king's hereditary pride, had proposed a match between the prince of Wales and the second daughter of his Catholic majesty ; and in order to render the temptation irresistable to the English monarch, whose necessities were well known he gave hopes of an immense fortune with the Spanish princess. Allured by the prospect of that alliance, James, it has been affirmed, was not only induced to bring Raleigh to the block, but to abandon the elector Palatine, his son-inlaw, and the Protestant interest in Germany, to the ambition of the house of Austria. This latter suspicion completed the odium occasioned by the former, and roused the attention of parliament. : We have formerly had occasion to observe32, in what manner Frederic V. elector Palatine, was induced, by the persecuted protestants, to accept the crown of Bohemia, contrary to the advice of the king of England, his father-inlaw and how he was chased from that kingdom, and stript of all his hereditary dominions, by the power of the emperor Ferdinand I. supported by the Spanish branch of the house of Austria, in spite of the utmost efA. D. 1620. forts of the Evangelical Union, or Protestant body in Germany, though assisted by the United Provinces. The news of these disasters no sooner reached England, than the voice of the nation was loud against the king's inactivity. People of all ranks were on fire to engage in the defence of the distressed Palatine, and rescue their Protestant brethren from the persecutions of the idolatrous Catholics, their implacable and cruel enemies. In this quarrel they would cheerfully have marched to the extremity of Europe, have inconsiderately plunged themselves into a chaos of German politics, and freely have expended the blood and treasure of the kingdom. They therefore regarded James's neutrality as a base desertion of the cause of God and of his holy religion; not reflecting, that their interferance in the wars on the con32. Part I. Let. LXXIV, tinent, however agreeable to pious zeal, could not be justi fied on any sound maxims of policy. The king's ideas relative to this matter, were not more liberal than those of his subjects; but happily, for once, they were more friendly to the welfare of the nation. Shocked at the revolt of a people against their prince, he refused, on that account, to patronize the Bohemian Protestants, or to bestow on his son-in-law the title of king33; although he owned that he had not examined their pretensions, privileges, or constitution34. To have withdrawn their allegiance from their sovereign, under whatever circumstances, was, in his eyes, an enormous crime, and a sufficient reason for denying them any support; as if subjects must be ever in the wrong, when they stand in opposition to those who have acquired, or assumed authority over them, how much soever that authority may have been abused! The Spanish match is likewise allowed to have had some influence upon the political sentiments of James, on this occasion. He flattered himself that, in consequence of his son's marriage with the Infanta, and the intimate connexions it would form between England and Spain, besides other advantages, the restitution of the Palatinate might be procured from motives of mere friendship. The principal members of the house of commons, however, thought very differently that projected marriage was the great object of their terror. They saw no good that could result from it, but were apprehensive of a multitude of evils, which, as the guardians of public liberty and general happiness, they thought it their duty to prevent. They accordingly framed a remonstrance to the king, representing the enormous growth of the Austrian power becoming dangerous to the liberties of Europe, and the alarming progress of the Catholic 33. Rushworth, vol. i. 34. It was a very dangerous precedent, he said, against all Christian kings, to allow the translation of a crown by the people. Franklin, p. 48. religion religion in England. And they intreated his majesry instantly to take arms in defence of the Palatine; A. D. 1621. to turn his sword against Spain, whose treasures were the chief support of the Catholic interest over Europe; and to exclude all hope of the toleration or re-establishment of popery in the kingdom, by entering into no negociation for the marriage of his son, Charles, but with a protestant princess. Yet more effectually to extinguish that idolatrous worship, they requestad that the fines and confiscations to which the Catholics were subject, by law, should be levied with the utmost rigour; and that the children of such as refused to conform to the established worship should be taken from their parents, and committed to the care of Protestant divines and schoolmasters 35. Inflamed with indignation at hearing of these instructions, which militated against all his favourite maxims of government, James instantly wrote to the speaker of the house of commons commanding him to admonish the members, in his majesty's name, not to presume to meddle with any thing that regarded his government, or with deep matters of state, as above their reach and capacity; and especially not to touch on his son's marriage with a daughter of Spain, nor to attack the honour of that king or any other of his friends and confederates 36. Conscious of their strength and popularity the commons were rather roused than intimidated by this imperious letter. Along with a new remonstrance they returned the former, which had been withdrawn ; and maintained, that they were entitled to interpose with their counsel in all matters of government; and that entire freedom of speech, in their debates on public business, was their ancient and undoubted right, and an inberitance transmitted to them from their ancestors37. 85. Rushworth, vol. i. 37. Rushworth, ubi. sup. See a'so Franklin and Kennet. 36. Id. ibid. The The king's reply was keen and ready. He told the house, that their remonstrance was more like a denunciation of war than an address of dutiful and loyal subjects; that their pretension to inquire into all state-affairs, without exception, was a plenipotence to which none of their ancestors, even during the weakest reigns, had ever dared to aspire : and he closed his answer with the following memorable words, which discover a very considerable share of political sagacity: "Although we cannot allow of your style, in mentioning "your ancient and undoubted right and inheritance, but would "rather have wished, that ye had said, that your privileges "were derived from the grace and permission of our ances"tors and us (for the most of them grew from precedents, "which show rather a toleration than inheritance); yet we are pleased to give you our royal assurance, that as long as 66 you contain yourselves within the limits of your duty, we "will be as careful to maintain and preserve your lawful li"berties and privileges as ever any of our predecessors "were, nay as to preserve our own royal prerogative 38" Alarmed at this dangerous insinuation, that their privileges were derived from royal favour, the commons framed a protest, in which they opposed pretension to pretension, and declared, "Tha the liberties, franchises, privileges, and jurisdictions of parliament, are the ancient and undoubted "birth-right and inheritance of the subjects of England, and “that the arduous and urgent affairs concerning the king, "state, and defence of the realm, and of the church of Eng"land, and the maintenance and making of laws, and redress "of grievances, which daily happen within this realm, are "proper subjects, and matter of counsel or debate in par"liament; and that in the handling and proceeding on "these businesses, every member of the house of parlia“ment bath, and of right ought to have, freedom of speech 38. Franklin. Rushworth. "to "to propound, treat, reason, and bring to conclusion the "same39." "Thus, my dear Philip, was fully opened, between the king and parliament, the grand dispute concerning privilege and prerogative, which gave birth to the court and country parties, and which so long occupied the tongues, the pens, and even swords, of the most able and active men in the nation. Without entering deeply into this dispute, (of which you must make yourself master by consulting the controversial writers) or taking side with either party, it may be observed, that if our ancestors, from the violent invasion of William the Norman to the period of which we are treating, did not enjoy so perfect, or perhaps so extensive a system of liberty, as since the revolution, in 1688, they were at no time legally subject to the rule of an absolute sovereign; and that, although the victorious arms and insidious policy of a foreign and hostile prince obliged them, in the hour of misfortune, to submit to his ambitious sway, and to the tyrannical laws which he afterward thought proper to impose upon the nation, the spirit of liberty was never extinguished in the breasts of Englishmen. They still looked back, with admiration and regret, to their independent condition under their native princes, and to the unlimited freedom of their Saxon forefathers; and as soon as circumstances would permit, they compelled their princes of the Norman line, to restore to them the most essential of their former laws, privileges, and immunities. These original rights, as we have seen, were repeatedly confirmed to them by charter; and if they were also frequently violated by encroaching princes, those violations ought never to be pleaded as precedents, every such violation being a flagrant act of injustice and perjury, as every king, by his coronation oath, was solemnly bound to maintain the national charters. Nor did the people, keenly 37. Rushworth, vol. i. sensible |