Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T08:54:25.262Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

John Locke's circle and James II*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2010

Mark Goldie
Mark Goldie
Affiliation:
Churchill College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

James II's grant of religious toleration and his invitation to the whigs to return to office dramatically changed the English political scene and created profound dilemmasfor the crown's former enemies. Although there is ambiguity in their responses, and although Locke himself remained an immovable exile, his circle offriends took advantage of these changes. This included nomination to James's proposed tolerationist parliament, an accommodation which damaged them in the actual elections to the Convention of 1689. Some took office, and in at least two cases Locke's associates published pamphlets in support of the king. By exploring the politics of the Lockean whigs a contradiction in earlier views is resolved. For whilst Richard Ashcraft has argued that Locke's circle remained unremittingly hostile to James and engaged in clandestine plotting, other sources identify the same people as among the king's ‘whig collaborators’. The chief actors in Locke's circle are Edward Clarke, Sir Walter Yonge, Richard Duke and Richard Burthogge.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , September 1992 , pp. 557 - 586
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Ashcraft, pp. 467, 521, and chs. 10–11 generally. For similar claims see Tully, J., A discourse of property: John Locke and his adversaries (Cambridge, 1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 The words arc those of Jones, J. R., ‘James II's whig collaborators’, Historical Journal, (1960), 65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Jones did, however, open up the question of whig support for James, the extent of which remains underestimated. See Lacey, D. R., Dissent and parliamentary politics in England, 1661–1689 (New Brunswick, 1969), ch. 9Google Scholar; Jones, J. R., The revolution of 1688 in England (London, 1972), chs. 5–6Google Scholar; idem, ‘James ITs revolution: royal policies, 1686–1692’, in The Anglo-Dutch momtnt, ed. Israel, J. (Cambridge, 1991), pp. 47–72Google Scholar.

3 Ivan Roots pointed out to me a parallel with royalists in the:1650s: those at home were much more politically flexible than those in exile.

4 Ashcraft, p. 532; Henning, III, 789.

5 For the use of the term ‘the Row’ lee Locke, Corr., III, 296, 375, 801.

6 Historical Manuscripts Commission, Portland, II, 133Google Scholar.

7 None of them appears in the Dictionary of National Biography, though this is to be rectified for Clarke and Yonge in the forthcoming Supplement. Their are entries for Yonge and Duke in Henning. See also , Locke, Con., n, 479–80Google Scholar; III, 5, 7, 26; Cranston, passim; Ashcraft, passim (though he does not mention Duke); Lacey, Dissent, passim. There is a massive body of Clarke papers in the Sanford collection in the Somerset Record Office.

8 See , Locke, Some thoughts contenting tdueation, ed. , J. W. and Yolton, J. S. (Oxford, 1989)Google Scholar; The educational writings of John Locke, ed. Axtell, J. L. (Cambridge, 1968)Google Scholar.

9 See Davison, L. and Keirn, T., ‘John Locke, Edward Clarke and the 1696 guineas legislation’, Parliamentary History, VII (1988), 228–40Google Scholar; Kelly, P., ‘Locke and Molyneux: the anatomy of a friendship’, Hermathena, CXXVI (1979), 38–54, esp. p. 49Google Scholar.

10 Fea, A., King Monmouth (London, 1902), pp. 97–8, 103–7Google Scholar. Otterton still stands, but Chipley new house and Escot were demolished in the nineteenth century. For the Shaftesbury connections of the Row see Haley, K. H. D., The first earl of ShafUsbtay (Oxford, 1968), pp. 670, 711, 727Google Scholar. Several Clarke letters discuss popery and Exclusion politics: SRO, DD/SF 3109, 3110.

11 Locke, Corr., II, 600, m, 213–14; Ashcraft, p. 377; Cranston, pp. 229–30, 263, 257–8.

12 They are listed as presbyterians in Lacey, Dissmt, pp. 389, 459. Clarke was more firmly within anglicanism, but his enemies accused him of dissent.

13 See The politics of religion in restoration England, eds. Harris, T., Seaward, P. and Goldie, M. (Oxford, 1990)Google Scholar.

14 He used his power as patron to protect semi-conforming ministers: Matthews, W. G., Calamy revistd (Oxford, 1934), p. 149Google Scholar; Jackson, P., ‘Nonconformists and society in Devon 1660–1688’ (Ph.D. thesis, Exeter, 1986)Google Scholar, app. 2.

