now see it has been attended with none of the calamities that were prognosticated; that it quietly took effect, and fully answered all the purposes for which it was intended. Hence we may learn, that many great difficulties are surmounted, because they are not seen by those who direct the execution of any great project; and that many schemes, which theory deems impracticable, will yet succeed in the experiment.

§ XI. The English parliament assembling on the third day of December, the queen, in her speech to both houses, congratulated them on the glorious successes of her arms. She desired the commons would grant such supplies as might enable her to improve the advantages of this successful campaign. She told them that the treaty of union, as concluded by the commissioners of both kingdoms, was at that time under the consideration of the Scottish parliament; and she recommended despatch in the public affairs, that both friends and enemies might be convinced of the firmness and vigour of their proceedings. The parliament was perfectly well disposed to comply with all her majesty's requests. Warm addresses were presented by both houses, Then they proceeded to the consideration of the supply, and having examined the estimates in less than a week, voted near six millions for the service of the ensuing year. Nevertheless, in examining the accounts, some objections arose. They found that the extraordinary supplies for the support of king Charles of Spain, amounted to eight hundred thousand pounds more than the sums provided by parliament, Some members argued that very ill consequences might ensue, if a ministry could thus run the nation in debt, and expect the parliament should pay the money. The courtiers answered, that if any thing had been raised without necessity, or ill applied, it was reasonable that those who were in fault should be punished: but, as this expense was incurred to improve advantages, at a time when the occasion could not be communicated to parliament, the ministry was rather to be applauded for their zeal, than condemned for their liberality. The question being put, the majority voted that those sums had been expended for the preservation of the duke of Savoy, for the interest of king Charles against the common enemy, and for the safety

and honour of the nation. When the speaker presented the money bills, he told her that as the glorious victory obtained by the duke of Marlborough at Ramillies, was fought before it could be supposed the armies were in the field, so it was no less surprising that the commons had granted supplies to her majesty before the enemy could well know that the parliament was sitting. The general was

again honoured with the thanks of both houses. The lords in an address, besought the queen to settle his honours on his posterity. An act, was passed for this purpose: and in pursuance of another address from the commons, a pension of five thousand pounds out of the postoffice was settled upon him and his descendents. The lords and commons having adjourned themselves to the last day of December, the queen closed the year with triumphal processions. As the standards and colours taken at Blenheim had been placed in Westminster hall, so now those that had been brought from the field of Ramillies were put up in Guildhall, as trophies of that victory. About this time, the earls of Kent, Lindsey, and Kingston, were raised to the rank of marquises. The lords Wharton, Paulet, Godolphin, and Cholmondeley, were created earls. Lord Walden, son and heir apparent to the earl of Suffolk, obtained the title of earl of Bindon: the lord keeper Cowper, and sir Thomas Pelham were ennobled as barons.

XII. The parliament being assembled after their short recess, the earl of Nottingham moved for an address to the queen, desiring her majesty would order the proceedings of the commissioners for the union, as well as those of the Scottish parliament on the said subject, to be laid before them. He was seconded by the duke of Buckingham and the earl of Rochester; and answered by the earl of Godolphin, who told them they needed not doubt but that her majesty would communicate those proceedings, as soon as the Scottish parliament should have discussed the subject of the union. The lords Wharton, Somers, and Halifax observed, that it was for the honour of the nation that the treaty of union should first come ratified from the parliament of Scotland; and that then, and not before, it would be a proper time for the lords to take it into consideration. On the twenty-eighth day of January, the queen in person

told both houses, that the treaty of union, with some additions and alterations, was ratified by an act of the Scottish parliament: that she had ordered it to be laid before them; and hoped it would meet with their concurrence and approbation. She desired the commons would provide for the payment of the equivalent, in case the treaty should be approved. She observed to both houses, that now they had an opportunity of putting the last hand to a happy union of the two kingdoms; and that she should look upon it as a particular happiness, if this great work, which had been so often attempted without success, could be brought to perfection in her reign. When the commons formed themselves into a committee of the whole house, to deliberate on the articles of the union, and the Scottish act of ratification, the tory party, which was very weak in that assembly, began to start some objections. Sir John Packington dis'approved of this incorporating union, which he likened to a marriage with a woman against her consent. He said it was an union carried on by corruption and bribery within doors, by force and violence without: that the promoters of it had basely betrayed their trust, in giving up their independent constitution, and he would leave it to the judgment of the house, to consider whether or no men of such principles were fit to be admitted into their house of representatives. He observed that her majesty, by the coronation oath, was obliged to maintain the church of England as by law established; and likewise bound by the same oath to defend the presbyterian kirk of Scotland in one and the 'same kingdom. Now, said he, after this union is in force, who shall administer this oath to her majesty? It is not the business of the Scots, who are incapable of it, and no wellwishers to the church of England. It is then only the part of the bishops to do it; and can it be supposed that those reverend persons will, or can act a thing so contrary to their own order and institution, as thus to promote the establishment of the presbyterian church government in the united kingdom? He added, that the church of England being established jure divino, and the Scots pretending that the kirk was also jure divino, he could not tell how two nations that clashed in so essential an article could unite: he, therefore, thought it proper to consult the con

