The History of England - Vols. 1 to 6 (432 page)
Read The History of England - Vols. 1 to 6 Online
Authors: David Hume
But, here it is observable, that the wisdom of the English constitution, or rather the concurrence of accidents, has provided, in different periods, certain irregular checks to this privilege of parliament, and thereby maintained, in some tolerable measure, the dignity and authority of the crown.
In the ancient constitution, before the beginning of the seventeenth century, the meetings of parliament were precarious and were not frequent. The sessions were short; and the members had no leisure, either to get acquainted with each other, or PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)
403
http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/792
Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 5
with public business. The ignorance of the age made men more submissive to that authority which governed them. And above all, the large demesnes of the crown, with the small expence of government during that period, rendered the prince almost independent, and taught the parliament to preserve great submission and duty towards him.
In our present constitution, many accidents, which have rendered governments, every where, as well as in Great Britain, much more burthensome than formerly, have thrown into the hands of the crown the disposal of a large revenue, and have enabled the king, by the private interest and ambition of the members, to restrain the public interest and ambition of the body. While the opposition (for we must still have an opposition, open or disguised) endeavours to draw every branch of administration under the cognizance of parliament, the courtiers reserve a part to the disposal of the crown; and the royal prerogative, though deprived of its ancient powers, still maintains a due weight in the balance of the constitution.
It was the fate of the house of Stuart to govern England at a period, when the former source of authority was already much diminished, and before the latter began to show in any tolerable abundance. Without a regular and fixed foundation, the throne perpetually tottered; and the prince sat upon it anxiously and precariously. Every expedient, used by James and Charles, in order to support their dignity, we have seen, attended with sensible inconveniences. The majesty of the crown, derived from ancient powers and prerogatives, procured respect; and checked the approaches of insolent intruders: But it begat in the king so high an idea of his own rank and station, as made him incapable of stooping to popular courses, or submitting, in any degree, to the controul of parliament. The alliance with the hierarchy strengthened law by the sanction of religion: But it enraged the puritanical party, and exposed the prince to the attacks of enemies, numerous, violent, and implacable. The memory too of these two kings, from like causes, has been attended, in some degree, with the same infelicity, which pursued them during the whole course of their lives.
Though it must be confessed, that their skill in government was not proportioned to the extreme delicacy of their situation; a sufficient indulgence has not been given them, and all the blame, by several historians, has been unjustly thrown on
their
side.
Their violations of law, particularly those of Charles, are, in some few instances, transgressions of a plain limit, which was marked out to royal authority. But the encroachments of the commons, though, in the beginning, less positive and determinate, are no less discernible by good judges, and were equally capable of destroying the just balance of the constitution. While they exercised the powers, transmitted to them, in a manner more independent, and less compliant, than had ever before been practised; the kings were, perhaps imprudently, but, as they imagined, from necessity, tempted to assume powers, which had scarcely ever been exercised, or had been exercised in a different manner, by the crown. And from the shock of these opposite pretensions, together with religious controversy, arose all the factions, convulsions, and disorders, which attended that period.
This Note was, in the first editions, a part of the text.
PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)
404
http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/792
Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 5
[m]Rush. vol. iii. p. 1216. May, p. 63.
[n]Rush. vol. iii. p. 1173, 1182, 1184, 1199, 1200, 1203, 1204.
[u]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 146. Rush. vol. iii. p. 1260. May, p. 66. Warwick, p. 151.
[y]Rush. vol. iii. p. 1190, 1191, 1192, &c. May, p. 64.
[a]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 154. Rush. vol. iii. p. 1275.
PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)
405
http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/792
Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 5
[i]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 177. Whitlocke, p. 38. Rushworth, vol. iii. p. 1365.
[k]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 177. Whitlocke, p. 38. Rushworth, vol. i. p. 129. 136.
[m]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 178. Whitlocke, p. 37.
[s]An act of parliament, 25 Hen. VIII. cap. 19. allowed the convocation with the
king’s consent to make canons. By the famous act of submission to that prince, the clergy bound themselves to enact no canons without the king’s consent. The parliament was never mentioned nor thought of. Such pretensions as the commons advanced at present, would, in any former age, have been deemed strange usurpations.
[t]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 206. Whitlocke, p. 37. Rush. vol. v. p. 235. 359. Nalson, vol. i.
p. 807.
[u]Lord Clarendon says it was entirely new; but there are instances of it in the reign of
Elizabeth. D’Ewes. p. 296, 352. There are also instances in the reign of James.
[x]Nalson, vol. i. p. 783. May, p. 79.
[y]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 199, 200, &c. Nalson, vol. i. p. 570. May, p. 80.
[z]Rush. vol. v. p. 228. Nalson, vol. i. p. 800.
[a]Dugdale. Clarendon, vol. i. p. 203.