15 North, Roger, The life of…Guilfmd (1742), p. 117Google Scholar; idem, Autobiography (London, 1890), m, I33–4.

16 Locke's phrases, ‘the Drum Ecclesiastick’ and ‘a Rope of Sand’ (preface, and First Treatise, para. 1) are echoes of (Hudibras, part I, canto 1.

17 Butler's lines are: ‘This is some pettifogging fiend,/Some under door-keeper's friend's friend,/ That undertakes to understand,/ And juggles at the second hand,/ And now would pass for Spirit Po,/ And all men's dark concerns foreknow’ (Hudibras, part 3, canto t). The OED defines ‘Po’ with a riddle, by referring only to Seymour's jibe against Duke.

18 Calamy rtvistd, p. 262; , Laccy, Dissent, pp. 313Google Scholar, 38g; Alexander, J. J., ‘An Otterton notebook’, Transactions of the Devonshire Association, I (1918), 493–502Google Scholar.

19 Henning, III, 789; , Lacey, Dissent, pp. 115Google Scholar, 3130. Like Duke, Yonge had a Cromwellian presbyterian father: see Henning, III, 787–8.

20 SRO, DD/SF 285, 1697, 3874, 3368, 3109; Luttrell, Narcissus, A briefhistorical relation ofstate affairs, 6 vols. (Oxford, 1857), 1, 283–4, 342. 349Google Scholar.

21 The best recent accounts are Earle, P., Monmouth's rebels (London, 1977)Google Scholar, and Clifton, R., The last popular rebellion (London, 1984)Google Scholar.

22 British Library, Harleian MS 6845, fo. 271; Ford, Lord Grey, The secret history of the Rye House plot and of Monmouth's rebellion (1754), p. 102Google Scholar. Cf. , Clifton, Last popular rebellion, p. 154Google Scholar.

23 Ashcraft, p. 470.

24 Ibid. pp. 452ff.

25 SRO, DD/S F 4229; Locke, Corr., III, 165–6. John Barber was in charge of ‘the new gardens in the Row’: Corr., III, 64. I am most grateful to Clarke's descendant, the present owner, Mr William Sanford, for showing me the gardens at Chipley, as well as drawings indicating the appearance of the estate in the eighteenth century. It is pleasing that family lore still maintains that Locke drafted the Essay in the bowling green.

26 Harrison, J. and Laslett, P., The library of John Locke (Oxford, 1971), p. 9Google Scholar.

27 Locke, Corr., III, 613–14; III, 345; , Locke, Educational Writings, p. 316Google Scholar; Some thoughts on education, pp. 257–8; Selby, P. J., A history of Britishforest trees (London, 1842), pp. 5, 8Google Scholar; Wood, N., John Locke and agrarian capitalism (Berkeley, 1984), p. 29Google Scholar; also pp. 22, 26–7, 61–2, 98, 103–6. Wood takes the key letter about lime trees at face value, and the same point is made by Gordon Schochet in a review of , Ashcraft: ‘Radical politics and Ashcraft's treatise on Locke’, Journal of the History of Ideas, L (1989), 498–9Google Scholar. Locke also shipped sheep for Chipley from Rotterdam via Exeter: Corr., III, 305, 322, 381, 388–9.

28 SRO DD/SF 3070, 3305, etc. Ashcraft thinks it impossible to believe that Locke concerned himself with how much milk two wetnunes produced. On the contrary, the Clarke papers show that Locke was inordinately preoccupied with the minutiae of the children's nurturing.

29 SRO, DD/SF 3109, printed in Notes and Queriesfor Somerset and Dorset, XXX (1974), 52–4Google Scholar. See , Earle, Monmouth's rebels, pp. 114, 141, 213Google Scholar; Henning, I, 372–3. Mistakenly, Ashcraft calls William a ‘brother’ of Edward, and Henning calls Edward ‘a milliner in Fleet Street’.

30 Calendar of treasury books, VIII, 1829, 1846Google Scholar; Wigfield, W. M., The Mommouth rebels (Gloucester, 1985), pp. 46, 62, 169Google Scholar. A ‘servant’ of Yonge's may also have been involved in the rebellion: ibid, p. 160.

