WILLIAM AND MALY,

297

practicable, as morbidly jealous of all superior authority, and chap.as fond of haranguing, as he had been four years before, and—was as much bent on making a merely nominal sovereign ofWilliam as he had formerly been bent on making a merelynominal general of Argyle.* A man far superior morally andintellectually to Hume, Fletcher of Saltoun, belonged to thesame party. Though not a member of the Convention, he was ioun.a most active member of the Club.** He hated monarchy: hehated democracy: his favourite project was to make Scotlandan oligarchical republic. The King, if there must be a King,was to be a mere pageant. The lowest class of the people wereto be bondsmen. The whole power, legislative and executive,t was to be in the hands of the Parliament. In other words, thecountry was to be absolutely governed by a hereditary aristo-cracy, the most needy, the most haughty, and the most quar-relsome in Europe. Under such a polity there could have beenneither freedom nor tranquillity. Trade, industry, science,wouldhavelanguished; and Scotland would have been a smallerPoland, with a puppet sovereign, a turbulent diet, and anenslaved people. With unsuccessful candidates for office, andwith honest but wrongheaded republicans, were mingled poli-ticians whose course was determined merely by fear. Manysycophants, who were conscious that they had, in the evil time,done what deserved punishment, were desirous to make theirpeace with the powerful and vindictive Club, and were glad tobe permitted to atone for their servility to James by their op-

* There is an amusing description of Sir Patrick in the Ilyndford MS.,written about 1704, and printed among the Carstairs Papers. “He is alover of set speeches, and can hardly give audience to private friendswithout them.”

** “No man, though not a member, busier than Saltoun.” — Lockhartto Melville, July 11. 1689; Leven and Melville Papers. See Fletcher’sown works, and the descriptions of him in Lockhart’s and Mackay’sMemoirs.