sent up for their concurrence, on the supposition, that those were matters concerning money, the peculiar province of the lower house: the lords ordered a minute inquiry to be made into all the rolls of parliament since the reign of Henry the Seventh; and a great number of instances were found, in which the lords had begun the clauses imposing fines and penalties, altered the penalties which had been fixed by the commons, and even changed the uses to which they were applied, these precedents were entered into the book: but the commons resolved to maintain their point without engaging in any dispute upon the subject. After warm debates, and a free conference between the two houses, the lords adhered to their amendments, though this resolution was carried by a majority of one vote only: the commons persisted in rejecting them; the bill miscarried, and both houses published their proceedings by way of appeal to the nation. A bill was now brought into the lower house, granting another year's consideration to those who had not taken the oath abjuring the pretended prince of Wales. The lords added three clauses, importing, that those persons who should take the oath within the limited time might return to their benefices and employments, unless they should be already legally filled; that any person endeavouring to defeat the succession to the crown, as now limited by law, should be deemed guilty of high treason: and that the oath of abjuration should be imposed upon the subjects in Ireland. The commons made some opposition to the first clause; but, at length, the question being put, whether they should agree to the amendments, it was carried in the affirmative by one voice.

§ XXVIII. No object engrossed more time, or produced more violent debates, than did the inquiry into the public accounts. The commissioners appointed for this purpose pretended to have made great discoveries. They charged the earl of Ranelagh, paymaster general of the army, with flagrant mismanagement. He acquitted himself

d While this bill was depending, Daniel de Foe published a pamphlet entitled, "The Shortest Way with the Dissenters; or Proposals for the Establishment of the Church" The piece was a severe satire on the violence of the church party; The commons ordered it to be burned by the hands of the common hangman, and the author to be prosecuted. He was accordingly committed to Newgate, tried, condemned to pay a fine of two hundred pounds, and stand in the pillory.

in such a manner as screened him from all severity of punish ment: nevertheless, they expelled him from the house for a high crime and misdemeanor, in misapplying several sums of the public money; and he thought proper to resign his employment. A long address was prepared and presented to the queen, attributing the national debt to mismanagement of the funds; complaining that the old methods of the exchequer had been neglected; and that iniquitous frauds had been committed by the commissioners of the prizes. Previous to this remonstrance, the house, in con sequence of the report of the committee, had passed several severe resolutions, particularly against Charles lord Halifax, auditor of the receipt of the exchequer, as having neglected his duty, and been guilty of a breach of trust. For these reasons, they actually besought the queen, in an address, that she would give directions to the attorney general to prosecute him for the said offences; and she promised to comply with their request. On the other hand, the lords appointed a committee to examine all the observations which the commissioners of accounts had offered to both houses. They ascribed the national debt to deficiencies in the funds they acquitted lord Halifax, the lords of the treasury, and their officers, whom the commons had accused; and represented these circumstances in an address to the queen, which was afterwards printed with the vouchers to every particular. This difference blew up a fierce flame of discord between the two houses, which manifested their mutual animosity in speeches, votes, resolutions, and conferences. The commons affirmed, that no cognisance the lords could take of the public accounts would enable them to supply any deficiency, or appropriate any surplusage of the public money; that they could neither acquit nor condemn any person whatsoever, upon any inquiry arising originally in their own house; and that their attempt to acquit Charles lord Halifax was unparliamentary. The lords insisted upon their right to take cognisance originally of all public accounts they affirmed, that in their resolutions, with respect to lord Halifax, they had proceeded according to the rules of justice. They owned, however, that their resolutions did not amount to any judgment or acquittal; but that finding a vote of the commons reflected upon a member of their

house, they thought fit to give their opinion in their legislative capacity. The queen interposed by a message to the lords, desiring they would despatch the business in which they were engaged. The dispute continued even after this intimation: one conference was held after another, till at length both sides despaired of an accommodation. The lords ordered their proceedings to be printed, and the commons followed their example. On the twenty-seventh day of February the queen, having passed all the bills that were ready for the royal assent, ordered the lord keeper to prorogue the parliament, after having pronounced a speech, in the usual style. She thanked them for their zeal, affection, and despatch; declared, she would encourage and maintain the church as by law established; desired they would consider some further laws for restraining the greatlicense assumed for publishing scandalous pamphlets and libels; and assured them, that all her share of the prizes which might be taken in the war should be applied to the public service. By this time the earl of Rochester was entirely removed from the queen's counsels. Finding himself outweighed by the interest of the duke of Marlborough and lord Godolphin, he had become sullen and intractable; and, rather than repair to his government of Ireland, chose to resign the office, which, as we have already observed, was conferred upon the duke of Ormond, an accomplished nobleman, who had acquired great popularity by the success of the expedition to Vigo. The parties in the house of lords were so nearly matched, that the queen, in order to ascertain an undoubted majority in the next session, created four new peers, who had signalized themselves by the violence of their speeches in the house of commons.