vocation about this critical point. A motion was made, that the first article of the treaty, which implies a peremptory agreement to an incorporating union, should be postponed; and that the house should proceed to the consideration of the terms of the intended union, contained in the other articles. This proposal being rejected, some tory members quitted the house; and all the articles were examined and approved without further opposition. The whigs were so eager in the prosecution of this point, that they proceeded in a very superficial manner, and with such precipitation as furnished their enemies with a plausible pretence to affirm that they had not considered the treaty with the coolness and deliberation which an affair of this importance required.

XIII. Before the lords began to investigate the articles of the union, they, at the instance of the archbishop of Canterbury, brought in a bill for the security of the church of England, to be inserted as a fundamental and essential part of that treaty. It passed through both houses without opposition, and received the royal assent. On the fifteenth day of February, the debates concerning the union began in the house of lords, the queen being present, and the bishop of Sarum chairman of the committee. The earls of Rochester, Anglesey, and Nottingham, argued against the union, as did the bishop of Bath and Wells. Lord Haversham, in a premeditated harangue, said the question was, whether two nations independent in their sovereignties, that had their distinct laws and interests, their different forms of worship, church government, and order, should be united into one kingdom? He supposed it an union made up of so many mismatched pieces, of such jarring, incongruous ingredients, that should it ever take effect, it would carry the necessary consequences of a standing power and force, to keep them from falling asunder and breaking in pieces every moment. He repeated what had been said by lord Bacon, that an unity pieced up by direct admission of contrarieties in the fundamental points of it, is like the toes of Nebuchadnezzar's image, which were made of iron and clay, they may cleave together, but would never incorporate. He dissented from the union for the sake of the good old English constitution, in which he dreaded some alteration from the additional weight of sixty-one Scottish members,

26

and these two returned by a Scottish privy council. He took notice, that above one hundred Scottish peers, and as may commoners, were excluded from sitting and voting in parliament, though they had as much right of inheritance to sit there, as any English peer had of sitting in the parliament of England. He expressed his apprehension of this precedent and asked what security any peer of England had for his right and privilege of peerage, which those lords had not. He said, if the bishops would weaken their own cause, so far as to give up the two great points of episcopal ordination and confirmation; if they would approve and ratify the act for securing the presbyterian church government in Scotland, as the true protestant religion and purity of worship; they must give up that which had been contended for between them and the presbyterians for thirty years, and been defended by the greatest and most learned men in the church of England. He objected to the exempting articles, by which heritable offices and superiorities were reserved. He affirmed that the union was contrary to the sense of the Scottish nation: that the murmurs of the people had been so loud as to fill the whole kingdom; and so bold as to reach even to the doors of the parliament; that the parliament itself had suspended their beloved clause in the act of security for arming the people: that the govern ment had issued a proclamation pardoning all slaughter, bloodshed, and maiming committed upon those who should be found in tumults. From these circumstances he concluded, that the Scottish nation was averse to an incorporating union, which he looked upon as one of the most dangerous experiments to both nations. Lords North and Grey complained of the small and unequal proportion of the land tax imposed upon Scotland. The earl of Nottingham said it was highly unreasonable that the Scots, who were by the treaty let into all the branches of the English trade, and paid so little towards the expense of the government, should moreover have such a round sum by way of equivalent. The same topics were insisted upon by the lords North and Grey, Guernsey, Granville, Stawell, and Abingdon. The earl of Nottingham, after having opposed every article separately, concluded with words to this effect: "As sir "John Maynard said to the late king at the revolution,