31 Calendar of treasury books, VIII, 1899, 1846Google Scholar; cf. p. 3005; , Locke, Corr., III, 154Google Scholar.

32 SRO DD/SF 3874.

33 William Stratton to Edward Clarke, 13 May 1687: SRO DD/S F 3077. Sec also Locke to Cornelius Lyde, 28 June 1703: ‘I have also sent you a warrant for distraining on Mary Cooke if she has not paid… I believe Pensford is not without a bailiff in it, he perhaps will be fittest to execute it’. And Peter King to Locke, 4 Nov. 1703: ‘Horwood is very poor, but being frighted, hath promised to pay…which if he doth not, Mr Lyde will distrain’ (Locke, Corr., VIII, 23, 104).

34 William Sprcat, transported to Jamaica. I owe this point to Priscilla Flower-Smith.

35 I merely glance here at the large question of Locke's ‘aristocratic whig’ context and its implications for Ashcraft's thesis. See McNally, D., ‘Locke, Levellers and liberty: property and democracy in the thought of the first whigs’. History of Political Thought, X (1989), 17–40Google Scholar; Idem, Political tconomy and the rise of capitalism (Berkeley, 1988). esp. pp. 58, 62Google Scholar; Marshall, J., ‘John Locke in context: religion, ethics and politics’ Ph.D. thesis, Johns Hopkins, 1990), esp. ch. 8Google Scholar; Wood, Locke and agrarian capitalism; Scott, J., Algernon Sidney and the restoration crisis, 1677–1683 (Cambridge, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Krey, G. S. De, ‘London radicals and revolutionary politics, 1675–1683’, in Politics of religion, eds. Seaward, Harris and Goldie, , pp. 133–62Google Scholar; , Schochet, ‘Radical polities’, pp. 501–6Google Scholar.

36 Historical Manuscripts Commission, Ptrtland, III, 133; SRO DD/SF 3304, 4229.

37 Locke, Concerning education, episde dedicatory to Clarke; , Locke, ‘Proposal for reform of the Poor Laws’, quoted in McNally, , ‘Locke’, p. 33Google Scholar. For Locke's severity seeJames Tully, ‘Governing conduct’, in Conscience and casuistry in early modern Europe, ed. Leitcs, E. (Cambridge, 1988)Google Scholar. Sec I. above for Tully's earlier work on Locke; since reading Foucault, he has discovered a less libertarian Locke.

38 Homing, II, 535–6; , Luttrell, Briefhistorical relation, I, 467Google Scholar; Bishop Burnett history of his turn time, ed. Routh, J., 6 vols. (Oxford, 1833), III, 364Google Scholar; iv, 353–4. Like many whigs, Locke found it hard to understand why tories, ill-treated by James, should scruple at deposition: ‘I wonder at N.F. ‘noble yriend Lord Pembroke’ what he means. I think the treatment he received from others [James II], lay no obligations on him to be forward now’ (Locke to Clarke, 18 Jan. 1689: Corr., III, 536).

39 E.g. , Locke, Corr., III, 380, 437Google Scholar.

40 Whiting, John, Persecution exposed (1715), p. 143Google Scholar; Wheeler, Adam, ‘Iter beUicosum: Adam Wheeler his account of 1685’, ed. Maiden, H. E. (Camden Society, 1910), pp. 153–68Google Scholar; , Clifton, Last popular rebellion, pp. 194–5, 199 220Google Scholar

41 , Locke, Corr, III, 322, 334, 352, 353Google Scholar; cf. 1, 375; , Luttrell, Brit/historical relation, 1, 384Google Scholar. William and Edward Clarke were also closely associated with Viscount Fitzharding, who led the Somerset militia against the rebels: they were all trustees of Lord Rochester's estate: SRO DD/SF, 3093–4.

42 , Locke, Corr., III, 193, 213, 279, 294, 311–12, 462, 511Google Scholar; cf. III, 93, 215, 216, 375. There was also talk of restoring Locke's studentship at Christ Church, Oxford, from which he was expelled in 1683: III, 201, 210, 311, 456. See Ashcraft, pp. 511–17.

43 , Locke, Corr., II, 729Google Scholar.

44 , Locke, Corr., III, 185, 257, 307, 384; cf. 406–7, 414, 450, 453, 455Google Scholar. See Cranston, pp. 398, 301-a; Ashcraft, pp. 471, 514–16.

45 , Locke, Corr., III, 92Google Scholar. De Beer suggests P stands for ‘priests’, but I prefer John Marshall's suggestion that ‘prelatists’ is more plausible: compare Corr., III, 191.

