MARY. 1553-1558. Loans. Commerce shackled with unconstitutional restrictions. Illegal levy of taxes. Impressment, suggested?-or what is so consistent with the facts which actually existed? 5. Pecuniary Impositions. To satisfy the pecuniary demands of Philip, for purposes utterly foreign from the interests of England, the queen, as parliament seldom granted but a scanty supply, adopted violent and tyrannical expedients to extort money from her industrious subjects. a A loan of 60,000l. was exacted from one thousand persons, on account of their riches and affection to her person; general loan was exacted on every one who possessed 201. per annum; 60,000 marks were levied on 7000 yeomen, who had not contributed to the former loan; the exportation of English cloth for Antwerp fair was prohibited, and not again permitted until the merchants had agreed to pay 60,0007.; and on other occasions embargoes were laid upon shipping, until the owners had agreed to give large sums of money; foreigners were forbidden to export their merchandize, for which iniquity she received 50,000l. from some interested merchants, and an imposition of four crowns on each piece of cloth which they should export; and such was her character, that the city of London were compelled to go security for a loan of 30,000l. to the city of Antwerp'. Although this unprincipled queen was largely indebted to her servants, besides the loans extorted from her subjects, she, to gratify Philip, declared war against France; and in order to support it, continued to levy money in the same arbitrary manner as heretofore. She obliged the city of London to supply her with 60,0007. on her husband's entry; levied before the legal time a second year's subsidy voted by parliament; issued privy seals, by which she procured loans; and after equipping a fleet, seized all the corn in Norfolk and Suffolk without giving remuneration to the owners 3. By these expedients, and by impressment, an army of and the Spanish 10,000 men was levied, and sent over to the Low Countries; and to prevent public remonstrance, some of the most influ mode of arrest. 1 3 Strype's Mem. 428, 558. 2 Burnet, 359. Carte, 330, 333, 337, 341. Godwin, 359. Cowper's Chronicle. 4 Hume, 423, 424. 3 Ibid. 433. 2 Ibid. 432. ential gentry were imprisoned in the Tower, and lest they should be known, the Spanish practice was pursued,—they either were carried thither in the night-time, or were hoodwinked and muffled by the guards who conducted them. 6. Punishment by Torture. MARY. 1553-1558. as a punishment. The torture is more frequently mentioned in this reign, The torture, used than in all former ages of our history put together, and— probably from that imitation of foreign governments, which contributed not a little to deface our constitution in the sixteenth century—seems deliberately to have been introduced as part of the process in those dark and uncontrolled tribunals, which investigated offences against the state'. A commission was issued in 1557, authorising the persons named in it to inquire, by any means they could devise, into charges of heresy or other religious offences, and in some instances to punish the guilty, but in others of a graver nature to remit them to their ordinaries; which seems to have been meant as a preliminary step for the introduction of the Inquisition: and Lord North and others were enjoined, "to put to the torture such obstinate persons as would not confess, and there to order them at their discretion "."" Several of those who suffered death in the sixteenth century, and several also who did not suffer capitally, were, previously to their trials, inhumanly tortured,—by the common "rack," by which their limbs were stretched, by levers, to a length too shocking to mention, beyond the natural measure of their frame; or the "hoop," called the "scavenger's daughter," on which they were placed, and their bodies bent until the head and the feet met; or by confinement in the "little ease," a hole so small that a person could neither stand, sit, nor lie straight in it; the "iron gauntlet," a screw that squeezed the hands until the bones were crushed; by needles thrust under the nails of the sufferers; or by a long deprivation of sustenance. It adds to the atrocity of these inflictions, that in several instances, when the sufferers were put to trial, there was no 43 Strype's Eccl. Mem. 377. 1 Haynes, 195. 2 Burnet, App. 256. 3 Ibid. 243. 1 Hallam's Const. Hist. 57, 201. 2 2 Burnet, 347. 2 Collier, 404. Bartoli, 250, 418. 5 Lingard, 381, 650. 3 3 Burnet, 243, 246, 247. Preliminary troduction of the steps for the in Inquisition. The common daughter, little ease, &c. rack, scavenger's MARY. legal proof established; and in some, not even any legal 1553-1558. evidence offered to substantiate the offence, of which the party was accused'. Death of Mary caused by the contempt of her ability to murder her innocent sister. Mary. Thus was the nation situated, when, happily for the country and herself, this amiable queen fell a victim to bodily disease, husband, and in- and mental inquietude, chiefly arising from the contemptuous neglect with which she was treated by Philip; and inability to gratify her vicious appetites, with the blood of her guiltless The character of sister', leaving a character almost unparalleled in history, for obstinacy, bigotry, violence, cruelty, malignity, revenge, and tyranny; and, as Mr. Turner justly observes, if ever a sovereign has reigned who exhibited the deteriorating and degrading effects of a political priesthood, with persecuting principles, to take the direction of the state government, and to make the mind of the sovereign subservient to the compulsory imposition on others of the religious system, tenets, and speculations which they choose to maintain, Mary is the person,-whose name stands on the rolls of English History, like the Pharos on the dark and dangerous rock, to warn every potentate and country, what must be timely discerned and shunned, if honour, fame, happiness, or national prosperity, be worthy of a king's pursuit, or desirable for his own satisfaction to enjoy. ELIZABETH. SECTION V. ELIZABETH, November 17, A.D. 1558,-March 24, a.d. 1603. 