Life of Lord Chancellor Methuen.

Chapter XXXI. **

Life of Lord Chancellor Methuen.

** THE Methuens,. or Methvens, derive their name from the Barony of Methven, in Perthshire, granted by Malcolm Canmore, King of Scotland, to one of the knights escorted Queen Margaret from Hungary in 1070. The name and achievements of JOHN METHUEN are much more familiar to the diplomatic than to the legal world; but as he filled the high office of Lord Chancellor of Ireland for some years, from 1697 to 1701, I give as full an account of him as my diligence enables me. He was eldest son of Mr. Methuen, of Bishop’s Canning, Wilts, and destined shire. for the legal profession. Having kept the usual terms, he was called to the bar. After several years of moderate Practised practice, his talents were employed in the diplomatic service, and he was despatched to Portugal as Envoy during the reign of King William III. He was greatly esteemed for his prudence, tact, and general information; so much so, that when Sir Charles Porter, Lord Chancellor of Ire-land, died suddenly in 1696, the high character of the Portuguese Envoy then in London, at once recommended him as a fit and proper person to hold the Irish Great Seal.

In a letter dated December 2, 1696, addressed by Mr. Vernon to the Duke of Shrewsbury, we find the character of Mr. Methuen favourably mentioned. [Letters of the Reign of William III. Vol. i. p. 100.] Alluding to the recent death of the Lord Chancellor, the letter continues: ‘Mr. Secretary Trumbull came some time after with the accounts he had received of it. So I don’t doubt but he is to dispatch the orders that will be requisite either for supplying the commission of justices, or appointing com-missioners for the Seal, till the King thinks of a fit person for Chancellor. I have been thinking of it in the mean-time, and none occurs to me more fit than Mr. Methuen, as well for his prudence and principles, as his having been bred up in these courts.

‘I have further considered, that if your Grace should ever go for Ireland, as was once talked of, [The Duke of Shrewsbnry was Viceroy but not when Methuen was Chan-cellor.] you would have in this man one that you might entirely depend on, or otherwise you might oblige him in contributing to his advancement to that post, and have the Envoyship of Portugal to dispose of, as once you intended. I was so full of it that I mentioned to my Lord Portland what I thought of this gentleman’s deserts, and he spoke as if he had a very good opinion of him. I have since taken some notice of it to Mr. Methuen himself, who apprehends it may be thought too honourable a post for him; but he don’t look upon himself as unqualified to discharge it. [It is related that he aspired to the Chancellorship of England.]

‘I thought it worth while for him to try his friends. He thinks himself very well already in my Lord Sunder-land’s good opinion, and has a friend who can fix him if he be not engaged. He believes, too, my Lord may have , favourably thought of him; and I promised him to open the matter to your Grace, believing, if you had not pre-viously entered into any consideration about the disposal of this office, you might wish one so well qualified in it, and if that were your opinion, you would write to my Lord Keeper about it. It will not be judged fit, I sup-pose, to take any of the Irish lawyers, [Very like the modern advertisement ending ‘No Irish need apply.’] both as to the country and the factions they are divided into, and one to be sent from hence should not be merely chosen for his abilities at the bar; and when Sir Charles Porter was sent, I think he might as little have pretended to it as this gentleman, who to his knowledge in the law has added his experience abroad, and his commendable behaviour in the House of Commons.

‘But I submit to all what your Grace shall judge of it.’ [Letters of the Reign of William III. Edited by James, vol. i. p. 101.]

This able and astute letter put the qualifications of Methuen in so favourable a light, that the Duke of Shrewsbury immediately acted on the suggestion. Lord Somers, then the powerful Lord Chancellor of England, recommended him to the King, who consented; but there was some delay in substituting a successor to carry on the negotiations with Portugal which Methuen had com-menced. Sir John Rushout was mentioned, but the King would not agree, and remained undecided with regard to removing Methuen for some time. At first the English Chancellor was rather surprised to find Mr. Methuen soli-citing this office and expressed as much. In an interview he received the Envoy very kindly, told him ‘he had been thinking who was proper for his place, but he had not yet mentioned it to any body; there were one or two occurred to him, but he doubted whether they would accept it if it were offered to them. He excused it to him that he could not say he (Methuen) had been in his thoughts, looking upon him as one that had addicted himself another way; but he now promised him that he would take no resolutions without first communicating them to him.’ The Chancellor made up his mind, and the result was alto-gether in favour of the Envoy. The fact of Lord Somers recommending Methuen to the King, shows he considered Methuen well qualified for the office, and he was declared A.D. 1696- Chancellor of Ireland at a Council held in January, 1696-7.