46 , Locke, Corr., III, 191Google Scholar. See Cranston, p. 384; Ashcraft, pp. 497–8. On Wythens tee Henning, III, 783–4; Calendar of treasury books, VIII, 414.

47 , Locke, Corr., III, 238Google Scholar; 1, 33411; cf. 1, 332, 334; m, 452,585. In May 1688 Grigg wrote to Locke about the reissue of the Indulgence: it was a time for Christians to show that ‘truth is superior to all the policy of fallen angeb and the best laid devices of ambitious men’: Corr., III, 452.

48 Izacke, R., Ramarkable antiquities of the city of Exeter (1723), pp. 283–4Google Scholar; Brockett, A., Nonconformity in Exter, 1650–1875 (Manchester, 1962), pp. 6, 50, 57Google Scholar; cf. pp. 40, 67, 89; Hoskins, W. G., Industry, trade and people in Exeter, 1688–1800 (Manchester, 1935), pp. 99, 118, 122Google Scholar; Newton, R., Eighteenth-century Exeter (Exeter, 1984), pp. 11, 27Google Scholar; cf. pp. 30, 52; Rowe, M. M. and Jackson, A. M., Exeter freemen, 1266–1967 (Devon and Cornwall Record Society, 1973), p. 156Google Scholar; Calamy revised, pp. 440–1. King was one of the Few in Exeter assessed at more than six hearths; Starr was amongst the half-dozen wealthiest, assessed at £1000 in the 1690s.

49 Devon Record Office, Exeter Corporation Act Book No. 13, fos. 42fT.

50 Henning, 1, 359–60, III, 76 8 (Wright ‘apparently became a Whig collaborator in 1688’); , Locke, Corr., II, 354Google Scholar; in, 379; iv, 208–9; Hobson, M. G., Oxford Council Acts, 1665–1701 (Oxford Historical Society, 1939), pp. xvi, xix, xxvi, xxix, 196–7, 198, 203, 213Google Scholar; Wood, Anthony, Athenae Oxonunsis, ed. Bliss, P., 5 vols. (1817), II, 463, 496, 541Google Scholar; in, 72, 93, 145, 155, 256, 261, 506–10; Ashcraft, pp. 113, 373, 374, 431, 433; Cranston, pp. 199, 228, 232n, 357, 365, 381, 466–8; Dr Williams' Library, London: Morrice MS P, 443. Ashcraft disarmingly calls Pawling a ‘tradesman’; but, assessed at six hearths, he was one of Oxford's most prosperous residents; he probably left off trade after about 1680; in the 1690s he was comptroller of the Stamp Office at £300 per annum. It is potsible that Pawling refused to serve in 1688 simply because he had left Oxford; he was dismissed the corporation in 1689 for non-attendance.

51 , Locke, Corr., III, 312, 378–80, 410Google Scholar. Clarke may have shared Tyrrell's misgivings, though he was not as unambiguous as Ashcraft suggests: , Locke, Corr., III, 380Google Scholar; Ashcraft, p. 547.

52 , Locke, Corr., III, 210, 214, 216, 263, 280, 296Google Scholar; Duckett, 1, 242; n, 255. The aged Morice, of a presbyterian and whig family, was Yongc's first wife's grandfather and his patron in his early parliamentary career; Morice's son (Yonge's father-in-law) had been elected, together with Yonge, freemen of Lyme Regis in 1680, a gesture by which urban whigs marked their allies amongst the county gentry. Southcote, though a catholic, came from a presbyterian background.

53 , Locke, Corr., III, 296, 463Google Scholar.

54 The autobiography of Sir John Bramston, ed. Braybrook, Lord (Camden Society, 1845), p. 304Google Scholar. In 1693 Atwood electioneered with Locke's hot Sir Francis Masham of Otes and others of the ‘fanatic’ party (p. 373).

55 George, R. H., ‘The charters granted to English parliamentary corporations in 1688’, English Historical Rrvinv, LV (1940), 47–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pickavance, R. G., ‘The English boroughs and the king's government: a study of the tory reaction of 1681–85’ (Ph.D. thesis, Oxford, 1976)Google Scholar.

56 , Locke, Corr., VII, 65–6Google Scholar; VII, 137; viii, 19; Yolton, J., John Locks and the way of ideas (1956), pp. 4, 9, 19, 100–1, 156–7, 179Google Scholar.

