The Diary of Thomas Burton
17 February 1658-9

Sponsor

History of Parliament Trust

Publication

Author

John Towill Rutt (editor)

Year published

1828

Pages

Citation Show another format:

'The Diary of Thomas Burton: 17 February 1658-9', Diary of Thomas Burton esq, volume 3: January - March 1659 (1828), pp. 307-325. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=36910 Date accessed: 27 November 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

Thursday, February 17, 1658–9.

Mr. Speaker took the chair at nine.

Mr. Cooper prayed.

The order of the day was read that the Accounts from the Commissioners of the Treasury, Army, Navy, and Admiralty, be brought in.

Mr. Sherwyn, according to the order of the House, did present an account from the Commissioners of the Treasury, which was received.

Colonel Sennet likewise presented an account from the Commissioners of the Army, according to former orders, which was received.

Colonel Clark likewise brought in an account from the Commissioners of the Admiralty, which was received.

Mr. Speaker acquainted the House that he had received a letter from his Highness, directed to the House of Commons. He supposed it concerned this business.

Sir Arthur Haslerigge. I move, that this being the first letter from his Highness, it stay till the House be full. I farther move to know if the establishment of the Army be brought in, and a list of the officers, that we may know who are our protectors. It seems this is not done. It is not within these gentlemen's survey, but the Muster-Master General's. Dr. Stene (fn. 1) is Commissary of those Musters.

Mr. Scot seconded the motion, and said, they were our army. Divers officers were dead, and their accounts left unexamined.

He moved that a particular Committee ought not to be named, but a private Committee was more proper.

Colonel Birch. The letter may give us a great deal of light. Read that first, and then read the accounts, before you commit them.

The letter was read, signed R. P., directed to "Our House of Commons."

Sir William Wheeler was moving something in relation to the business of the accounts.

Sir Arthur Haslerigge took him down, and said, though he looked over the letter, and said nothing to it, he had to say something to it, though with weakness.

Sir William Wheeler took him down, and said: for aught Sir Arthur knew, he might have spoken to the letter, but said not a word to it.

Sir Arthur Haslerigge took notice of it, and said: it ought not to be slightly passed by.

We are come again, for aught I know, to King, Lords, and Commons, when Kings and Lords were in their height. Let us be exceeding careful of an ill precedent.

I heard it said yesterday, that an officer said in the head of his regiment, that his Highness and the other House were desirous that the army might have their pay, but the Commons were against it. I wish our young Prince may have good and wise counsel about him, not to advise him to a breach of the privilege of Parliament. I doubt this is laid at our doors. Have we not hastened this ?

Was there need of this letter ? The Lord deliver us from such evil counsellors as King Charles had about him, in the beginning of the Long Parliament. One ran to court, the other went with the vote, as soon as ever it passed. (fn. 2) We have looked upon this as a high thing for a member of this House to go to dinner at court; but we are all in now; say they. A word is enough to the wise. For an innocent Prince to be misled, I am heartily sorry for it. There was no need of this letter. I pray. God deliver him and us from evil counsellors.

Mr. Secretary. This letter was well intended, and not to direct you. If any evil counsellers be, let them be known I am, for my part, here ready to answer any charge. It is an easy thing to charge in general terms. I was never a soldier, but shall have the courage to withstand any charge. His Highness thought fit to give you this account, and lay it fairly by you, that you should use your prudence in it. There was no breach of privilege intended, nor I hope any done. It is fit you should understand the emergencies of your affairs.

Sir Walter Earle. I observe no great pressing nor requiring in the letter, only it seems to take notice of your debates, which ought not to be done. One Tirrell was highly censured by this House for carrying things out of doors. But it is no more than has ever been done, to acquaint the House of Commons. It is no new thing, but was always represented this way.

Mr. Knightley. In the beginning of the Long Parliament, the King did a high breach of privilege upon this House. (fn. 3) What is past, the single person or any other may take notice of; but of the debates he ought not. Mr. Kirton brought a message from court of this nature, but had a warning given him never to do the like again. I wish this had not come, and desire it may not be again.

The letter was all this while passing from member to member.

Colonel White. It is not happy for a Commonwealth to have daily breaches upon their privileges; but I find not by this letter, that you are broke in upon. The letter takes no notice of your debates. It is but his duty, he being Chief Magistrate, to advertise you of your charge and preparation. I would have the letter laid aside, and Mr. Secretary to take notice of it; that nothing may hereafter come from the court of this nature, to distaste the House.

