“And now, I confess, that when I looked before upon the face of the government, I thought, as every man would have done, that the people were never so happy as in my time; but even, as at divers times I have looked upon many of my coppices, riding about them, and they appeared, on the outside, very thick and well-grown unto me, but, when I turned into the midst of them, I found them all bitten within, and full of plains and bare spots; like the apple or pear, fair and smooth without, but when you cleave it asunder, you find it rotten at heart.  Even so this kingdom, the external government being as good as ever it was, and I am sure as learned judges as ever it had, and I hope as honest administering justice within it; and for peace, both at home and abroad, more settled, and longer lasting, than ever any before; together with as great plenty as ever:  so as it may be thought, every man might sit in safety under his own vine and fig-tree,” &c. &c.[A]

But while we see this king of peace surrounded by national grievances, and that “this fair coppice was very thick and well-grown,” yet loud in murmurs, to what cause are we to attribute them?  Shall we exclaim with Catharine Macaulay against “the despotism of James,” and “the intoxication of his power?”—­a monarch who did not even enforce the proclamations or edicts his wisdom dictated;[B] and, as Hume has observed, while vaunting his prerogative, had not a single regiment of guards to maintain it.  Must we agree with Hume, and reproach the king with his indolence and lore of amusement—­“particularly of hunting?"[C]

[Footnote A:  Rushworth, vol. i. p. 29; sub anno 1621.]

[Footnote B:  James I. said, “I will never offer to bring a new custom upon my people without the people’s consent; like a good physician, tell them what is amiss, if they will not concur to amend it, yet I have discharged my part.”  Among the difficulties of this king was that of being a foreigner, and amidst the contending factions of that day the “British Solomon” seems to have been unjustly reproached for his Scottish partialities.]

[Footnote C:  La Boderie, the French Ambassador, complains of the king’s frequent absences; but James did not wish too close an intercourse with one who was making a French party about Prince Henry, and whose sole object was to provoke a Spanish war:  the king foiled the French intriguer; but has incurred his contempt for being “timid and irresolute.”  James’s cautious neutrality was no merit in the Frenchman’s eye.

La Boderie resided at our court from 1606 to 1611, and his “Ambassades,” in 5 vols., are interesting in English history.  The most satirical accounts of the domestic life of James, especially in his unguarded hours of boisterous merriment, are found in the correspondence of the French ambassadors.  They studied to flavour their dish, made of spy and gossip, to the taste of their master.  Henry IV. never forgave James for his adherence to Spain and peace, instead of France and warlike designs.]