Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-4zrgc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-06T06:37:59.699Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Catholic Officers in the Navy of James II

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 October 2016

L. Gooch
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Shortly after his accession, James II introduced in England a scheme, already begun in Ireland, of dispensing Catholic army officers from the Test Act of 1673. This encroachment of the penal laws was controversial and James, therefore, turned to the courts for a legal opinion on his use of the royal prerogative. In Godden v. Hales (1686) the judges upheld the king’s right to dispense with the law in particular cases. Despite this decision, however, public and Service opinion remained hostile to the idea of placing Catholics in the armed forces. James took action against a clergyman, Samuel Johnson, who published a pamphlet addressed to all soldiers and sailors telling them not to associate with ‘idolatrous and bloody Papists who fight for the Mass book and to burn the Bible’.

Type
Articles
Information
British Catholic History , Volume 14 , Issue 3 , May 1978 , pp. 276 - 280
Copyright
Copyright © Catholic Record Society 1978

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

Notes

1 State Trials, 9, pp. 1196–9.

2 State Tracts, vol. 2, p. 429.Google Scholar

3 Grey, A., Debates in the House of Commons, 1667–1694, vol. 7, pp. 112–13.Google Scholar

4 H.M.C, Egmont 2, p. 169. Egmont to Sir John Perceval, 5 December 1685.

5 Ashley, M., The Glorious Revolution of 1688, p. 156,Google Scholar quoting a letter of 6 February.

6 Powley, E. B., The English Navy in the Revolution of 1688.

7 Grew, E. and M., S., The English Court in Exile, p. 10.Google Scholar

8 The text of the invitation is in Ashley, op. cit., Appendix C.

9 E.H.R. 1, pp. 524–5.

10 H.M.C., Dartmouth, p. 229.

11 Pepysian MS. 2941, printed in Navy Records Society, vol. 26.

12 James signed naval commissions until 16 November.

13 Various lists of officers serving after 1688 exist, e.g., S.P.D., 5 January 1690.

14 Captains Sir William Booth, Edmund Elliot, David Lloyd, James Montgomery and ThomasSmith were most prominent and were dismissed in 1689.

15 Ailesbury, T. Bruce, Earl of, Memoirs, ed. W. E. Buckley (1890).

16 Charnock, C. J., Biographia Navalis (1794), vol. 2, p. 134.Google Scholar Charnock compiled his navalbiographies from a number of sources and is not always accurate. He is, however, picturesque, especially if he is retailing gossip or unfavourable information.

17 Charnock, op. cit., 11, p. 142.

18 CR.S. 6, pp. 256–69. See also Kirk’s Biographies.

19 Calendar of State Papers Domestic, 1686–87, p. 23.

20 Navy Records Society, 5, p. 6.

21 CR.S. 13, p. 59.

22 Charnock, op. cit., 2, p. 163.

23 Charnock, op. cit., 1, p. 106.

24 Nairne Papers (Bodleian).

25 H.M.C., Dartmouth, p. 70.

26 Campbell, J., Naval History, 2, p. 388.Google Scholar

27 H.M.C., Dartmouth, p. 164.

28 Charnock, op. cit., 1, p. 273.

29 CR.S. 18, xix.

30 Pepys, Admiralty Letters, No. 131.

31 Pepys, Admiralty Journal, 19 September 1674.