1649-1685. CHARLES II. process against Vane and Lambert, and though the convention parliament had refused to except them from the penalty of death, yet, on account of the declaration from Breda, had recommended them to mercy in case of their conviction, which recommendation had been favourably received". Execution of Justification, by Vane, of his conduct. Charles II. declared by the judges to have been a king de facto from the death of his father. They were indicted for overt acts of high treason against Charles II., by their exercise of civil and military functions under the commonwealth; though not, as far as appears, expressly directed against the king's authority, and certainly not against his person'. The question was not whether a right to the crown descended according to the laws of inheritance; but whether such a right, divested of possession, could challenge allegiance as a bounden duty, by the law of England,-but it is clear a king, "that hath right, and is out of possession," is not within the statutes of treasons. Vane urged, in justification of his conduct, that by the statute which rendered the Long Parliament indissoluble without its own consent, the two Houses were raised to a power equal and co-ordinate with that of the king, and possessed a right to restrain oppression and tyranny: by the war which followed between these equal authorities, the people were placed in a new and unprecedented situation, to which the former laws of treason could not apply after the decision by the sword, "a decision given by that God, who, being judge of the whole world, does right, and cannot do otherwise," the parliament became, de facto, in possession of the sovereign authority, and whatever he had done in obedience to that authority was justifiable, by the principles of civil government, and the statute of 11 Henry VII. The judges, however, determined that Charles, in virtue of the succession, had been king de facto, as well as de jure, from the moment of his father's death, though "kept out of the exercise of his royal authority by traitors and rebels:" and as he was the only person then claiming kingly power, he was to be considered as a king in possession, and in the actual exercise of his authority". 6 Com. Journ. Aug. 28, Sept. 5, 1660. 11 Lords' Journ. 156. 7 Lingard, 370. 8 7 2 Hallam's Const. Hist. 440, 441. 3 Inst. 7. Bagot's Case, 9 Edward IV. Constitution. 2 Hallam's Const. Hist. 442. Higden's View of the English 6 State Trials, 119-186. 7 Lingard, 373. 7 Hume, 381. 10 Parliament being determined to immolate a victim, sentence CHARLES II. of death was passed and executed upon Vane; but Lambert 1649-1685. was confined, as a prisoner, in Guernsey, for thirty years 1o,thus affording an additional instance that law, justice, or a sense of honour, are practically held by popular assemblies in utter scorn, where a party object is to be obtained, or where a political enemy is to be butchered. 8. The Corporation Act. Although the courtiers, who were desirous of extending the powers of the crown, were predominant in parliament, yet it was impossible for them to be absolute as long as the presbyterians retained possession of the corporate and borough offices; accordingly the "Corporation Act" was introduced, to eject the latter from such local authority. By that statute, commissioners were appointed, with the power of removing at discretion every individual holding office in or under any corporation in the kingdom; and that all persons retaining their situations should qualify themselves, by renouncing the solemn league and covenant, by taking the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and by declaring upon oath their belief of the unlawfulness of taking up arms against the king on any pretence whatsoever, and their abhorrence of the traitorous doctrine, that arms might be taken up by his authority against his person, or against those that were commissioned by him; and that no future officer should be eligible who had not, within the year preceding his election, taken the sacrament according to the rite of the Church of England. Enactments contained in II. c. 1, sess. 2. Stat. 13 Charles In an abstract sense, this act was most unjust, because its objects of the effect was to destroy the political power of the presbyterians, Corporation Act. who had been instrumental in effecting the Restoration; and by the Act of Uniformity, their ecclesiastical influence was annihilated. municipal insti This statute likewise produced great change in the consti- Alterations tution of many of the boroughs, and vested the municipal effected in the franchises in non-residents, whose rights to exercise either the tutions. parliamentary or municipal franchises, arose from political depravity. 10 Com. Journ. Aug. 28, 1660. 11 Lords' Journ. Sept. 5, 1662. CHARLES II. 1649-1685. Unconstitutional address of the king to parliament, in 1664. Repeal of the 9. The Triennial Act. The absolute notions of the king were exemplified from his conduct in effecting the repeal of the Triennial Act, in which he, in effect, avowed a design forcibly to prevent the execution of the laws'. It was generally thought that no parliament, under that act, could sit for more than three years; but the king, on opening the parliamentary session of 1664, stated that he had often read over that bill, and, though there was no colour for the fancy of the determination of the parliament, yet he would not deny that he had always expected them to consider the wonderful clauses in that bill, which passed in a time very uncareful for the dignity of the crown, or the security of the people. He requested them to look again at it. For himself, he loved parliaments; he was much beholden to them; he did not think the crown could ever be happy without frequent parliaments. "But assure yourselves," he concluded, "if I should think otherwise, I would never suffer a parliament to come together by the means prescribed by that bill." Notwithstanding this language, parliament passed a bill for the repeal of that which had been unanimously enacted, in 1641, as the basis of constitutional monarchy; the preamble reciting, that the Triennial Act was "in derogation of his majesty's just rights and prerogative inherent in the imperial crown of this realm, for the calling and assembling of parliaments3;" and then repeals every clause and article. But the opposition were sufficiently powerful to have a proviso inserted, that parliaments should not, in future, be intermitted for above three years at the most; so that, in principle, the Triennial Act still subsisted, but without security to enforce its observance; and the necessity of such securities was thus evinced, that nearly four years elapsed between the dissolution of Charles's last parliament and his death. 