JAMES II. 1685-1689. All arts were used to obtain such returns as would form a parliament to the king's mind, and complaints were transmitted from all parts of England of the injustice and violence used in the elections, beyond what had ever been practised in mentary elective former times. The parliament was assembled on the 19th of May, 1685, and the foregoing "methods were so successful, that when the members were all returned, the king said there were not above forty members but such as he wished;"-in truth, most of them were furious and violent courtiers, and seemed resolved to recommend themselves to the king by putting everything in his power. This gave all thinking men a melancholy prospect. Interference with the parlia franchise. "All people saw the way for packing a parliament. A Character of the new set of charters and corporation men, if those now named first parliament. should not continue to be compliant, was a certain remedy to which recourse might be had. Of this parliament it was said, that in all England, it would not have been easy to find five hundred so weak, so poor, and so devoted to the court as those were." The king, on the meeting of parliament, repeated the declaration which he had made to the privy council, of governing according to the laws, and preserving the established religion, and stated his expectation, that they would settle on him for life the revenue which had been enjoyed by his brother. "I might use many arguments," said he, "to enforce this demand; the benefit of trade, the support of the navy,-the necessities of the crown,-and the well being of the government itself, which I must not suffer to be precarious. But I am confident, that your own consideration and your sense of what is just and reasonable, will suggest to you whatever on this occasion might be enlarged upon. There is, indeed, one popular argument," added he, "which may be urged against compliance with my demand: men may think that by feeding me from time to time with such supplies as they think convenient, they will better secure frequent meetings of parliament: but as this is the first time I speak to you from the throne, I must plainly tell you, that such an expedient would be very improper to employ with me, and that the best to engage me to meet you often, is always to use me well." 14 Lords' Journ. 9. 8 Hume, 220, 221. way The king's threat trary powers. to assume arbi JAMES II. 1685-1689. Power is to be watched in its first encroach ments, and nothing is gained This can only be considered as a public manifestation of contempt for the laws, a threat to assume arbitrary power, and an attempt to intimidate all oppositionists;-but for such a "gracious disposition," the members of that degraded House of Commons, rent the air with their sycophantic yells3,—and more fully to evince their gratitude, abstained from any complaint as to the king's illegal exaction of duties, and his pecuniary wishes were complied with to a greater extent than he had required*. It might be urged that the commons were desirous of conciliating their new sovereign', but it should have been remembered, that power is to be watched in its very first by timidity and encroachments, and that nothing is gained by timidity and submission; that every concession adds new force to usurpation; and, at the same time, by discovering a dastardly spirit, inspires the enemy with new courage and enterprise. submission. A supply required, to support a standing army. The ill success which had attended the rebellion of Monmouth, inspired the king with boldness to pursue his vile machinations :-accordingly parliament was summoned, in order to acquire its consent to the establishment of a standing army, the employment of Roman Catholic officers',-and a repeal of the Habeas Corpus Act". From the employment of Roman Catholic officers in the army, the suspicions of his intentions to subvert the established religion, excited universal fears, and the commons were called upon by their constituents, to support the constitution". The king acquainted the two Houses, that the militia, which had formerly been so much magnified, was now found, by experience in the last rebellion, to be altogether useless; and he required a new supply, in order to maintain those additional forces which he had levied. He also took notice, that he had employed a great many Catholic officers, and that he had, in their favour, dispensed with the law, requiring the "test" to be taken, by every one that possessed any public office and to cut short all opposition, he declared, that, having reaped the benefit of their service during such times 33 Evelyn, 159. 58 Hume, 221, 222. 7 8 Lingard, 352. 8 14 Lords' Journ. 21, 44, 65. Lonsdale, 64. • Lonsdale's Memoirs, 13. Reresby, 110. Dalrymple, 166, 170, 171, 177. Barillon, in Fox, App. 93, 127. 8 Lingard, 353. • Barillon, in Fox, 132, 135. 3 Burnet, 81. of danger, he was determined, neither to expose them afterwards to disgrace, nor himself, in case of another rebellion, to the want of their assistance 10. The House of Commons considered the speech by paragraphs, and resolved to grant a supply; but at the same time, that they might mark their disapprobation of the measure suggested by the king, accompanied it with a bill for the improvement of the militia. Instead of assenting to his proposal in favour of the Roman Catholic officers, they promised to relieve them from the penalties by a bill of indemnity, and prayed him, since to keep them in employment was to dispense with the law without authority of parliament, to give such orders for their discharge as might remove all apprehension and jealousy from the hearts of his faithful subjects. Before this address was presented, 700,000l. was voted as a present supply. The king, when the address was presented, denied its prayer with intemperate language; the commons, with a vile spirit, submissively proceeded to the consideration of the supply, and established funds for its payment". JAMES II. 1685 1689. Parliament request the disCatholic officers. charge of Roman tyranny of the crown. The lords then commenced an opposition to the measures Opposition by of the crown, the Bishop of London successfully moving the the lords to the appointment of a day for taking the king's speech into consideration; but such was the disappointment and vexation of the king, that he prorogued the parliament; and when he found, by private "closetings," it was impossible to make them his instruments, for the destruction of the church, they were dissolved; and a universal belief was then engendered, he meant to govern the country without parliaments 12. 