57 Bold, Samuel, A sermon against persecution (1682Google Scholar; repr. 1720); idem, A brief account of the first rise of tht name protestant (1688).

58 Duckctt, II, 242; The autobiography and letters of Thomas Comber, ed. Whiting, C. E. (Surtees Society, 1946-1947), p. 23Google Scholar; cf. pp. 174, 188–9; , Locke. Corr., VI, 68–9, 595Google Scholar. Space forbids discussion of William Popple who, similarly, was close to Locke after the revolution, when he produced the English version of , Locke'sLetter concerning toleration, and who in 1688Google Scholar was close to , Penn, and published A rational catechism (1687)Google Scholar and A letter to Mr Penn (1688) on behalf of toleration.

59 Henning, I, 201–3; III, 789; Duckett, II, 232, 298.

60 Hanham, H. J., ‘Ashburton as a parliamentary borough, 1640–1868’, Transactions of the Devonshire Association, XCVIII (1966), 207, 211–15Google Scholar; idem, ‘A tangle untangled: The lordship of the manor and borough of Ashburton’, Transactions of the Devonshire Association, XCIV (1962), 449 453Google Scholar.

61 Henning, I, 191–2; n, 241; Duckett, n, 233, 241. Hanham judges that the Dukes ‘accepted James's overtures merely as a means of securing a respite from their Tory enemies’ and out of the ‘sheer desperation’ of die dissenters: ‘Ashburton’, p. 216. Starr u variously styled Edward and Edmund.

62 Duckett, I, 373–7; II, 263, 265, 298.

63 Duckett, II, 11, 15, 16, 228, 274, 292; Hcnning, I, 370, 380; , Locke, COrr., I, 672Google Scholar; II, 258; Nonrey, P. J., ‘The relationship between central government and local government in Dorset, Somerset and Wiltshire 1660–1688’ (Bristol Ph.D., 1988), p. 347Google Scholar.

64 Henning, I, 378–9.

65 Ashcraft discusses James's campaign for a ‘packed’ parliament at pp. 540–7; he says nothing at all about the involvement of Locke's friends in support of James's schemes.

66 Plumb, J. H., ‘Elections to the Convention Parliament’, Camhridgt Historical Journal, V (1937). 235–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67 Duckett, II, 19ff.

68 Henning, I, 369–80; , Norrey, ‘Central and local government’, p. 3730Google Scholar.

69 Hcnning, I, 379; Petition of Clarke and Trenchard: SRO DD/SF 1084; Journal of the House of Commons, X, 20–1Google Scholar. The Commons voted 230 to 132 against Clarke's petition; this was on 7 Feb., five days before Locke's return to London.

70 For this assumption see , Tully, Discourse on property, p. 173Google Scholar; for criticism of it see , Wood, Lock and agrarian capitalism, pp. 83–5Google Scholar; , McNally, ‘Locke’, p. 23Google Scholar; , Scott, Sidney, pp. 174–5Google Scholar. For tory populism see Harris, T., London crowds in the reign of Charles II (Cambridge, 1987)Google Scholar.

71 Henning, I, 194, 200.

72 Henning, I, 19a, 202; n, 241. Sir Walter Yonge's son, Sir William, a henchman of Sir Robert Walpolc, repeated the device of 1689 when in 1734 he was elected to Ashburton as a precaution against losing Honiton: , Hanham, ‘Lordship’, pp. 453–4Google Scholar.

73 Henning, III, 265–7; Green, E., The march of William of Orange through Somerset (London, 1892), pp. 57–8, 64Google Scholar.

74 , Locke, Corr., V, 50–51, 78Google Scholar; VI, 684–6; VII, 709–11, 777–80; VIII, 455.

75 , Locke, Corr., V, 50–1Google Scholar; The philosophical writings of Richard Burthogge, ed. Landes, M. (Chicago, 1921)Google Scholar, Introduction; , Wood, Athenee Oxoniensis, IV, 581Google Scholar; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Portland, a, 133–4Google Scholar; Windeatt, E., ‘Early nonconformity in Totnes’, Transactions of the Devonshire Association, XXXII (1900), 414–16, 419Google Scholar; Roberts, S. K., Recovery and restoration in an English county: Devon local administration, 1646–1670 (Exeter, 1985), p. 161Google Scholar. Neither De Beer nor Landes were able to provide the dates of Burthogge's birth and death: 1638 and 1705.