1 Vide ante, 393. 3 Com. Journ. March 28, 1664. c. 1. 2 Hallam's Const. Hist. 448. 2 11 Lords' Journ. 582. Clarendon, 281. Stat. 16 Charles II. 10. Religious Dissensions. CHARLES II. 1649-1685. fined. Christianity is religious virtue,-it is universal love: and Christianity demuch is it to be regretted that it should ever have been made an engine of power,-a banner of popularity, or a badge of party. Bigotry, when associated with politics, as exemplified by Evil effects of the Roman Catholics and the puritans, besides the black sociated with passions to which it directly gives birth, covers with a pre- politics. tended holy garb, even to one's own eyes, the most selfish and malignant; while by shutting against its opponents every avenue of sympathy, the real source of moral feeling, it stifles the voice of conscience, and, by gaining the support of a faction, kindles indignation against public reproach, that would otherwise humble the guilty under its lash. Last exhortation of Charles I. to his son, respecting the English Catholic church. One of the last acts of Charles I. was to address the following exhortation to his son, and which contains an accurate view of the English Catholic church, and of the constitutional loyalty of its members. "If you never see my face again, and God will have me buried in such a barbarous imprisonment and obscurity, wherein few hearts that love me are permitted to exchange a word or a look with me, I do require and entreat you, as your father and your king, that you never suffer your heart to receive the least check against, or disaffection from, the true religion established in the church of England. I tell you I have tried it, and after much search and many disputes, have concluded it to be the best in the world, not only in the community as Christian, but also in the special notion as reformed; keeping the middle way The Anglican between the pomp of superstitious tyranny, and the meanness church is beof fantastic anarchy. . Not but that the draught tious tyranny, being excellent as to the main, both for doctrine and govern- ness of fantastic ment in the Church of England, some lines, as in very good anarchy. figures, may haply need some correcting and polishing; which might here easily have been done by a safe and gentle hand, if some men's precipitancy had not violently demanded such rude alterations as would have quite destroyed all the beauty and proportions of the whole. The scandal of the late troubles, which some may object and urge to you against the Protestant religion established in England, is easily answered to them, or your own thoughts, in this,-that scarce any one who hath been a beginner, or an active persecutor, of tween supersti and the mean CHARLES II. 1649-1685. The nation divided into three religious parties. Liberty of conscience promised in the declaration of Charles II. from Breda. Proposed restoration of rights to the ministers church. this late war against the church, the laws, and me, either was, or is, a true lover, embracer, or practiser of the Protestant religion established in England, which neither gives such rules, nor ever before set such examples 1." יי When the restoration of Charles II. occurred, the nation were divided into three religious parties; viz., the members of the English Catholic church, the Roman Catholics, and the dissenters, comprising the presbyterians, the independents, and the anabaptists. Charles, in his declaration from Breda, had promised to grant liberty of conscience, so that "no man shall be disquieted or called in question for differences of opinion in matters of religion, which do not disturb the peace of the kingdom; and that we shall be ready to consent to such an act of parliament as, upon mature deliberation, shall be offered to us for the full granting that indulgence,"—but no allusion was made to the church establishment. The ejected ministers of the Anglican church, who had endured, for their attachment to its discipline and to the of the Anglican crown, so many years of poverty and privation, had a just claim to be restored to their original rights: and the commons, previous to the advent of Charles, prepared a bill of confirmation and restoration, with the two-fold object of replacing in their benefices, but without their legal right to the intermediate profits, the episcopal clergy, who, by ejection or forced surrender, had made way for intruders; and at the same time of establishing the possession, though originally usurped, of those against whom there was no claimant living to dispute it, as well as of those who had been presented on legal vacancies*, -so that an usurped possession was confirmed where the lawful incumbent was dead". This Act of Conciliation gave great offence to the Anglican church, whose just suspicions of the presbyterians and other sects, as regarded the supremacy of the Anglican church, had in no ways relaxed; but the king was obliged to pursue a course of hypocritical and expediential policy, in order to make, if possible, both parties his adherents,-as it was impossible for Charles directly to expel the presbyterians without being guilty of ingratitude, as they had zealously exerted themselves to procure his restoration, (and, which perhaps 1 Southey's Book of the Church, 510, 511. 211 Lords' Journ. 7, 10. 3 Stat. 12 Charles II. c. 17. 2 Hallam's Const. Hist. 430, 431. |