be engrossed and to remain amongst the records, and also to be enrolled in chancery. In surveying this portion of the life of Mr. Somers, it is impossible to regard it without the most lively sentiments of admiration and respect. From an obscure origin, he had risen, by the exertion of his own talents and diligence, not merely to a high rank in his own profession, but to a conspicuous station in public life. From a very early age the strenuous advocate of popular rights, he enjoyed the happiness of seeing the principles he so deeply loved and cherished, practically applied, on a scale magnificently extensive, to the settlement of the nation. It must indeed have been a most grateful reflection to him, that when the liberties of the country were almost overwhelmed, he had not hesitated to exert himself in their defence, and that the better spirit, which manifested itself at the revolution, might have been owing, in some degree, to his own exertions. To a mind truly ambitious, what reward can be proposed equal to reflections like these? To instruct and inform the intellect of a nation, to lead them to a knowledge of their rights, and to teach them how those rights may be claimed and exercised with temper, discretion, and success, is indeed a worthy and noble ambition. Soon after the accession of William and Mary, Mr. Somers, having been appointed solicitor-general, received the honour of knighthood; and in the debates on the bill for recognising the new sovereigns and ratifying the act of convention, he distinguished himself greatly by the able manner in which he defended the principles of the revolution. The legality of the convention having been questioned by a member of the opposition, because it had not been summoned by writ, the solicitor-general answered the objection with much spirit. He said that if it was not a legal parliament, they who were then met, and had taken the oaths enacted by that parliament, were guilty of high treason; that the laws repealed by it being still in force, they must presently return to King James; that all the money levied, collected, and paid by virtue of the acts of that parliament, made every one that was concerned in it highly criminal. "This," adds Burnet, "he spoke with such zeal, and such an ascendent of authority, that none were prepared to answer it, so that the bill passed without more opposition. This was a great service done in a very critical time, and contributed not a little to raise Somers's character." * In the month of April, 1692, Sir John Somers was raised to the post of attorney-general; and such was the reputation he acquired both in the discharge of his official duties and in the house of commons, that he was, in the month of March, 1692-3, appointed lord keeper of the great seal. An unfortunate misunderstanding occurred, immediately after his receiving the seals, between the king and himself, relative to the filling up of the office of attorney-general, and some other legal appointments. The lord keeper had promised the place of attorney to Sir Thomas Trevor, but William had directed that it should be bestowed upon Mr. Ward. Sir John Somers, therefore, addressed a very respectful letter to the king, urging the ancient practice with regard to these appointments, and stating that he conceived it was for his majesty's service that they should be dependent on the great seal. Notwithstanding this remonstrance, Mr. Ward received the appointment, but shortly afterwards was succeeded by Sir Thomas Trevor.t On accepting the great seal, Sir John Somers was not created a peer; and it was not until the year 1697 that he was raised to the peerage by the style and title of Baron Somers, of Eversham. It appears that he expressed considerable reluctance to receive this honour. had directions," says the Duke of Shrewsbury in a letter dated May, 1695, and enclosing a warrant for a peerage, "to have said every thing I could imagine to persuade you to accept of a title, and the king is really convinced that it is for his service that you should. I beg the Gwn Times, vol. ii. p. 42. folio ed. answer I may have, may be a bill for the king's signing. As for arguments, I have used all I have already, and by your objections you may give me leave to tell you, you are as partial and unreasonable with too much modesty, as some are with too much ambition." * In the year 1695, during the king's absence from England, Lord Keeper Somers was constituted one of the lords justices, a post which he again filled in the years 1697 and 1698, and in 1697 he was appointed lord high chancellor. At this time the king was pleased to grant to him the manors of Reygate and Howleigh in Surrey, together with an annuity of £2100 out of the fee-farm rents. These grants formed an article in the impeachment, which a few years afterwards was preferred against him by the commons. The situation of Lord Somers in the ministry was difficult and critical. Although he enjoyed the confidence of the king, yet he had rendered himself particularly obnoxious to the Tories, who had attained such influence, that William was perpetually wavering between that party and the Whigs. In a letter, which appears to have been written towards the close of the year 1698, Lord Somers expresses, in strong terms, his doubts as to the stability of the administration. "There is nothing to support the Whigs, but the difficulty of his (the king's) piecing with the other party, and the almost impossibility of finding a set of Tories who will unite. So that in the end I conclude it will be a pieced business, which will fall asunder immediately."