: begun; Clarges urged that Catholic officers might at some future time be tempted to resist the Protestant succession; and Serjeant Maynard, recalling the case when Henry IV. yielded to Parliament with regard to his confessor, said that no doubt King James, who surpassed Henry in all respects, would grant the request, which should be delivered to him in a respectful remonstrance he would not break with his Parliament for the sake of twenty or thirty officers whose services could be discharged equally well by others. The House adopted certain resolutions, in which occurred this strong request with regard to the Catholic officers: "That his Majesty would be pleased not to continue them in their employments." This language being subsequently viewed as too abrupt, the following words were substituted in lieu thereof: "That his Majesty would be graciously pleased to give such directions that no apprehensions or jealousies may remain in the hearts of his Majesty's good and faithful subjects." So the motion for an address was carried, and a bill of indemnification was ordered to be prepared for unqualified persons. CHAP. I. James II.'s Parlia ment. mons' to the King. Mr. Solicitor Finch brought up the address on the The Com16th. It contained nothing about the standing army and Address the militia, but it reminded the King of the statutes by which Catholics were rendered incapable of serving in the English army, which incapacity could only be removed. by act of Parliament. "Therefore we are preparing a bill to pass both Houses for your royal assent to indemnify them from the penalties they have now incurred; and because the continuing of them in their employment may be taken to be a dispensing of that law without act of Parliament (the consequence of which is of the greatest concern to the rights of all your Majesty's subjects and to all the laws made for security of their religion), we therefore do most humbly beseech your Majesty that you would be graciously pleased to give such directions therein that no apprehensions or jealousies may remain in the hearts of your Majesty's good and faithful subjects." A motion for obtaining the concurrence of the CHAP. I. James II's Parliament. A Member Lords and making the address a joint one from both Houses was lost by a considerable majority. The Commons presented their address to James on the 17th at Whitehall. When the Speaker had read it, the King expressed surprise at their distrust of him; but however they might proceed on their part, he would be steady in all his promises to them-a declaration which was very favourably received on the whole, though some were dissatisfied with the sovereign's demeanour. On the following day, when the royal answer was committed. read in the Commons, it was proposed to discuss the speech again. Mr. Wharton having moved a day for the consideration of the address, he was seconded by Mr. Coke, who suddenly threw the House into a ferment. by remarking, "I hope we are all Englishmen, and are not to be frighted out of our duty by a few high words." Exception was taken to this utterance, and in the midst of a violent scene Coke endeavoured to excuse himself. He was ordered to withdraw, and there were cries from Lord Preston and others of "Send him to the Tower!" He was committed accordingly, "for his indecent and undutiful reflecting on the King and this House." Remark by Bishop The discussion was resumed on the King's answer, and able speech the general feeling was that the House would do well to Compton accept it. But the interest in the question suddenly became centred in another place. The Lords now proposed to take the King's speech into consideration, although they had already returned thanks to his Majesty for it. The danger from the King's attitude became so apparent that even the bishops were compelled to intervene The proposal to reopen the question was strongly recommended by Lord Halifax, and also by Lord Devonshire, a follower of the philosopher Hobbes. Surprise was expressed that a number of officers had accepted posts in unquestionable contradiction of the laws of England, even though they were sheltered by powerful support. Henry Compton, of London, the most militant of the bishops, delivered an uncompromising speech, which created a profound sensation. Looking at the question from a Protestant and an ecclesiastical point of view, he saw in the appointment of the Catholic officers a way opened for a general transformation. "If it were acquiesced in, all the higher posts would very soon be filled with Catholics, and the whole administration would assume a Catholic character," which was exactly James's object. "The case resembled that of the dykes which protected the land in Holland; if they were broken through in one point a general inundation followed. English Protestantism appeared to him a district embanked by the laws, and the power of universal Catholicism the great flood which it alone kept back." Point was lent to these observations from the fact that France and Austria were strenuously supporting the most advanced claims of the Papacy, while French Protestant exiles were to be found in large numbers in the streets of London. Compton spoke with the sympathy of most of his episcopal brethren, and his speech was, from the historical point of view, "one of the most remarkable ever made in Parliament; it set forth in full distinctness the breach between the episcopal system and the Crown, which had previously been allied together." 