was scarcely a more important member of the European system than
the little kingdom of Scotland had previously been. This,
however, is little to be regretted. Of James the First, as of
John, it may be said that, if his administration had been able
and splendid, it would probably have been fatal to our country,
and that we owe more to his weakness and meanness than to the
wisdom and courage of much better sovereigns. He came to the
throne at a critical moment. The time was fast approaching when
either the King must become absolute, or the parliament must
control the whole executive administration. Had James been, like
Henry the Fourth, like Maurice of Nassau, or like Gustavus
Adolphus, a valiant, active, and politic ruler, had he put
himself at the head of the Protestants of Europe, had he gained
great victories over Tilly and Spinola, had he adorned
Westminster with the spoils of Bavarian monasteries and Flemish
cathedrals, had he hung Austrian and Castilian banners in Saint
Paul's, and had he found himself, after great achievements, at
the head of fifty thousand troops, brave, well disciplined, and
devotedly attached to his person, the English Parliament would
soon have been nothing more than a name. Happily he was not a man
to play such a part. He began his administration by putting an
end to the war which had raged during many years between England
and Spain; and from that time he shunned hostilities with a
caution which was proof against the insults of his neighbours and
the clamours of his subjects. Not till the last year of his life
could the influence of his son, his favourite, his Parliament,
and his people combined, induce him to strike one feeble blow in
defence of his family and of his religion. It was well for those
whom he governed that he in this matter disregarded their wishes.
The effect of his pacific policy was that, in his time, no