+ At length the Tories resolved to make a strenuous effort to remove the lord chancellor, whose great credit with the king had been the principal means of preserving the Whig administration: by his discretion and moderation the heat and violence, which some of the leading Whigs displayed, had been softened down and rendered less displeasing to the king, and unless he could be removed, it was in vain that the Tories struggled for power. The leaders, therefore, of that party endeavoured to Hardwicke State Papers, vol. ii. p. 429. + Id. p. 436. persuade the king that the difficulties, into which he had been thrown, were occasioned by the odium in which the ministry were held in the house of commons. Various charges had been there preferred against Lord Somers, particularly that he had removed several gentlemen from the commission of the peace, who refused to subscribe the voluntary association which had been very generally entered into, upon the discovery of the assassination plot of 1696. In these removals Lord Somers had merely acted in conformity to an order of the council, directing that those justices of the peace, who refused to subscribe, should be dismissed. Though his enemies did not succeed in procuring a vote of the house against him, yet the repeated attempts which they made were considered by the king to be so injurious to his service, that he resolved to dismiss Lord Somers from the office of chancellor. This act seemed the more ungracious, as the chancellor was, at the time, suffering severely from an illness, induced by his close attendance upon his various duties in court and in the cabinet. On his first appearance at court, after his restoration to health, the king told him that it seemed necessary for his service that his lordship should part with the seals, and that it was desirable that the delivery of them up should be his own act. To this proposal Lord Somers replied, that he could not make a voluntary surrender of his office, which might give his enemies occasion to charge him with being intimidated or guilty; but that if his majesty should be pleased to send a warrant, under his hand, demanding the seal, he would instantly resign it. Soon afterwards, the warrant being brought by Lord Jersey, Somers immediately delivered to that nobleman the seal which he had for seven years held with so much honour.* The conduct of William, in thus dismissing one of the most faithful and attached of his ministers, at the instigation of his enemies, a victim to the violence of faction, ill became that high character for justice and * Burnet, vol. ii. p. 242. fol. ed. resolution which had raised him to the throne of England. Every honourable and well-judging person was disgusted with the coolness and want of heart with which the king consented to sacrifice a man, whose greatest offence was that he had been one of the principal instruments in accomplishing that happy settlement of the nation, which placed his ungrateful master on the throne. At the close of his life, William is said to have adverted to the dismissal of Somers as an act of which he most sincerely repented.* Such was the indecent haste with which he gratified the wishes of the Tories, that no one had been selected to fill the vacant office. The seals were offered both to Holt and Trevor, who declined them; and after having been a short time in commission, were placed in the hands of Sir Nathan Wright. For some time it was thought that Lord Somers would possibly be reinstated †; but the king had fallen into the hands of the Tories, who resisted, with all their influence, his return to office. Having thus succeeded in removing Lord Somers from the king's councils, his enemies resolved to harass him with an impeachment. The principal ground of this impeachment was the part taken by him in the celebrated partition treaties, which had rendered him extremely obnoxious to the house of commons; and accordingly, on the 1st of April, 1701, he was impeached, together with the Earl of Portland and the Earl of Orford, of high crimes and misdemeanors. Not contented with this proceeding, on the 23rd of April, the commons presented an address to the king to remove those noblemen from his councils; but the lords, on the other hand, presented a counter-address, begging his majesty not to pass any censure on the accused, while the impeachment was pending against them. At length, on the 19th of May, the commons exhibited articles of impeachment against Lord Somers, which were grounded, 1. On his conduct with regard to the partition treaties; 2. On Cunningham's Hist. vol. i. p. 252. + Hardwicke State Papers, vol. ii. p. 436. |