1 The Court party were alarmed at the turn of events, and endeavoured to ward off the attack by urging that the peers were now precluded from finding fault with the King's speech. But this plea was rejected with indignation, and a day was named (November 23rd) for taking the speech into consideration. The King had been present at the debate, and he gathered from its menacing tone, as well as its unanswerable arguments, that the Lords would vote such an address as must embarrass him and call for the abandonment of his evasive attitude. The Lords likewise now contemplated appealing to the judges for a legal deliverance upon the unconstitutional acts of the King. But, with all this, the peers did not desire an open breach; they only wished for a clear understanding with regard to the Catholic 1 Ranke's History of England. CHAP. I. James II.'s Parliament. The Lords and the King. CHAP. I. officers, and were ready to grant by act of Parliament a dispensation to those officers whom the King was reluctant to dismiss. James II.'s Parliament. Parlia ment But this did not suit James, who thought far more of his suddenly personal prerogative than of legality. Finding therefore prorogued. that he could carry nothing in either House unless he departed from his speech, and allowed the operation of the Test Act, he resolved to prorogue Parliament before the Lords resumed their debate. Consequently, he appeared unexpectedly in the House of Lords on November 20th, 1685, and the Commons having been summoned, Lord Chancellor Jeffreys announced that his Majesty was pleased, "for many weighty reasons," to prorogue Parliament to February 10th, and it was prorogued accordingly. The King's main object in this was to save his dispensing power, a right which would have been denied him by the Houses and the judges. To maintain that right and his Catholic policy he was content to forego the grant of supplies. Although the prorogation was a normal act, it increased the discontent of those who knew what was operating in the King's mind, and undoubtedly put a fresh complexion on the affairs of England. It is finally dissolved. James's Declara James discovered that it was not an easy task to put forward unconstitutional claims, and then expect Parliament to sanction them. His determination to push the Catholic religion to the uttermost was the great stumblingblock to a good understanding, and it alienated those Tory and Protestant supporters who originally aided in his accession in the belief that he would not assume an aggressive attitude. Having staved off the evil day for himself by one prorogation, he was obliged to continue upon the same lines, and Parliament was prorogued no fewer than six times. It was at length ordered to assemble on November 22nd, 1687, but before that day arrived it was dissolved by proclamation. Meanwhile James began to govern without the aid of Parliament, as his father had done, and with like tion of Indulgence. disastrous results, his tyrannical action precipitating the Revolution. He took for his counsellors men like Tyrconnell and Castlemaine, and Father Petre, the Jesuit. By the exercise of the dispensing power, he placed Roman Catholics in office in defiance of the law; and he further endeavoured to strengthen the Catholic position by the formation of a High Commission Court, with Jeffreys as President. On April 4th, 1687, James issued his first Declaration of Indulgence, a distinctly illegal act; but he hoped by this document, which swept away all the penal laws and tests, to unite the Catholics. and the Puritans against the Anglican Church. Some Nonconformists, including the distinguished Quaker William Penn, accepted the Indulgence joyfully, but Baxter, Bunyan, Howe, and their sympathisers looked askance at it. Hopes were indulged of a Nonconformist Parliament, and preparations were made for securing it; but all possibility of a reconciliation was soon at an end. Tyranny proceeded apace both in Church and State, and Protestant feeling was exasperated by the introduction of a Jesuit to the Council board, by an imposing reception given to the Pope's Nuncio, and by the sending of an ambassador to Rome. Attacks were next made upon the Universities, Romanism being forced upon Oxford and Cambridge through the action of the High Commission Court. CHAP. I. James II.'s Parlia ment. Declara tion. On April 27th, 1688, the King published a second His second Declaration of Indulgence; but as it remained comparatively neglected, it was supplemented on May 4th by an order in Council which directed all ministers to read the Declaration from their pulpits on certain specified Sundays. The days fixed for London were May 20th and 27th, but the London clergy almost unanimously pledged themselves not to read the Declaration. At an assembly held at Lambeth Palace on May 18th, Trial of a petition was written out by Sancroft, Archbishop of the Seven Bishops. Canterbury, whose tenor was that the sovereign had no right to dispense with the laws in matters affecting the Church. The petition was signed by Sancroft and six bishops Ken of Bath and Wells, Lake of Chichester, |