Sivut kuvina

Sermon, he, on the other hand, excited alarm, by bestowing on the latter, in direct contradiction to the decision of the Parliament, a rich living, and on Montague, who entertained similar opinions, the bishopric of Chichester; and on the detested Laud, the bishopric of London. He also caused the Petition of Right to be printed, at first only in a few copies; and then, not with the legal Parliamentary confirmation, but in a mean and equivocal manner with the first answer, which was rejected by the House of Commons, and subsequently withdrawn by himself.(") The produce of the newly granted taxes was employed in equipping a fleet to succour the Protestants in Rochelle, and Buckingham was on the point of embarking at Portsmouth, as Commander-in-chief, when he was assassinated on the 23d of August, 1628, by a lieutenant of the name of Felton. In a few hours all had deserted him, who had been so highly honoured and flattered, and the body lay in a corner, on a mean bed, watched by a single servant. In the hat of the assassin a paper was found, the contents of which were: “He is a coward and deserves not the name of a soldier and a knight, who will not sacrifice his life for God, his king, and his country. Let no man praise me for having accomplished this deed, on the contrary, let those accuse themselves who have been the cause of it. If God had not for our sins deprived us of our understanding, this man would not have remained so long unpunished.” It appeared, from the investigation, that Felton had no accomplices, and had, before he committed the deed, implored God on his knees to divert him from his purpose if he did wrong, but otherwise to confirm him, and give him strength to execute it. To a clergyman, who did not know him, he said publicly at church, “Pray for my friend Felton, who is melancholy and out of his wits.” When he was bitterly reproached for his crime, he answered, “Buckingham has twice unjustly passed me over in promotion, and has been declared by Parliament an enemy to his country. I have done what all wished for, and at what everybody rejoices now that it is done.” And, in fact, the joy at Buckingham's assassination was so great, that it could not but appear offensive, nay, fearful, to every unprejudiced person. For it was not merely that a dangerous statesman was removed from the stage, but people despairing, in the trouble of the times, of the sufficiency of noble means, were content with a crime in order to attain certain ends. Putting his personal feelings out of the question, the King might consider that he gained, by the death of Buckingham, inasmuch as he was placed in a much more favorable situation with respect to the Parliament, and it became more easy to give the government a new direction. These considerations may have contributed to the resolution to summon a Parliament to meet on the 20th of January, 1629. On this occasion the King said, “The dispute about tonnage and poundage may be easily terminated if the meaning of my words and actions is rightly understood. I did not demand that tax as a right, but ad bene esse, and meant to shew you, not the right, but the necessity of levying it, till you should give your consent. And I was convinced that this consent was delayed only from want of time, and not want of good will, and hope, that as I have removed your objections, it will soon be given. Let us not be jealous and suspicious of each other, but act in confidence and concord, and bring this session to a happy end.” Without examining whether this declaration of the King entirely agreed with his former words and views, the House of Commons accepted it gratefully, but did not suffer itself to be thereby deterred from entering into discussions on many of the points already mentioned. Such as the printing of the Petition of Right, the promotion of Mainwaring, and especially the state of religious affairs, which increased from day to day the excitement of people's minds. When the King urged the passing of the money-bills, he was answered, that religion undoubtedly had the precedence of tonnage and poundage; and when he, then, referring to his unlimited supremacy as head of the Church, ordered the Parliament not to meddle with things that did not concern it, no attention was paid to it. On the contrary, from that moment, the dispute relative to the Church and Ecclesiastical Law, increased in such a manner, that it almost exceeded in extent and violence the dissension on laws relative to civil affairs. In order to defeat resolutions respecting religious matters, or against tax-collectors, who levied taxes which had not been voted, the King had recourse to a prorogation of the Parliament, by which, however, those matters were delayed which he wished to have settled, and the reciprocal enmity was increased. When the Speaker of the House of Commons, on the 2d of March, after a long interruption of the sittings declared, that the King ordered a new adj ournment till the 10th of March. Some members answered, “That such a command could by no means be given to the House of Commons, as an adjournment, depended upon itself,(”) but as soon as some necessary things were finished, it would, however, comply. Hereupon Sir John Elliot read a motion for a representation to the King upon tonnage and poundage, which the Speaker, John Finch, in consequence of the King's order, just received, would not suffer to be put to the vote but was going to leave the chair. The moment, however, that he rose, in order to withdraw, Hollis, Valentine, and some others came forward, and the first said,(*) “By God you shall sit still here till we please to close the debate.” Mr. Edmunds, and some privy counsellors, in vain endeavoured to release the Speaker, and to support his opinion. Many opposed, and Mr. Selden exclaimed, “It is very blameable that the Speaker, a servant of this house, refuses, under any pretext, to obey. If such obstinacy goes unpunished it will be considered as a precedent, and every Speaker may, at any moment, interrupt the business of the House under the pretext of a royal order.” When Finch, notwithstanding this exhortation, refused with entreaties and fears, to prolong the sitting, his relation and countryman, Peter Hayman, said, “This brings sorrow over our country, and disgrace upon our family. For all evil, nay, our ruin, which may ensue, will appear one day as the consequence of your base conduct, and be spoken of only with indignation and contempt. If, however, the Speaker persists in not doing his duty, he must be called to account and another chosen.” During this dispute, Elliot had drawn up a protest, which was read by Hollis, and adopted by the majority, though not without much noise and confusion. This remonstrance was in substance, “That all who should seek to extend or to introduce Popery, Arminianism, or other heretical doctrines, who should advise the levying of tonnage and poundage, without consent of Parliament, or

« EdellinenJatka »