[c]Published on dissolving the third parliament. See Parl. Hist. vol. viii. p. 347.
[d]Rushworth, vol. iii. p. 1295.
[e]It appears, that a subsidy was now fallen to 50,000 pounds.
PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)
406
http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/792
Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 5
[h]Nalson, vol. i. p. 530, 533.
[k]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 203. Whitlocke, p. 37. Nalson, vol. i. p. 666.
[r]Parl. Hist. vol. vii. p. 282. Rushworth, vol. v. p. 209.
[s]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 199. Whitlocke, p. 122. May, p. 81.
[t]Lord Clarendon, vol. i. p. 233, says, that the parliamentary party were not agreed
about the entire abolition of episcopacy: They were only the
root and branch men,
as they were called, who insisted on that measure. But those who were willing to retain bishops, insisted on reducing their authority to a low ebb; as well as on abolishing the ceremonies of worship and vestments of the clergy. The controversy, therefore between the parties was almost wholly theological, and that of the most frivolous and ridiculous kind.
[w]Idem, ibid. p. 158, 159. Nalson, vol. i. p. 739.
[x]Rushworth, vol. v. p. 166. Nalson, vol. i. p. 749.
[y]It is now known from the Clarendon papers, that the king had also an authorized
agent who resided at Rome. His name was Bret, and his chief business was to negociate with the pope concerning indulgences to the catholics, and to engage the catholics in return to be good and loyal subjects. But this whole matter, though very innocent, was most carefully kept secret. The king says, that he believed Bret to be as much his as any papist could be. See p. 348, 354.
[a]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 249. Rushworth, vol. v. p. 57.
PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)
407
http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/792
Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 5
[c]It appears not, that the commons, though now entirely masters, abolished the new
impositions of James, against which they had formerly so loudly complained: A certain proof that the rates of customs, settled by that prince, were in most instances just, and proportioned to the new price of commodities. They seem rather to have been low. See Journ. 10th Aug. 1625.
[d]It was an instruction given by the house to the committee which framed one of
these bills, to take care that the rates upon exportation may be as light as possible; and upon importation as heavy as trade will bear: A proof that the nature of commerce began now to be understood. Journ. 1 June, 1641.
[f]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 209. Whitlocke, p. 39. Rushworth, vol. v. p. 189.
[i]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 210, 211.
[r]Whitlocke, p. 40. Rush. vol. iv. p. 41. May, p. 90.
[s]Rushworth, vol. iv. p. 145.
[t]Rush. vol. iv. p. 120, 247. Warwick, p. 115.
PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)
408
http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/792
Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 5
[c]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 223, 229, 230, &c. Whitlocke, p. 41. May, p. 93.
[d]Rushworth, vol. iv. p. 560.
[g]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 232, 256. Rush. vol v. p. 248, 1279.
[i]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 247. Whitlocke, p. 43.
[m]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 252. Rush. vol. v. p. 241. Warwick, p. 180.
[n]Dugdale, p. 69. Franklyn, p. 901.
[s]Ibid. p. 257. Warwick, p. 160.
[t]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 258. Rush. vol. v. p. 251.
[u]Whitlocke, p. 44. Franklyn, p. 896.
[NOTE [X]]
Mr. Carte, in his life of the duke of Ormond, has given us some evidence to prove, that this letter was intirely a forgery of the popular leaders, in order to induce the king to sacrifice Strafford. He tells us, that Strafford said so to his son, the night before his execution. But there are some reasons, why I adhere to the common way of telling this story. 1. The account of the forgery comes through several hands, PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)
409
http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/792
Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 5
and from men of characters not fully known to the public. A circumstance which weakens every evidence. It is a hearsay of a hearsay. 2. It seems impossible, but young Lord Strafford must inform the king, who would not have failed to trace the forgery, and expose his enemies to their merited infamy. 3. It is not to be conceived but Clarendon and Whitlocke, not to mention others, must have heard of the matter. 4.
Sir George Ratcliffe, in his life of Strafford, tells the story the same way that Clarendon and Whitlocke do. Would he also, who was Strafford’s intimate friend, never have heard of the forgery? It is remarkable, that his life is dedicated or addressed to young Strafford. Would not he have put Sir George right in so material and interesting a fact?
[x]Clarendon, vol. i. p. 261, 262. Rushworth, vol. v. p. 264.
[NOTE [Y]]
What made this bill appear of less consequence was, that the parliament voted tonnage and poundage for no longer a period than two months: And as that branch was more than half of the revenue, and the government could not possibly subsist without it; it seemed indirectly in the power of the parliament to continue themselves as long as they pleased. This indeed was true in the ordinary administration of government: But on the approaches towards a civil war, which was not then foreseen, it had been of great consequence to the king to have reserved the right of dissolution, and to have endured any extremity rather than allow the continuance of the parliament.