Sir John Northcote. This was no breach of privilege, to bring in this letter from the Chief Magistrate. He ought to acquaint you of the danger; but I cannot but take notice of what was said by the said officer in the head of his regiment. (fn. 4) This may be of dangerous consequence to loose the Army. Those that have no money would pay, but those that have the purse stop it and will not. King's servants have been turned out of the House and sent to the Tower, for telling things out of the House. I would have gentlemen that know not this, haply to take notice of it. If the dangers are real, why not a Parliament called sooner ? Why, methinks, our dangers are not so great.

Mr. Reynolds. I will not say the letter is a breach of Parliament. It is fair enough, but I would have no more of them.

Mr. Solicitor-general. If sending a letter by the Chief Magistrate be a breach of privilege, it were well it were known. I have read over the letter, and find no such things in it. It is fit the physician should know the state of your body; but to desire no such letter should come again, is to stop the intercourse between you and your Chief Magistrate.

Mr. Onslow. Put the letter wholly aside, and make no further debate of it. It mentions no money. It is no breach of Parliament. I move that the Muster Roll be brought in.

The letter was laid aside, and the debate upon the establishment of the Army was proceeded upon.

Sir Arthur Haslerigge. Now you are fully possessed of the business, and ripe to appoint a Committee.

Mr. Bodurda. I am against a Committee. You may, by the accounts before you, understand the heads of what is fit.

Colonel Allured. I move that none that are concerned in the accounts, be of that Committee.

Major Burton. I move that Captain Baynes be added to the Committee.

Mr. Bodurda. I move that Sir John Carter be of the Committee.

The question was put, yet Sir Arthur Haslerigge took exceptions, and the question was again put a first and second time.

Mr. Knightley. I move that that question be put again.

Sir John Carter. I am no accountant, nor have meddled with money, nor am in any way concerned. As a soldier, I have fought and bled for you. If I be a fit member of the House, I suppose I am a fit. member of a Committee.

Sir Arthur Haslerigge. I found myself unfit for accounts, and did not know that that gentleman was fit for them; so I gave my negative. I ask his pardon for it, and am sorry that he should take exceptions.

Mr. Sherwyn. If Captain Baynes have a salary, he may not be of the Committee.

The question being put upon Mr. Scot,

Mr. Speaker declared for the Yeas. Some declared for the Noes, but the House was not divided; yet Mr. Scot stood.

Captain Baynes. By the favour of the Parliament, I am one of the commissioners appointed to receive appeals touching the excise, and do receive a salary for it. I shall be laid aside, if you please.

Mr. Bulkeley. I move that you abide by your order; and not let any persons that receive or pay salaries be of this Committee.

Captain Baynes was thereupon excused.

Mr. Secretary. I move that Mr. Knightley be one.

He prayed to be excused, for ignorance, and that Alderman Thompson be named in his stead.

Colonel White moved that Captain Baynes be one, for he was very fit, and not disabled by receiving a salary.

Lord Lambert. I would have Captain Baynes left out, and Colonel White in his stead.

Captain Hatsell prayed to be excused, and it was ordered accordingly.

Mr. Trevor moved that Mr. Knightley be added.

Resolved, that there shall be but twelve of this Committee, viz.

Mr. Middleton, Colonel Birch, Sir John Carter, Sir Henry Vane, Major-general Brown, (fn. 5) Lord Lambert, Mr. Godfrey, Colonel Thompson, Mr. Scot, and Mr. Jackson.

Resolved, that five be the quorum of this Committee.

Mr. Godfrey. I move that a chairman be named here, that may have the particular care of this business. I move for Colonel Birch.

Mr. Attorney-general. The Parliament used to name a chairman; but they found that inconvenient, in respect, the chairman being away, hindered all the business.

The titles of the papers brought in were read, and referred to the said Committee, and also referred to them, to take an account of the Armies in Scotland and Ireland.

Mr. Reynolds. I move that, by name, the Muster Master be ordered to bring in the Muster Rolls to your Committee.

Colonel Birch. I move to give your Committee general power, and then they need not come to you for particular powers; only to inspect your forces by sea and land, and to inquire of the revenue of the three nations, and how your charge may be defrayed for the future, and to send for persons, papers, and records.

