in truth it was weakened by it. For the whole nation felt what an infinitely important question was involved in this apparently trifling suit, and the great majority took part with the accused. In fact, every unprejudiced person must still agree in this view of the case, for only one thing was proved by the Court party and granted by its opponents, namely, that the King is the head of the State, and as such has the right, in a moment of sudden and extreme danger, to adopt every means for the security of the kingdom. In this correct sense, Elizabeth acted in 1588, and met with universal approbation, but on the present occasion there was no imminent or great danger, and the palpable object was merely to establish a right in the King to levy taxes independently of Parliament. But such a right had not only been abolished by law before the time of the Stuarts and Tudors, but had lately been again most clearly annulled by the petition of right. If, said the opponents of the Court party, the judges who are empowered to decide only on private suits, are inconsiderately allowed to decide in the last instance on important political questions, there is, in fact, an end of all public law. (25) Hitherto distress and arbitrary conduct has been excused in individual instances, but now it is attempted to convert the exception into the rule, or to set up an absurdity for an incontrovertible principle. And if the money so extorted

were at least employed for great objects, or if glorious deeds and successes might serve as an excuse, now the enormous revenue does not suffice even for the ordinary expenditure of peace, and is dissipated at Court or in some other undue manner.

If some violent persons carried their opinions and intentions beyond what has just been stated, yet Clarendon himself, the most zealous advocate of the King, could not approve his mode of government, and says in substance: "The dissolution of the Parliaments was rash and foolish; for if some Members spoke with warmth, nay, with violence, yet they did not exceed allowable bounds, made judicious proposals, and were led to express just censures, by many follies and excesses of persons in office. The five subsidies promised by the second Parliament, did not indeed entirely provide for the existing wants, but so large a sum had hardly ever been granted. The more unsatisfactory did the reasons appear which were assigned for the dissolution of the Parliament, the more injudicious the rigorous levy of the money, as if it were already granted in a constitutional manner and in due form. Notwithstanding so many grounds for anger and distrust, the newly summoned Parliament merely brought forward the reasonable petition of right, purchased it for five subsidies, and was again dissolved in a fit of passion. That the thoughtless Buckingham, who was unacquainted

with the Constitution, acted in such a manner is less to be wondered at, than that Lord Weston, who was well versed in Parliamentary business, imagined he could attain the object in his irregular course without a Parliament. Lastly, it had a very bad effect that the taxes arbitrarily imposed were demanded not merely de facto, but as a right, according to the decision of judges, who thereby forfeited the esteem of the people, and that, at the same time, notions were announced which could not but offend every man who loved liberty, still more than the oppression itself.

The Church presented a counterpart to this confusion in the affairs of the State; the prevailing episcopal system stigmatized on the one hand Catholicism as superstitious and tyrannical; on the other, the Reformed and Puritans as arbitrary and anarchical. In order to strengthen itself against the attacks of these two parties, the Church entered into strict alliance with the Court, and justified the newly-founded royal papacy, for which it was gratefully allowed to employ it in many points for its own advantage. Laud, in particular, acted in this spirit with that vehemence which is usually produced by firm conviction and narrow views. The Roman Catholics, pressed on all sides, hoped for the protection of the Queen; while the King was not inclined either to offend the Protestants or to violate his coronation oath. And yet this was

done, when he dispensed with the Ecclesiastical Laws for money, and endeavoured to secure the assent of the Catholics to his absolute mode of government. For this, the latter became doubly odious; and besides, were divided among themselves into a Jesuitical and an Antijesuitical party.

When Laud, to make the celebration of divine worship more solemn, caused paintings, crosses, altars, &c. to be restored, he was called a papist, though he certainly never thought of laying his power at the feet of Rome. When he and the King allowed all kinds of diversions on Sunday, this was called promoting the most horrible corruption of morals, though no more was intended than to prevent gloomy austerity, and arbitrary condemnation of what was innocent.(26) Laud certainly acted in all respects without tact, and everything that he did to make the clergy more respected, for instance, conferring many offices upon them, only exposed them to envy and doubled the reproaches of the Puritans against the worldlymindedness and corruption of the Episcopal Church. "We are called Puritans," said they, "because we desire consistently to complete the reformation which has stopped half-way, and to restore corrupted Christianity to its pristine purity; because we courageously defend the laws and liberties of the country, contradict unworthy courtiers, proud prelates, useless projectors and extravagant nobles,

are zealous for God and his service, disapprove of swearing, impious talking and profanation of the Sabbath, and rather listen to serious conversation and good Sermons, than follow useless vanities.

To this the adversaries of the Puritans replied, "They are enemies to the King and the existing government in Church and State, rebellious hypocrites, who, in the excess of their vanity, call themselves saints, while all their holiness manifests itself only in absurd trifles; in broad-brimmed hats and cropped heads. Men, who are ambitious, hypocritical, licentious, plunged in debt, and other worthless characters, assume this easy external shew of gravity and simplicity, deceive the welldisposed, corrupt the wavering, and very unjustly are not strictly repulsed by the Puritans, because the latter affirm that bad and useless men have often been most zealous in promoting the word of the Lord."

Osborn endeavoured to keep the medium between unconditional praise and unlimited censure, saying, "Under the general denomination of Puritans are comprehended not only the insane fools who oppose the discipline and ordinances of the Church, or make religion the protection of their wrong; but those also who, from a genuine sense of decorum, endeavour to subdue the vices of the age; they suffered much by episcopal tyranny, and some fools who were among them did great injury to these people,