3. Prerogative of "Dispensation." James being determined to rely upon his prerogative of "dispensation," patents under the great seal were issued, discharging the Roman Catholic officers in the army, from the penalties to which they were liable, by Stat. 25 Charles II. c. 2, 10 8 Hume, 239. 11 Com. Journ. Nov. 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 20, 1685. 129-141, 146. Reresby, 215-220. 3 Burnet, 85. Parl. Hist. 1367–1368. Barillon, in Fox, 12 14 Lords' Journ. 88. Reresby, 220, 222. 3 Burnet, 85. Dalrymple, 172. 8 Lingard, 360. JAMES II. 1685-1689. Tampering with the judges. Dispensing powers of the crown. The Anglican and enabling them to hold their commissions, "any clause in any act of parliament notwithstanding. As it was requisite to have a legal decision upon the question, the judges were privately consulted, who having, with the exception of four, who were immediately dismissed from office, held the legality of the dispensation, upon the principle that the kings of England were sovereign princes; that the laws of England were the king's laws, and that it was consequently an inseparable prerogative of the crown, to dispense with penal laws in particular cases, and upon necessary occasions, of which necessities and reasons it was the sole judge. A "mock trial" for penalties was had against one of the Roman Catholic officers, and the prerogative publicly allowed'. Although the king could not dispense with the common law, nor with any statute prohibiting that which was malum in se, nor with any right or interest of a private person or corporation, it is questionable whether James did not pos sess the power of dispensation under other circumstances, and which had been claimed and exercised by his predecessors', and parliament had recognised this power, when they enacted the law against aliens in the reign of Henry V., and also when they passed the Statute of Provisors; but it is equally clear that such a power was subversive of the principle upon which legislative authority is established. TheTest Act," which was now rendered ineffectual, had ever been conceived the great barrier of the established religion under a popish successor: as such it had been insisted on by the parliament; as such, granted by the king; as such, during the debates with regard to the exclusion, recommended by the chancellor',—and the people justly thought, that the power of dispensation ought no longer to be entrusted to the crown. The clergy having declaimed against the erroneous doctrines clergy silenced. imputed to the Church of Rome, and having exhorted their hearers, in warm language, to a steadfast adhesion to the reformed faith, were ordered by the king, in virtue of his 1 Barillon, Jan. 10, Feb. 25, April 25, May 2, 1687. 8 Lingard, 372. 12 Rep. 18. 2 7 Parl. Hist. 132. 11 State Trials, 1165-1199. 7 State Trials, 205. State Trials, 171. 12 Rep. 18. 7 Rep. 1-28. Vide etiam Treatises of Sir Edward Herbert, Sir Robert Atkins, and Mr. Atwood. Rot. Parl. 1 Henry V. n. xv. • Ibid. xxii. 5 8 Hume, 248. 6 1 Ellis's Corresp. 3, 6. Reresby, 226. 3 Evelyn, 199. 1685-1689. ecclesiastical supremacy, to lay aside questions of controversy, JAMES II. and to confine their discourses to subjects of moral divinity and of a holy life. The Dean of Norwich having disobeyed such injunctions, the Bishop of London received orders to suspend him, but his lordship only advised him to remain silent until the king was satisfied with the propriety of his conduct. This disobedience to the royal mandate, served as a pretext for an Ecclesiastical Commission. Disobedience to the royal manBishop of Lon date, by the don. 4. The Ecclesiastical Commission. authority that By Stat. 1 Elizabeth, c. 1, the crown had power to appoint Ecclesiastical persons to exercise its ecclesiastical authority, and to visit, was granted to redress, correct, and amend all errors, schisms, offences, con- Elizabeth. tempts, and enormities, which by any manner of ecclesiastical power, could be lawfully redressed, corrected, and amended. By 16 Charles I. c. 11, the clause granting that power was Stat. 16 repealed, and all letters patent, erecting new courts, similar Charles I. c. 11. to the High Commission Court; and all powers and authorities granted thereby, were declared utterly void and of no effect. But the 13 Charles II. c. 12, while it put down the stat. 13 High Commission Court, with its extraordinary powers of Charles II. c. 12. imposing fines, committing to prison and tendering the oath, ex officio, preserved to the spiritual courts the exercise of their ordinary jurisdiction; and to the crown, that of its ordinary supremacy. The king, after a consultation with the judges, was by them advised to appoint a standing Court of Delegates, with ordinary powers to hear and determine ecclesiastical causes, and to pronounce on offenders ecclesiastical censures. Ecclesiastical But a commission was appointed, by which seven commis- Appointment of sioners were vested with full and unlimited authority over the Church of England. On them were bestowed the same by James II. inquisitorial powers, possessed by the former Court of High Commission': they might proceed upon bare suspicion; and the better to set the law at defiance, it was expressly inserted in their patent, that they were to exercise their jurisdiction, any law or statute to the contrary. The king's design 1 11 State Trials, 1132. Ralph, 929. Vide ante, 393, 442. |