Resolved, that these papers and accounts, delivered in from the Commissioners of the Revenue, the Committee of the Army, and the Commissioners of the Admiralty and Navy be referred to this Committee; and this Committee, or any five of them are to consider of the number and strength of the armies and forces by land, and the number and strength of the navy forces by sea, and how all the said forces by land and sea are at present disposed of. And this Committee are to meet to-morrow at two, and so de die in uiem, in the Treasury Chamber. (fn. 6)

Captain Buynes. It is enough to deliver in a list of the commanding officers, and the number of the soldiers under their respective commands; and, further, that your Committee inquire how to retrench the charge of bringing in your money.

Mr. Bayles. I move to inquire of the miscarriage upon the charge of the money.

Mr. Reynolds. I move that the monies laid out to your civil officers, as well as military, be inquired into.

Colonel Birch. You intend not to give the disposal of your forces to your Committee.

It was altered to, inquire bow disposed of.

Mr. Reynolds. I move to have the words added "for retrenching your charge."

These words were ordered to be added accordingly. (fn. 7)

Mr. Scot. It is fit you should know the state of your affairs, with your allies and enemies. There is a time of year when kings go out to war. Therefore, whether you are in a good consistency and right understanding between you and the Chief Magistrate, or not, your meaning, I suppose, is not to leave the making of peace or war in the single person's hands. (fn. 8) You mean to place it elsewhere. It is, therefore, fit to inquire who are your friends and enemies. I would have a short day appointed to inquire of all this.

Mr. Onslow. This Committee will satisfy you in all these particulars.

Colonel Birch. I move that all persons under pay attend your Committee to assist them. I have known a chairman in such cases spend 40l. from his own purse, in sending for declarations, ordinances, and papers, for the service of the Committee.

Mr. Neville. I would have you take into speedy consideration the war with Spain. (fn. 9) There are many reports that the enemy would seek you in peace, if your sense were understood that you would admit it.

There is a general decay of trade, that money will not be had for this business. No money has come for two or three years. I could tell you of one thousand particular decays of trade, by want of the Spanish trade.

I hope, upon the debate of the militia, this business will come into consideration.

Mr. Secretary. I move to revive a motion I made in the morning, for which these gentlemen have moved. For the state of your affairs in general, you are at peace with all the world; but as to that state of Spain, which was made known to you before, and you may have the estate of it again, when you please, some part of this affair cannot stay the disposal of your Committee. Fart of your fleet must be disposed of. Your enemies are at work. It will be your interest to know how the Sound is disposed of. In Europe, Poles and Danes and Dutch combined; the Swede only on his own legs. (fn. 10) The consequence is of weight to you, how far you will engage. The counsels are before you. You may be informed of all, when you please. There is no engagement as yet. The charge of the fleet, next year, will amount to a million. (fn. 11) I would have a short day appointed to inquire of this.

Captain Hatsell. By this your very being is in question; if you take not care for your interest in the Sound.

Mr. Bodurda. I move to second this.

Mr. Knightley. I move for Monday, and nothing to intervene.

Sir Henry Vane. I move for Monday. This business is of great weight, but I would not have you out your other great vote. Be upon a good foundation at home.

Ordered, to take into consideration the business of the Sound on Monday morning.

After altum silentium, the order to take into consideration the additional clause upon the Bill of Recognition was read.

Sir Walter Earle. I move whether you will take into consideration the business of the Petition of Right, Magna Charta, &c. as was moved formerly. (fn. 12)

Sir Henry Vane. I move to take things in order as they lie before you. First begin with bounding the power of the Chief Magistrate, how far you will have him have the militia and the negative voice; and how he may not protect delinquents by a power against justice, or be himself not accountable.

Colonel While. I hope the sword will be placed in the people, so as there shall be no danger of delinquents being protected.

There was a great person in the army, that said rather than the militia and negative voice should go from the Chief Magistrate, he would fight it over again, and begin next morning. This is a bounding of our power.

A gentleman desired he might name him, and then a charge might be put down against him, and be tried here.

Sir Arthur Haslerigge. I am altogether for unity: I would have this done, but in time. When you receive the list of the officers, it may be, you may meet with that officer then.

Let us proceed upon this vote. I am glad I have it in my hands. It is of three parts. I take the matter as it lies in the vote, and would have us first go upon the negative voice. I would have light from the gentlemen of the Long Robe. I know not whether Protector or King be the greater man. I hope we shall learn in the debate. There was a maxim in the law that the King could do no wrong. It was received and swallowed by me that the King was so bounded that he could hot act in his own person, neither could any personal actions be brought against him. No action would lie against him, as against a justice of peace or constable; because he never acted but in his public capacity. A constable was less bounded in his personal capacity than the King, who could not imprison nor act any thing in his own person.

