is past, provided that you follow my directions, and do not fall again into the former erroneous courses."

As soon as the King had ended his speech, the Lord Keeper detailed, more circumstantially, the state of domestic and foreign affairs. His Majesty, said he, "has applied to the Parliament for a grant of money, not because it is the only, but because it is the best mode; not because he has no other means, but because it is most agreeable to his goodness and to his wishes, for the welfare of his people. If it should fail, necessity and the sword of the enemy will compel him to take other means. Therefore do not forget the direction which his Majesty has given you; I repeat it, forget it not."

Even the warmest friends of the King could not but confess that these speeches were devoid of all friendliness and courtesy, and touched in a tone of ill humour, upon things which it would have been better to have passed over in silence. Those who saw the matter in a graver and more unfavorable light, said, "at a moment when the King is forced from his illegal course by extreme distress for money, and Parliamentary assistance alone can save him; when there are many grounds for bitter complaints, he speaks in the tone of an absolute monarch, again threatens with illegal measures, and calls in question the rights of Parliament, which is the centre of the English Constitution."

The majority of the true friends of their country, in the House of Commons, without suffering themselves to be frightened into servile submission or provoked to violent opposition, resolved to proceed with temper, and in such a manner, that the King should have no pretext to dissolve the Parliament, or to adopt other arbitrary measures. According to their preceding manner, however, together with the deliberations on the public wants, they entered on discussions relative to the administration, billeting of soldiers, forced loans, arrests, and other grievances. Some very remarkable speeches were delivered on these subjects. Thus, Sir Francis Seymour, on the 22d of March, said, "This is the great council of the kingdom, and here, if not here alone, his Majesty may see, as in a true glass, the state of the kingdom. We are called hither by his writs to give him faithful counsel, compatible with his honour, and this we must do without flattery and fear. Let us therefore not imitate Cambyses' judges, who, on his putting the question to them, replied, the will of the King is law, and he may do as he pleases. How can we talk of grants, if the King is convinced that he may take at his pleasure, and while it is preached from the pulpit that all we possess is his by divine right? In such manner, clergymen forget their vocation, and become ignorant statesmen; they are ready to sacrifice their conscience for a good bishopric. Princes, who extorted the most from

their subjects, were always in the greatest distress. He is not a good subject who will not willingly and freely sacrifice his life when the service of the King and the good of the State really require it; but he is no good subject, but a slave, who suffers his property to be taken away from him against his will, and his liberty against the laws of the kingdom."

Sir Robert Phillips used still stronger language: "In the ancient festival of the Saturnalia," he said, "the slaves had for one day liberty of speaking and acting. Not so in England, where every one is free for life. What avail useless words about rights and privileges in Parliament, if it is speedily dissolved, and nobody secure at any other time of his person and property."

"Now," said Benjamin Rudyard, “it must be decided whether Parliaments shall live or die. It is not well-being, but existence that is at stake. If the King continues to take one way, and the Parliament another, the State must be ruined between them. We have more need than ever of wisdom, at a moment when our persons, property, and everything dear to us is in question. Let us by all means avoid dissension: let us trust the King, that he may trust us: for advice without money, and money without a redress of grievances is partial and insufficient. Let us endeavour to bring the King over to our side, then we shall easily obtain K k

VOL. I.

from him every thing reasonable, and, in fact, there can be the less difficulty in coming to such an agreement, as the one party cannot exist without the other.

Sir Thomas Wentworth, afterwards Earl of Strafford, who had himself been imprisoned for refusing to contribute to the loan, (2) bitterly complained of the conduct of the administration, and then continued: "It is not the King, but bad projectors have extended his rights beyond their due proportion, which formerly constituted the harmony of the whole. They have reduced the crown to poverty, by consuming the revenue in advance: they have established a privy council, which imprisons us at its pleasure. What have they robbed us of, or rather what have they left us, with which, after our property has been annihilated, we can assist the King?"

In conclusion, Sir John Cooke summed up the several arguments, and said, "We all agree that money must be granted to the King, and abuses redressed. The only difference of opinion relates to the manner of our further deliberations and decisions." At length it was resolved to discuss, in two different committees, the wants of the government, and the grievances of the people. Here the difference of views became more and more apparent. It was observed, that the actual want of money was not the greatest evil, but that the

government has fallen into it, and that what was granted has not been properly employed. Till liberty is secured, (added Wentworth,) no new grants must be made." The members of the House of Commons, who were more clear-sighted, were by no means disposed to a breach with the King at this moment, so that even Pym said, “Deeds are better than words. Let us therefore hasten our resolutions on the supplies." Accordingly, on the 11th of April, five subsidies were voted, a sum, not indeed sufficient to meet all the wants, but larger than had hitherto been granted, and even than the King himself expected. He said, therefore, “On this day I have risen higher in the estimation of all Christendom than if I had gained some battles. I love the Parliament, I take pleasure in it, and promise that all shall enjoy as much liberty as ever was enjoyed under the best King of the country." Buckingham, too, made a speech in praise of the Parliament on this occasion, which, however, was considered as presumptuous; because he said, "Hitherto he had been the favorite, but begged the King now to give that title to the members of Parliament."

As the grant of the five subsidies was only a provisional vote, and no time fixed when the money should be levied, and as the discussion of the grievances went on at the same time, the King urged them, on the 10th of April, after so good