1. Prerogative of the Crown. 4. Administration of Justice. 5. Pecuniary Exactions. 7. Liberty of the Press. 8. Undue Influence exercised over the Boroughs. 9. Privilege of Parliament. 10. The Reformation. 1. Prerogative of the Crown. The prerogative of the crown had been improperly exalted 1558-1603. by the cunning of Henry VII., as well as by the violence of Henry VIII., and from the positions of religious and political factions, Elizabeth was enabled to govern the country, upon * Barrington, 496. 3 Inst. 35. 1 Burnet, 342. Camd. Eliz. 476. Dalrymple's Mem. Great Britain, part ii. p. 128. 1 Butler, 401, 402. 5 5 Noailles, passim. 3 Turn. Hist. Eng. 373. principles, that were utterly inconsistent with those of civil ELIZABETH. liberty1. 1558-1603. the crown pos ing power. Although no subsidies could be raised,-no statute could be Recognition, that binding without parliamentary acquiescence, and that to sessed an enlargconsider of public grievances, and to procure their redress ing and restraineither by law or petition to the crown, were the privileges of the lords and commons, yet in the House of Commons it was acknowledged that the queen inherited both an enlarging and restraining power; by her prerogative she might set at liberty what was restrained by statute or otherwise, and by her prerogative she might restrain what was otherwise at liberty2; that the royal prerogative was not to be canvassed, nor disputed, nor examined3, and did not even admit of any limitation; that absolute princes, such as the sovereigns of England, were a species of divinity'; that it was in vain to attempt tying the queen's hands by laws or statutes, since by means of her dispensing power she could loosen herself at pleasure"; and that even if a clause should be annexed to a statute, excluding her dispensing power, she could first dispense with that clause, and then with the statute". These ignoble avowals, and the fulsome speeches of the commons, in which the queen was flattered in phrases appropriated to the Supreme Being, were not unlike the reasoning of those savages who worship the devil; not because they love him or honour him, or expect any good from him, but that he may do them no hurt. Parliament recognised the queen's title to the crown, enacted punishments for treason and slanderous reports of the queen 10,-and for unlawful and rebellious assemblies11. Tonnage and poundage were given to Elizabeth for life 12,first fruits were re-invested in the crown 13,-a grant of a subsidy and two-fifteenths and a tenth were voted ",-and powers created towards the establishment of ordinances in collegiate churches and schools 15. 1 D'Ewes, 460, 469, 640, 644, 646, 651, 675. Strype's Parker, 125, 126. Stat. 5 Elizabeth, c. 1. 5 Hume, 451-492. 5 Lingard, 206, 622, 624. 2 D'Ewes, 644, 675. 5 Ibid. 649. 6 Ibid. 9 D'Ewes, 654, 656-659. 9 Stat. 1 Elizabeth, c. 3. 10 Stat. 1 Elizabeth, c. 5, 6. 12 Stat. 1 Elizabeth, c. 20. 14 Stat. 1 Elizabeth, c. 21. 3 Ibid. 644, 649. + Ibid. 646, 654. 11 Stat. 1 Elizabeth, c. 16. The cause which mons to flatter the queen with teries. induced the com disgusting flat The recognition of the title of Elizabeth to the crown. 15 Stat. 1 Elizabeth, c. 22. Hume, 9, et seq. ELIZABETH. 1558-1603. The most dangerous attacks on liberty, are those or undermine. 2. Court of Star Chamber. Power, that threatens all alike, is not so much an object of apprehension with any particular class, as that which proceeds from a body but a little removed from itself. The most dangerous attacks on liberty, are those which surprise, or undermine; which are owing to powers given which surprise, under pretence of some urgent necessity; to powers popular and reasonable, perhaps, at first, but such as ought not to become settled and confirmed by long exercise, and yet are rendered perpetual by art and management; and, in a great degree, by the nature of those powers themselves. The Star Cham ber was supported by, and gratified the lower ranks of society. Elizabeth em The Court of Star Chamber, an institution the most despotic, was supported by, and gratified the lower ranks of society during the reigns of Henry VII. and VIII.; because its avowed object was to bring within the sphere of justice, men whose situation raised them above the reach of ordinary jurisdiction, and against whom feelings of the utmost jealousy were entertained. From the transferences of land, increase of commerce, attainders, and forfeitures, the power and rank of the nobility gradually decreased, and in an inverse ratio that of the inferior gentry increased, and the people experienced during the reigns of Elizabeth and James the practical operation of that court, which they had essentially originated', and in the reign of Charles I. they loudly, and successfully, clamoured for its abolition, because it had become equally detrimental to themselves, as it had been to their superiors. Elizabeth employed this court to enforce her proclamations, ployed the court, and orders of state, the perversion of justice, pecuniary exac as an instrument of tyranny. A right claimed to carry into effect the spirit of the existing laws. tions, illegal commissions, grants of monopolies, impressments, and restrictions upon the press, by fines, imprisonments, and corporal severities. 3. Royal Proclamations. The crown claimed a right by proclamation to carry into effect the spirit of existing laws; and if the privy council 1 Anterior to the time of the Tudors, there does not occur, either in any publication or record, so much as the mention of any court called the Court of Star Chamber: and the advocates for its antiquity are obliged to admit, that the few instances referred to by them, in proof of its antiquity, passed under the Council, as it was then called, or, as we should now denominate it, the Privy Council.-1 Brodie, 159. |