It is true we had a thing called prerogative. A great person, heretofore, was committed for saying he desired to know where that monster called prerogative was, and he would, gladly, know, what that monster could do. It was the Earl of Oxford. (fn. 13) It was answered, he should know what prerogative could do; and to declare it more demonstratively, it was told him that it could commit him to the Tower.

Now, if that maxim in law be still true, and this Protector be not greater than the King, then I am sure he can have no negative voice, for by that he might be able to do much wrong. If the Chief Magistrate deny any law, it is a wrong to the people. This was debated with the late King. The King denied his assent to what the House of Lords and Commons had made touching the militia, and would not consent to alter the Lieutenants. We persisted, and did it without him; (fn. 14) some of the gentlemen of the Long Robe's opinion then much concurring, that the negative voice was in the people. Therefore I would have that to be the first boundary: only state it now in order to the debate.

Mr. Attorney-general. We may agree, I hope. We are not at such a distance. I would have this stated, and let the negative voice be the matter of your debate to-morrow.

Sir Henry Vane. I would have the nature of the thing opened a little, that is to be the occasion of the farther debate. I shall offer you my thoughts preparatively. You are now bounding the Chief Magistrate.

The office of Chief Magistrate hath something in it essential, and which must be inviolably kept for him for the necessary preservation of the good of the whole, and the administration of justice; and something superfluous, and very chargeable. (fn. 15) Such as are;—

1. A thing called kingly power, which implies the whole affair of monarchy and prerogative, which are great occasions of vain expenses and waste, all the nation over. Lay aside this state of kingly power, and keep your Chief Magistrate. (fn. 16)

2. The power of the Chief Magistrate as to the negative voice. The denying it to the Chief Magistrate as by the law of the nation now set up by you, is fit and requisite. When all these things are in our power, must we dispute it over again between the people and the Chief Magistrate ?

The Chief Magistrate pretends to a power, not only of executing laws, but to enact laws; whereas it is the right of all to bind themselves, and to make those laws by which they are to be ruled. If corporations or any society of men have a right to make bye-laws, surely much more hath this House, which is the representative of the body of the nation. If the interest of the whole nation should lie at one man's door; it were worse than in the meanest corporation; especially to serve a single person, or the interest of a few courtiers or flatterers.

Thus it should be, that he should not deny what you find to be for your good. This our laws have declared that the single person ought to grant: Leges quas vulgus elegerit. (fn. 17) It was urged by Lord Fiennes, who drew the Declaration, that it was undeniable that the King should not deny laws. (fn. 18)

This, therefore, is of so great concernment, agreeable to the law of nature and constitution of the nation. It was before, though, if it were not, it is now in your power. Great weight was laid upon it in all propositions of peace, and so much weight depends upon it, as in the proportion of restraining or binding of power it ought to be a principal ingredient. The Chief Magistrate may do well without it.

On the other side, I would have him possess all things needful to his acting for the people; all the power to draw in the public spirits of the nation to a public interest, but not power to do them or you any hurt. This is to make him more like God himself, who can do none. Flatterers will tell him otherwise; but they that wish his safety and honour, will agree that he shall have power to do every thing that is good, and nothing that is hurtful. It is therefore necessary so to bind him as he may grow up with the public interest.

Mr. Knightley. I am free to proceed this afternoon; but for your safety I would have you adjourn now.

Colonel Birch. Bounding the Chief Magistrate is a necessary work and fit to be gone upon; but my weakness is such that I cannot agree this to be the first subject of your debate; or I should not trouble you. I cannot give my vote to this, or concur otherwise, till something else be done first; until it be agreed whether there be another House or not; for if there be, I would have the militia and negative voice disposed one way; if not, another way. I leave it before you, whether you ought not first to debate this, before you do any thing in order to the bounding the Chief Magistrate. I humbly submit it.

Mr. Neville. I think the last proposition, whether you will have another House, not material now; but when the whole Petition and Advice comes in debate, another House perhaps may then be thought convenient; but it is not ne cessary you should take the old way into consideration. You may have another House, and not a negative voice. You are not going to build upon the old constitution. The Other House may be such a House as is only preparatory to this, as, among popular assemblies in other commonwealths, there was an assembly to propound laws, and another to enact them, and a single person to put all in execution. Commonwealth was a good title, but grubbed up by the title of Chief Magistrate.

The negative voice will not at all touch the Other House. It is presumed we are going to something else, though what are men ? Therefore it is not fit to debate whether it shall be in the power of any person or persons to strangle the debates and pains of this House.