Before leaving London the diplomatic Chancellor tried to do a service, as was but natural, to his son. He repre-sented that young gentleman as the fittest person to suc-ceed him as Envoy in Portugal; the most capable and acceptable minister that could be sent there. He was young, to be sure - twenty-four years of age, - but ,a great favourite with the King of Portugal, and a good linguist, speaking French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian, with great fluency and exactness.

[His future career justified the Chancellor’s encomium. He was the cele-brated Sir Paul Methuen, he lived much on the Continent and was bred to diplomacy. In 1706, he succeeded the Right Hon. Richard Hill as minister to the Duke of Savoy. In September of that year, when the French were beaten before Turin, he was in attendance on the Duke, and shared his battles and skir-mishes. Voltaire, who entertained a warm friendship for him, says that Methuen gave him an account of the battle and the dying words of Marshal Marsin. In the ‘Siècle de Louis XIV,’ Voltaire says, ‘Le chevalier Methuen ambassadeur de l’Angleterre auprès le duc de Savoye, était le plus génereux, le plus franc, et le plus brave homme de son pays qu’on ait jamais employe dans les ambassades. Il avait toujours combattu à côté de ce souverain.’ He was the friend of Pope and Gay, the latter paid him this compliment:—

‘Methuen of sincerest mind,

As Arthur brave, as soft as womankind.’]

On June 15, 1697, the Lord Chancellor took the oaths and subscribed the declaration, pursuant to the Act for abrogating the Oath of Supremacy in Ireland. On that day he attended the House of Lords in Ireland as Speaker, and took his seat on the Woolsack. [Lords’ Jour. Ir. vol. i. p. 696. His patent is dated March 11, 1697.]

The Lord Bishop of Derry being dissatisfied with an order made by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, on June 22, in a cause wherein William Lord Bishop of Derry was plaintiff, the Society of the Governor and Assistants, London, for the New Plantation of Ulster, and the Mayor, Commonalty, and Citizens of Londonderry and others were defendants, petitioned the House of Lords of Ireland, praying to have an appeal received and to be re-lieved against the order.

The Lords were willing to grant the prayer of the petition considering they had the right to hear appeals, thereupon the following protest was entered on the Journals of the Lords :-‘We, whose names are underwritten, do dissent from the last vote, for receiving the Bishop of Derry’s Appeal. We think it right not to have been received now, because we conceive that the said Bishop was relievable in the inferior Courts of Justice, and therefore this appeal was not brought regularly before this House.

‘That if upon any order of Court appeals be admitted, when such order tends only to the better information of the Judges, everyone who is impatient of such post delay will bring his appeal, and the proceedings of the inferior Courts of Justice will be much interrupted; and we do not find that this House has received appeals but in cases where judgments or decrees were given, which was not in this case.

‘MOUNT ALEXANDER,

‘LOFTUS.

‘MASSAREENE.’

Notwithstanding the protest, the case was argued at the Bar on September 22, in the presence of Counsel. It was concerning the possession of some portion of land called Moylenan, in the city of Londonderry; and upon due consideration, and of the answer of the respondents, and of the proofs made, ‘the Lords Spiritual and Temporal ordered and adjudged that the orders of June 22, 1697, be reversed, but that the respondents should have liberty to try them both at law.’ [Lord’s Jour. Ir. vol. i. p. 695.] Some doubts having arisen whether the rights of the Church should be in any way prejudiced by a Bill entitled ‘An Act for confirming estates and possessions held and enjoyed under the Acts of Settlement and Explanation,’ the matter was referred to the Judges, whose opinion was reported to the House of Lords by Chief Justice Pyne, on October 28, 1698, in these words: ‘On consideration of the Bill entitled “An Act for confirming estates and possessions enjoyed under the Act of Settlement and Explanation,” there appears nothing therein to us that does, in anywise, prejudice the rights of the Church.’ [Ibid. vol. i. p. 696.]

This decision of the Judges did not give consolation to several of the Bishops, who, on the majority of the Peers voting for the Bill, entered a protest: ‘1. Because by the Acts several Bishops were to have augmentations which had not been satisfied. 2. Because by the aforesaid Acts all rights to the Church were saved, and all lands, &c. of which the Church was possessed in 1641 were to be restored, which was not done, and by this Act the Church would be barred from recovering them. 3. Because by the clause for discharging patentees’ lands from ancient encumbrances and debts, rent charges payable to Bishops and other Protestants would be discharged. 4. Many Protestants would be barred from recovering lands if the Bill passed. And 5. No saving for the King as in the Acts of Settlement and Explanation.’

