers, passed anunanimous resolution expressing warm approbation of Bussell’swhole conduct. The temper of the assembly was such thatsome ardent Whigs thought that they might now venture topropose a vote of censure on Nottingham by name. But theattempt failed. “I am ready,” said Lowther,—and he doubt-less expressed what many felt, — “I am ready to support anymotion that may do honour to the Admiral: but I cannot joinin an attack on the Secretary of State. For, to my knowledge,their Majesties have no more zealous, laborious or faithfulservant than my Lord Nottingham.” Finch exerted all hismellifluous eloquence in defence of his brother, and contrived,without directly opposing himself to the prevailing sentiment,to insinuate that Bussell’s conduct had not been faultless. Thevote of censure on Nottingham was not pressed. The vote

* Colt Papers in Tindal; Lords 1 Journals from Dec. 6. to Dec. 19. 1692,inclusive.

CHAP.

XIX.