Mr. Onslow. I would have no jangling motions in stating the matter of your debate. The Other House will come on best when you come to debate upon the rights and privileges of Parliament. I would have you proceed upon the negative voice in the first place, and adjourn till to-morrow.

Mr. Starkey. The end of the Other House is for a negative voice, else they are useless. I conceive the co-ordination of the powers, of great use and advantage to the people; and therefore it is most fit and necessary to take into consideration first, the Other House. For if you shall deny a negative to the Lords, you may, by the same arguments, deny it to the Chief Magistrate.

Captain Baynes. The Other House is not yet before you; but as to the power of the Chief Magistrate, formerly so boundless: what power a single person shall have in the legislature, which is proposed as the first bounding. For my part, I think no man can tell how to set bounds to the single person, no more than to hedge in a cuckoo. Therefore I think it most fit to deliberate and agree what power the Chief Magistrate shall have, and not what he shall not have. Let it be so stated in your Bill, arid that he shall have no more.

Mr. Sadler. All the bounds that ever I have heard of, for the Chief Magistrate, are but negatives. Exceptions do but strengthen a rule. Exceptio probat regulam, in non exceptis. You plainly confirm him in all other power. I would have him so bounded by the Bill as to give him an affirmative power, and let him have no more. But that which is most necessary is, to be satisfied whether the Chief Magistrate has power to dissolve you. Inquire that first.

Mr. Trevor. I am not for an affirmative power. You may bound your Chief Magistrate by negatives well enough. I am glad there is that care taken to bound the Chief Magistrate, but understand not well what you mean by bounding him affirmatively; unless he were to take his power now. Your first debate I conceive should be, wherein you will bound him. I wish we may do it so as he shall not be able to do any harm; but then it will be questionable whether he shall be able to do you any good.

Serjeant Maynard. Declare not the powers till you declare the persons. How we can circumscribe the power before we consider the parts of the Government, I know not. We are intrusted for the people, not for the nobility. True, but by whom, if the sole power of making laws be in this House ? Besides, you wholly exclude what is essential to a Chief Magistrate. You represent not him. Whether are we intrusted by the nobility, whether by the Chief Magistrate ? Our ancestors, that is the Commons, did not think it fit to put this jewel into our chest. A man that has a treasure, had rather have it kept under three keys than one.

Many differences are in religion and in our civil concerns. Suppose, in process of time, it should so fall out, that the major part of this House should agree to do some strange act, so as to lay some imposition upon conscience, or the like; or suppose they should be of contrary opinion to us as to Papists, or some other thing; and one party be pulling another out of the House, would you have the Chief Magistrate consent to their law, and confirm that without more to do ? You swear the Chief Magistrate to do that which is just. If you offer me that which is not just, I am bound by my oath to deny it. He means to approve laws that shall be just, but if that be propounded which shall not be conceived to be just, shall he be necessitated to confirm that?

I know not how you can proceed clearly upon the bounding of powers, till you have determined what the persons are that are in power. I therefore move to debate of the Other House.

Lord Lambert. The negative voice is the most material. I know not what was meant by the Serjeant's question, Who represented the Lords ? If he meant those sitting at the other end of the House, they are sufficiently represented here, both as they were electors, some of them in person, and many of them by their letters (fn. 19) to several places.

Assert the negative voice to be here, and you go a great way in your business. Some say it is here, some say not. Some would say but part is here, and would have it divided. Agree this, and all other points are centered here. The best of all your fabric is to correspond with your interest here, and to assert it. It is a matter of great weight; but I would have you adjourn for the present, and take it up to-morrow.

Ordered, that the debate be adjourned till to-morrow, at nine.

The clerk entered the order thus, viz.: "That the debate concerning the negative voice, be proceeded in to-morrow morning at nine of the clock; and that nothing else do then intervene:" but it, was not till after Mr. Speaker left the chair, which was not justifiable.

The Committee of Privileges sat in the Star Chamber, and then adjourned to the House, upon the business of Haslemere, in Surrey, Serjeant Waller in the chair.

The dispute lay between Captain Westbrook, Lord Onslow's friend, and Mr. Hooke, who was already admitted into the House.

Counsel and witnesses were heard on both sides, and all their electors particularly weighed, and severally put to the question at the Committee.

Captain Westbrook had fifteen capable electors, and the other fourteen; so that the Report of the Committee was for Westbrook.