76 The oceana and other political works of James Harrington, ed. Toland, J. (1700), pp. xxxvii–xxxviiiGoogle Scholar; The political works of James Harrington, ed. Peacock, J. G. A. (Cambridge, 1977), p. 126Google Scholar.

77 Calamy revised, pp. 58, 523; , Windeatt, ‘Nonconformity in Totnes’, pp. 414–16, 417–19Google Scholar. On one occasion Shapley had to pay the fine arising from a prosecution he himself instigated, because his wife was arrested at the conventicle.

78 Henning, I, 210; Duckctt, II, 331, 264, 299; Calendar of statepapers domestic, 1685–1689, III, 183; , Windeatt, ‘Nonconformity in Totnes’, p. 419Google Scholar; idem, ‘The dismissal of Sir Edward Seymour from the recordership of Totnes by James II’, Transactions of the Devonshire Association, VIII (1876), 360–69Google Scholar.

79 Bodleian Library, Oxford, MS Rawlinson D372. See M. Goldie, ‘James II and the dissenters' revenge: the Commission of Enquiry of 1688’, Historical Research (forthcoming). Clarke, Duke and Yonge were also appointed commissioners, but there is no evidence that they sat.

80 Ibid.; Long, Thomas, The letter for to teleration decipher 'd (1689)Google Scholar; King, Lord, The life of John Locks. 2 vols. (London, 1830), 1, 268–73Google Scholar.

81 Henning, I, a 10; III, 419. Lacey mistakenly refers to Burthogge as an anglican candidate in 1688 (Dissent, p. 351).

82 Windeatt, E., ‘The MPs for the borough of Tomes’, Transactions of the Devonshire Association, XXXII (1900), 443–4Google Scholar; , Windeatt, ‘Dismissal of Seymour’, p. 368Google Scholar; DNB, ‘Gipps’.

83 Historical Manuscripts Commission, Portland, II, 133–4Google Scholar; , Wood, Athenae Oxoniensis, IV, 581Google Scholar; , Wood, Fasti Oxoniensis, II, 214Google Scholar.

84 The tract is dedicated to ‘SW. Y.B. T. R. E N M E.’ I assume the first two are Sir Walter Yonge, Baronet, and Thomas Reynell.

85 Burscough, Robert, A vindication of a discount of schism (1701), pp. 103–4, 139Google Scholar; idemA trtatiu tfChurch Government (1692), pp. iii-iv, vi, xvii; idem, A discourse of schism (1699), p. 152.

86 , Burthogge, Prudential reasons (1687), pp. 1, 2, 9, 10Google Scholar.

87 Ibid. ep. ded., and pp. 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10.

88 For the claim that it was drafted in 1683–3 sec Marshall, ‘Locke in context’, ch. 8. David Wootton argues for 1681: Introduction to his Penguin edition of Locke (forthcoming). They share Ashcraft's view that the Second Treatise was inappropriate until after Charles II had ceased to call parliaments.

89 Quoted in , Green, March of William, p. 93Google Scholar.

90 , Long, Letter for toleration, p. 1Google Scholar. Jonas Proast was the other critic: see , Locke, Works (London, 1801), VI, 199Google Scholar. See Goldie, M., ‘John Locke, Jonas Proast and religious toleration, 1688–1692’, in From toleration to tractarimism, eds. Walsh, J., Haydon, C. and Taylor, S. (Oxford, 1993)Google Scholar.

91 See Tuck, R., ‘Hobbes and Locke on toleration’, in Thomas Hobbts and political theory, ed. Dietz, M. G. (Kansas, 1990), pp. 153–72Google Scholar; Marshall, ‘Locke in context’, ch. 3. Richard Tuck points out to me that it might be significant that Locke did not publish The two treatises whilst James was on the throne.

92 For recent attempts to relate the publication of the Two treatises to the circumstances of 1689 see Tarlton, C., “‘The rulers now on earth”: Locke's Two treatises and the revolution of 1688’, Historical Journal, XXVIII (1985), 279–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Schwoerer, L. G., ‘Locke, Lockean ideas, and the gloiious revolution’, Journal of the History of Ideas, LI (1990), 531–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

93 , Locke, Corr., III, 512, 536, 546Google Scholar; II, 479.