The Orangist Conspiracy against James II

Abstract

The 'Glorious' Revolution of i688 had its seamy side. It was far from being a spontaneous uprising against an unpopular king. James II was not sent packing by the mass of his subjects. On the contrary, a majority of the political nation probably wanted him to stay. Even those who rose up against him in i688 were not necessarily desiring a revolution. One of them who took an active part in precipitating his downfall, the earl of Danby, later regretted the outcome of his actions. As his son, who became a Jacobite, put it in I7I5: 'I can take God to witness that I had not a thought when I engaged in it (and I am sure my father neither) that the prince of Orange's landing would end in deposing the King'. Other activists in that year had different aims. William Gee, who had fled to Holland in I687, came over with the Dutch troops in December i 688, having sworn 'that they would never lay down arms till they had made The Prince of Orange King'.1 What these activists had in common was that they were prepared to play the Orange card againstJames II. Somehow or other the prince was to be employed to put pressure on the king, either to get him to change his pro-Catholic policies, or to remove him from the throne. In order to obtain William's intervention they had to co-operate in a conspiracy. In the event, those conspirators who hoped that William would oustJames succeeded perhaps beyond their wildest dreams, for the king gave up without a fight. The Orangist conspiracy itself was the single most important cause of the king's flight. Quite when the conspiracy began is, by the very nature of such plots, impossible to establish. It seems certain that there were very few conspirators involved in the Argyll and Monmouth rebellions of i685. Apparently they could rely on the active support of only a handful of plotters, including the professionals Robert Ferguson and John Wildman. That neither rebellion stood a chance of success might have given pause to the plans of any who at that stage were contemplating a conspiracy involving William of Orange. Historians have disagreed on the dating of an Orangist scheme. According to the late Lucille Pinkham, William's invasion 'was the result of plans laid carefully over many years'.2 These plans came to fruition, she claimed, in i686, and she attributed such significance to Dijkvelt's visit to England early in I687 as laying the foundations for the subsequent intervention. Certainly the Dutch envoy made some useful contacts. In the words of Bishop Burnet, 'He desired that those who wished well to their religion