Resolved there, that a minor is no good elector. (fn. 20)

The reason was, that he was not fit to dispose of his own estate, therefore not fit to dispose of another's, nor to choose for the whole nation.

Resolved, that a miller is not an inhabitant, unless his family be there.

The principal question was, whether the freeholders that were no inhabitants had votes in the election. Resolved the contrary, and that the bailiff not being a freeholder and inhabitant, had no vote; only by his office was to return.

The Committee sat till ten most assiduously. (fn. 21)

Footnotes

1 William Stene, M.D. member in this Parliament for Thetford.
2 See supra, p. 206.
3 See supra, p. 300.
4 See supra, p. 308.
5 Alderman, and one of the members for the City of London. He is mentioned by Lord Clarendon as commanding the garrison of Abingdon for the Parliament, in 1644. History, (1712,) ii. 526. "I thought it strange," says Oldmixon, "that the Earl always gave 'Major General Brown,' though in the Parliament service, a good word, 'a Citizen of London, (not a woodmonger) ' of good reputation, a stout man.' But I found out the reason of it, when, after the Restoration, he sat on the bench, to judge some of his brother officers to be hanged, drawn, and quartered." See "Clarendon and Whitlock Compared," (1727), p. 165. This is not quite correct. Alderman Brown, who, in 1660, was Lord Mayor elect, appeared, not "on the bench, "but as a witness against his present associate Mr. Scot, nearly to the same purport as Sir Theophilus Biddulph, (supra, p. 110, note.) He had been one of the Long Parliament, and now described himself as "one of those secluded members that were returned again a little before the coming in of his Majesty," See "Tryals of the Regicides," (1739,) p. 74. Alderman Brown, for this good service, was worthily created a Baronet, to grace his mayoralty.
6 See Journals.
7 "How to retrench and lessen the chargeof the Commonwealth, either in bringing in or issuing out the revenues thereof." Ibid.
8 The sole right of peace and war is now considered as the unquestioned prerogative of the crown; though, as to the latter, the executive can only threaten, should the Parliament refuse the necessary supplies. Such, a refusal, from the influence of the crown over the other branches of the legislature, is scarcely to be expected while the system of soi-disant representation (see supra, p. 149, note) shall continue to "work well." This royal prerogative was disputed, at the close of King William's reign, by that able political writer, Charles Davenant, in "An Essay upon the right of. making War, Peace, and Alliances, "in which he appeals, by numerous references, to "those authors who are accounted the fathers of our law." He thus describes the result of his inquiry:— "I cannot find when, or how, this doctrine crept in, that the right of making war and peace is, indefinitely, without any sort of distinction or restriction, vested in the kings of England; but certainly they who advance it, have neither read our histories nor consulted our records. He who makes this search will find them either silent in the point, or laying down maxims quite of another nature." See "Essays upon the Balance of Power, "&c. (1701), pp. 129, 237. For some animadversions on these Essays, see Biog. Brit. (1789), iv. 650.
9 See vol. i. p. 40, note. "Cromwell," says Mr. Bethell, "began his usurpation, upon the greatest advantages imaginable, having it in his power to have made peace and profitable leagues, in what manner he had pleased, with all our neighbours, every one courting us then, and being ambitious of the friendship of England. But he neglected all our golden opportunities, and, contrary to our interest, made an unjust war with Spain and an impolitic league with France, bringing the first, thereby, under, and making, the latter too great for Christendom; and by that means broke the balance betwixt the two crowns of Spain and France, which his predecessors, the Long Parliament, had always wisely preserved." World's Mistake, pp. 32, 33.
10 See vol ii. p. 359, note *. It appears that the celebrated Christina either felt at this time, or at least professed to feel an interest in the fortunes of her cousin, to whom she had resigned the royalty. "From Rome, Dec. 28, 1658. The Queen of Sweden is resolved to return to France. The Pope hath granted a passe for her. She pretends she will goe thence to Holland, to set her helping hand to a peace between the Kings, of Sweden and Denmark; but it is supposed she hath some other designs." Mercurius Politicus, No. 550.
11 There was a statement of "the Issues of England," annexed to "a Brief View of the Public Revenue," presented, to the House, April 7, 1659. The following amount, "by way of estimate, yearly," does not reach half a million:—                                        £.            s.    d.
"For the charge of 7,500 men, to be employed in 50
ships, for a summer's guard, for seven months, at 4l. a