§ XXIX. The two houses of convocation, which were summoned with the parliament, bore a strong affinity with this assembly, by the different interests that prevailed in the upper and lower. The last, in imitation of the commons,

e These were John Granville, created baron Granville of Potheridge in the county of Devon: Heneage Finch, baron of Guernsey in the county of Southampton sir John Leveson Gower, baron Gower of Sittenham in Yorkshire; and Francis Seymour Conway, youngest son of sir Edward Seymour, made baron Conway of Ragley in the county of Warwick. At the same time, however, John Harvey, of the opposite faction, was created baron of Iekworth in the county of Suffolk; and the marquis of Normandy was honoured with the title of duke of Buckinghamshire.

was desirous of branding the preceding reign; and it was with great difficulty that they concurred with the prelates in an address of congratulation to her majesty. Then their former contest was revived. The lower house desired, in an application to the archbishop of Canterbury and his suffragans, that the matters in dispute concerning the manner of synodical proceedings, and the right of the lower house to hold intermediate assemblies, might be taken into consideration, and speedily determined. The bishops proposed, that in the intervals of sessions, the lower house might appoint committees to prepare matters; and when business should be brought regularly before them, the archbishop would regulate the prorogations in such a manner, that they should have sufficient time to sit and deliberate on the subject. This offer did not satisfy the lower house, which was emboldened to persist in its demand by a vote of the commons. These, in consequence of an address of thanks from the clergy, touching Mr. Lloyd, son to the bishop of Worcester, whom they ordered to be prosecuted after his privilege as a member of the convocation should be expired, had resolved, that they would on all occasions assert the just rights and privileges of the lower house of convocation. The prelates refused to depart from the archbishop's right of proroguing the whole convocation with consent of his suffragans. The lower house proposed to refer the controversy to the queen's decision. The bishops declined this expedient, as inconsistent with the episcopal authority, and the presidence of the archbishop. The lower house having incurred the imputation of favouring presbytery, by this opposition to the bishops, entered in their books a declaration, acknowledging the order of bishops, as superior to presbyters, and to be a divine apostolical institution. Then they desired the bishops, in an address, to concur in settling the doctrine of the divine apostolical right of episcopacy, that it might be a standing rule of the church. They likewise presented a petition to the queen, complaining, that in the convocation called in the year 1700, after an interruption of ten years, several questions having arisen concerning the rights and liberties of the lower house, the bishops had refused a verbal conference; and afterwards declined a proposal to submit the dispute to her majesty's determi

nation: they, therefore fled for protection to her majesty, begging she would call the question into her own royal audience. The queen promised to consider their petition, which was supported by the earl of Nottingham; and or dered their counsel to examine the affair; how it consisted with law and custom. Whether their report was unfavourable to the lower house, or the queen was unwilling to en-, courage the division, no other answer was made to their address. The archbishop replied to their request presented to the upper house, concerning the divine right of presbytery, that the preface to the form of ordination contained a declaration of three orders of ministers from the times of the apostles; namely, bishops, priests, and deacons, to which they had subscribed: but he and his brethren conceived, that, without a royal license, they had not authority to attempt, enact, promulge, or execute any canon, which should concern either doctrine or discipline. The lower house answered this declaration in very petulant terms; and the dispute subsisted when the parliament was prorogued. But these contests produced divisions through the whole body of the clergy, who ranged themselves in different factions, distinguished by the names of high church and low church. The first consisted of ecclesiastical tories; the other included those who professed revolution principles, and recommended moderation towards the dissenters. The high church party reproached the other as timeservers, and presbyterians in disguise; and were in their turn, stigmatized as the friends and abettors of tyranny and persecution. At present, however, the tories both in church and state triumphed in the favour of their sovereign. The right of parliaments, the memory of the late king, and even the act limiting the succession of the house of Hanover, became the subjects of ridicule. The queen was flattered as possessor of the prerogatives of the ancient monarchy: the history written by her grandfather, the earl of Clarendon, was now for the first time published, to inculcate the principles of obedience, and inspire the people with an abhorrence of opposition to an anointed sovereign. Her majesty's hereditary right was deduced from Edward the confessor, and, as heir of his pretended sanctity and virtue, she was perVOL. I. Ggg