This protest was signed by five Irish Bishops.

An Act meeting the wishes of the Bishops was then prepared and passed.

The Lord Chancellor as Speaker of the Lords had to open the engrossed Bills sent up by the House of Com-mons in January 1698, entitled ‘An Act to prevent Papists being solicitors,’ which was speedily passed. [Lords’ Jour. Ir. vol. i. p. 748] Some useful Acts also passed. One against ‘Gaming,’ another for ‘Determining Differences by Arbitration;’ another for encouraging ‘Planting and Preserving Timber Trees and Woods.’

As might have been expected from one who, as Lord Chancellor Somers remarked, ‘had addicted himself an-other way,’ from his profession, Lord Chancellor Methuen made a bad and dilatory Equity Judge. He was very desirous to do what was right, but was doubtful how to do it, and, afraid of committing grave mistakes, postponed deciding any but the plainest causes. When the cause presented matter for more than one decision, he occasionally made a decree partly for the plaintiff and partly for the defendant, so that he might, if possible, satisfy all parties. The Court of Chancery in his time was grown very costly for suitors; office rules and general orders beset the clients at every step, while the repeated delays occasioned by the absence of the Lord Chancellor in Eng- land amounted to a denial of justice. During the eleven years of William III.’s reign, I do not find more than ninety eight decrees enrolled, though I am quite certain many more must have been pronounced.

Hyde, Earl of Rochester, Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland from 1701 to 1703, is mentioned by Dean Swift in very high praise. He began early to distinguish himself in the public service, an passed through the highest employments of the-State in most difficult times, with great credit and unstained honour. His principles of religion and loyalty were instilled into him by his illustrious father and other noble spirits who had exposed their lives and fortunes for Charles I.

Pulcherrima proles,

Magnanimi heroes natis melioribus annis.

His first great action was, like Scipio, to defend his father when oppressed by numbers; and his filial piety was not only rewarded with a long life, but high and distin-guished appointments.

The state of parties in Ireland had no attractions either for Lord Rochester or the diplomatist. While Methuen was Lord Chancellor, he was, as I already mentioned, frequently absent, [From December 11, 1697, to August 15, 1698; again from January 20, 1700, to July 7, 1701. He returned to England. December 1701 and did not again resume his judicial duties in Ireland,] and England was a country he was much happier in than that which might be regarded as -the proper sphere of his duties. When an opportunity presented itself of his filling a high position as repre-sentative of England at the Court of Portugal, all his old love of the Continent and diplomativ life returned with full force. He gladly accepted the offer made him, and without a sigh, saw the once coveted Great Seal of Ireland, transferred to his veteran successor, Sir Richard Cox. He filled the important office of Ambassador at the Court of Lisbon, and was responsible for the Treaty which bears his name. [The Methuen Treaty was for the mutual interchange of port wine and woollen manufactures, and regulated this trade until very recently] This Methuen Treaty was so distasteful to the Portuguese, that it is said, when, in 1701, it was carried to King Pedro II. for his signature, he vigorously set to and kicked it about the room. It is likewise related the Ambassador himself was so little pleased with his own work, that he privately advised Queen Anne not to ratify it. The Ambassador died at his post in Lisbon in the year 1706. His death was sudden, and his loss much lamented by the politicians of the time. The Duke of Marlborough, writing to Mr. Secretary Harley from the Camp at Helchin, on August 12, 1706, thus refers to him: -‘I had an account from Mr. Secretary Hodges of the sud-den death of Mr. Methuen, at Lisbon, when the situation of affairs in Spain seemed most to require his assistance, since we have no account yet of King Charles’s approach to Madrid. His timely appearance there would, in all probability, put an end to the war on that side.’ [The Marlborough Despatches, vol. iii. p. 78.] In a letter to Mr. Secretary Hodges the Duke alluded to the same subject: ‘I have received the favour of your letter of 26th past, giving an account of the sudden death of Lord Ambassador Methuen, which is very unlucky at this critical juncture, when our affairs in Spain seem much to want his assistance in encouraging the Court of Portugal to continue steady and resolute in pursuing the war, under the difficulties we are like to meet with for want of King Charles’s timely appearance at Madrid.’ [Ibid. vol. iii. p. 79.]

The family has since been ennobled, and is now represented by Frederick, second Baron Methuen, married to Anna, daughter of the Reverend John Sandford of Nynehead Somerset, and has issue.

Index Chapter 32. Home.