man, per month                                                                         210,000     0     0
"For the charge of 5,250 men, to be employed in 35
ships, for a winter's guard, for seven months, at 4l. a man,
per month                                                                                 147,000     0     0
"For building of ships yearly                                                       40,000     0     0
"In the pay of the Commissioners of the Admiralty,
and the Commissioners of the Navy, and the Treasurer's
of the Navy. [See vol. ii. pp. 396,397, note.]                                 7,744      0     0
"In the pay of the standing officers belonging to the
yards, and of ships in harbours                                                    3,628      6    11
"In the pay of the officers and seamen employed in the
looking-to of ships in docks, and otherwise unemployed             45,613     13    9
"The whole charge of the Navy, by theyear                               453,986       0    7"
Journals. From "a list of the Navy of England, at this time," it appears that there were 8,682 men, in 40 ships. Besides the Naseby of 80 guns, and 500 men, there were 5 of 64, and the rest of various' force, down to 22 guns. Parl. Hist. (1760), xxi. 423.
12 See supra, pp. 170, 171.
13 Henry Vere, temp. James I. See Granger's Biog. Hist. (1775,) i. 324.
14 See vol. ii. p. 435, note *.
15 Among "the Issues of England," (see supra, p. 315, note †), are "in expense of his Highness's household, yearly 100,000l." and "in repair of his Highness's houses, yearly, 5,650l." Journals.
16 Thus the United States avail themselves of an unexpensive Execucutive over their widely extending Republic. Their President's annual salary is considerably less than that paid to the Lord Mayor of London. 135,000l. was, in 1792, the whole annual charge of the fœderal government. It was lately shown by the Honourable Leicester Stanhope, in a debate at the India House, "that each of the twenty-four Directors is in possession of patronage, which would sell in the public market for about five times as much as the President of the United States receives for his services." Oriental Herald, (1827,) xiv. 195. Mr. Thomas Cooper remarks, in 1792, that "the income of his Majesty George III., which has been regarded as not more than necessary for the maintenance of kingly dignity, may be reckoned one way or other, at 1,200,000l. annually." He adds, "that by the 22 Geo. III., 32,955l. is appropriated to pay the salaries of the Lord Chancellor, the Speaker of the House of Commons, and all the Judges of England and Wales, and 89,799l. 0s. 2¼d., to the menial servants of his Majesty's household." See "A Reply to Mr. Burke's Invective," (1792.) pp. 18,19.
17 The following, according to Rot. Parliam. H. 4. n. 17, is part of the ancient form at the coronation:— "Concedis justas leges et consuetudines esse tenendas, et promittis per te eas esse protegendas, et ad honorem Dei corroborandas, quas vulgus elegerit, secundum vires tuas ? "Respondebit. Concede et promitto." See Husband's Collection, (1643,) p. 268. "Leges, quas vulgus; id est," says Milton, "communitas, sive plebeius ordo elegerit. Hanc clausulam, quas vulgus elegerit, Carolus, antequam coronam acceperit, ex formula juramenti regii eradendum curavit." Defensio, (1651,) p. 252. See supra, p. 219, note †; Dr. Harris's Lives, (1814,) ii. 204–206.
18 In this Declaration, dated May 26, 1642, and called "the Third Remonstrance," the two Houses assert "the obligation that lieth upon the kings of this realm, to passe such Bills as are offered to them by both Houses of Parliament—in respect of the oath that is or ought to be taken by the kings of this realm at their coronation, to confirm by their royal assent such good lavs as their people shall choose." They add: "Besides the words in the King's oath, referring unto such laws as the people shall choose, as in such things which concern the public weal and good of the kingdom, they are the most proper judges who are sent from the whole kingdom for that very purpose; so we do not find that since laws have passed by way of bills, that ever the kings of this realm did deny them, otherwise than is expressed, in that usual answer, Le Roy l'avisera, which signifies rather a suspension than. a refusal of the royal assent." Husband, pp. 268, 269. See vol. ii. p. 451, note § Parl, Hist. (1762,) xi. 98,99.
19 Whether the regular borough-market, (see supra, pp. 126, 148, notes), where they have been said to "buy and sell seats in Parliament as openly and notoriously as stalls for cattle at a fair," was now established, does not appear. The use of lettres missives, it seems, was well understood by this "other House." Mr. Bethel also mentions, among "several complaints" of "the Court designs," that "Whitehall had writ eighty letters for the making members of Parliament, many of which had had their effect," Brief Narrative, p. 340. These missives, also, have been since frequently employed to preserve Blackstone's "kind of democracy," among his "three distinct powers." The following letter, addressed by Bishop Compton, in virtue of "the alliance between Church and State," to "the Dutchess of Albemarle, at New Hall, in Essex," I copied from the original in the British Museum. "Madam, Sept; 25. "I am an humble petitioner to you, that when the election of Harwich is decided, you would give my Lord Cheyne leave to take the borough in Cornwall, for his option, and that you would give me leave to recommend another person to your favour. "Were it upon my own account, I should be ashamed to ask this: but it is for the Government and Church's sake that I beg it; for the person I would have in, will be of very great and important use to serve both: and therefore I am sure you will pardon the importunity. "Madam, your Grace's most obedient and obliged servant, "H. London." Bibl. Sloan. (Ayscough, 4052). This interference of a Lord Spiritual, calculated to render the Lower House "more a representation of the Lords than the Commons." might serve to expose, if they were not already so well understood, the good times of William III. The letter was, most probably, written in 1695, when Viscount Cheyne was chosen one of the members for Newport, Cornwall, which borough he had waved in 1690, and sat for Harwich. The Duchess, on whose eccentricities see Mr. Grainger, (Biog. Hist. iv. 157), had married the son of Monk, and thus became a sharer in the father's royal recompense. Monk's biographer, Dr. Skinner, represents this marriage in 1670, as "the last of his human cares;" for "he died four days after." He had, however, accomplished a great achievement, in the estimate of such a mind's ambition. "He united the glories of the ancient houses, of Newcastle and Dorchester, Cavendish and Pierpoint, with his own ducal coronet." Life (1724), pp. 372, 373. To another peeress there was a similar parliamentary application, with very different success. This high-spirited countess, who died in 1676, thus replied to a Secretary of State of Charles II., who requested to nominate a member for Appleby:— "I have been bullied by an usurper, I have been neglected by a court, but I will not be dictated to by a subject; your man shan't stand. "Anne, Dorset, Pembroke and Montgomery." Biog. Brit. (1784), iii. 640. "Dr. Donne," says Mr. Grainger, "speaking of her extensive knowledge, which comprehended whatever was fit to employ a lady's leisure, said, 'that she knew well how to discourse of all things, from predestination to sea-silk.' She was strongly solicited to go to Whitehall after the Restoration, but she declined it, saying,' that if she went thither, she must have a pair of blinkers,' such as obstruct the sight of untractable horses, lest she should see such things as would offend her, in that licentious court. She erected a monument in the highway, where her mother and she took their last farewell, on which spot a sum of money was annually given to the poor." Biog. Hist. (1775), ii. 53, 54.
20 "In Coke 4 Part. Instit., title Parl." MS.
21 It appears by the following passages between General Monk and Secretary Thurloe, that the plotter for Charles Stuart was just now affecting a zealous devotion to the interest of the young Protector:— "Dalkeith, [see vol. i. p. 227], 15th of Feb. 1658–9. "Major Knight is chosen here, and Colonel Fitch in the northern parts, Major Knight will be sent you speedily. I hope such as have been sent from Scotland will be faithful to his Highness. I am very glad to hear things go on so well. I hope that they may be well settled, notwithstanding the diversities of opinions of men. "Feb. 17. As for Judge Advocate Whalley to be chosen for Peblis and Selkirk, there is a Scotch gentleman chosen; but the country will not give him so much money as he expects; and so he is not like to go, but if he should not go up, and that they should choose another, which they cannot do without another writ, I do not doubt to get him chosen." See "Thurloe State Papers," vii. 613, 617. Dr. Price relates, concerning his master, that "Oliver Cromwell, not long before his death, writ once to him with his own hand; and in the letter there was this drolling expression: 'Tis said there is a cunning fellow in Scotland, called George Monk, who lyes in wait there to serve Charles Stuart; pray use your diligence to take him, and send him up to me.' Mystery, p. 12, Maseres's Tracts, pp. 711, 712. See Dr. Skinner, p. 72. A letter written "to General Monk," from "Collen, 12th August, 1655," by Charles Stuart, shows that the royal exile had, even then, good hope of his assistance at the "seasonable opportunity." See "Life of Dr. Barwick," (1724), p. 397. This same day, Feb. 17., "Mr. R. Rookwood," who appears to have been a royal spy, bought off by the judicious application of "secret service money," thus writes to Secretary Thurloe:— "I deliver, enclosed, the character by which Charles Stuart directed me to write weekly to him, and the means to receive letters and money." See "Thurloe State Papers," vii. 617.