Appendix Charles the first, enraged by ill ufage from his parliament, III. and reduced to the greateft difficulties, put afterwards in practice to the great difcontent of the nation. THE demand of benevolence was another invention of that age for taxing the people. This practice was fo little conceived to be irregular, that the commons, in 1585, offered the queen a benevolence; which the very generoufly refufed, as having no occafion, at that time, for money G. Queen Mary alfo, by an order of council, increased the customs in fome branches; and her fifter imitated the example H. There was a fpecies of fhip money impofed at the time of the Spanish invafion: The feveral ports were required to equip a certain number of fhips at their own charge; and fuch was the alacrity of the people for the public defence, that fome of the ports, particularly London, fent double the number demanded of them. When any levies were made for Ireland, France, or the Low Countries, the queen obliged the counties to raise the foldiers, to arm and cloath them, and carry them to the fea-ports at their own charge. New year's gifts were, at that time, expected from the nobility, and from the more confiderable gentry K. PURVEYANCE was another method of taxation, unequal, arbitrary, and oppreffive. The whole kingdom felt fenfibly the burthen of this impofition: and it was regarded as a great privilege conferred on Oxford and Cambridge, to prohibit the purveyors from taking any commodities within five miles of these universities. The queen victualled her navy by means of this prerogative, during the first years of her government L. WARDSHIP was the most regular and legal of all these impofitions by prerogative: Yet was it a great badge of flavery, and oppreffive to all the confiderable families. When an estate devolved to a female, the fovereign obliged her to marry any one he pleased: Whether the heir was male or female, the crown enjoyed the whole profit of the estate during the minority. The giving of a rich wardship was an ufual method of rewarding a courther or favourite. D'Ewes, p. 494. fon, p. 267. THE 1 Mon H Bacon vol. iv. P. 362. III. THE inventions were endless, which arbitrary power Appendix might employ for the extorting of money, while the people imagined, that their property was fecured by the crown's being debarred from impofing taxes. Strype has preferved a speech of lord Burleigh to the queen and council, in which are contained fome particulars not a little extraordinary M. Burleigh propofes, that the fhould erect a court for the correction of all abuses, and fhould confer on the commiffioners a general inquifitorial power over the whole kingdom. He fets before her eyes the example of her wife grandfather, Henry the feventh, who, by fuch methods, augmented extremely his revenue; and he recommends, that this new court fhould proceed, "well by direction and ordinary courfe of the laws, as by "virtue of her majefty's fupreme regiment and abfolute 66 as power, from whence law proceeded." In a word, he expects, from this inftitution, greater acceffion to the royal treasure, than Henry the eighth derived from the abolition of the abbeys, and all the forfeitures of ecclefiaftical revenues. This project of lord Burleigh needs not, I think, any comment. A form of government must be very arbitrary indeed, where a wife and good minister could make fuch a propofal to the fovereign. EMBARGOES on merchandize was another engine of royal power, by which the English princes were able to extort money from the people. We have feen instances in the reign of Mary. Elizabeth, before her coronation, iffued an order to the cuftom-houfe, prohibiting the fale of all crimson filks, which fhould be imported, till the court was first provided N. She expected, no doubt, a good penny-worth from the merchants, while they lay under this restraint. THE parliament pretended to the right of enacting laws, as well as of granting fubfidies; but this privilege was, during that age, ftill more infignificant than the other. Queen Elizabeth exprefsly prohibited them from meddling with ftate matters or ecclefiaftical caufes; and the openly fent the members to prifon, who dared to tranfgrefs her imperial edit in thefe particulars. There paffed few feffions of parliament, during her reign, where there occur not inftances of this arbitrary conduct. BUT M Annals, vol. iv. p. 234, & feq. N Strype, vol. i. p. 27. III. Appendix BUT the legislative power of the parliament was a mere fallacy; while the fovereign was universally acknowledged to poffefs a difpenfing power, by which all the laws could be invalidated, and rendered of no effect. The ufe of this power was also an indirect method practifed for erecting monopolies. Where the statutes laid any branch of manufacture under restrictions, the fovereign, by exempting one person from the laws, gave him in effect the monopoly of that commodity o. There was no grievance, at that time, more univerfally complained of, than the frequent difpenfing with the penal laws P. BUT in reality, the crown poffeffed the full legislative power, by means of proclamations, which might affect any matter, even of the greatest importance, and which the ftar-chamber took care to fee more rigorously executed than the laws themselves. The motives of these proclamations were fometimes very frivolous and even ridiculous. Queen Elizabeth had taken offence at the smell of woad; and the issued an edict prohibiting any one from cultivating that useful plant. She was alfo pleased to take offence at the long fwords and high ruffs then in fashion: She fent about her officers, to break every man's fword, and clip every man's ruff, which was beyond a certain length R. This practice refembles fomewhat the method employed by the great Czar Peter, to make his subjects change their garb. THE queen's prohibition of the prophesyings was founded on a better reafon; but fhews ftill the unlimited extent of her prerogative. Two or three people could not meet together, in order to read the fcriptures, and confer about religion, though in ever so orthodox a manner, without her permiffion. THERE were many other branches of prerogative in compatible with an exact or regular enjoyment of liberty. None of the nobility could marry without permiffion from the fovoreign. The queen detained the earl of Southampton long in prifon, because he privately married the earl of Effex's coufin S. No man could travel without the consent of the prince. Sir William Evers under went Rymer, tom. xv. p. 756. D'Ewes, p. 645. + Mur- den, p. 325: Annals. R Townsend's Journals, p. 250. Stow's Annals. Birch's Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 422. went a fevere perfecution, because he had prefumed to Appendix pay a private vifit to the king of Scots T. The fovereign even affumed a fupreme and uncontrouled authority over all foreign trade; and neither allowed any perfon to enter or depart the kingdom, nor any commodity to be imported or exported, without his confent *. THE parliament, in the thirteenth of the queen, praifed her for not imitating the practice, ufual among her predeceffors, of stopping the course of justice by particular warrants. There could not poffibly be a greater abule, nor a stronger mark of arbitrary power; and the queen, in refraining from it, was very laudable. But she was by no means conftant in this reserve. 'There remain in the public records fome warrants of her's, for exempting perfons from all lawsuits and profecutions; and these warrants, the fays, fhe grants from her royal prerogative, which he will not allow to be difputed. It was very usual in queen Elizabeth's reign, and probably in all the preceding reigns, for noblemen or privycounsellors to commit to prifon any one, who had happened to difplease them, by fuing for his juft debts; and the perfon, though he gained his caufe in the courts of justice, was commonly obliged to relinquish his property in order to obtain his liberty. Some likewife, who had been delivered from prifon by the judges, have again been committed to cuftody in fecret places, without any poffibility of obtaining relief; and even the officers and fergeants of the courts of law have been punished for executing the writs in favour of thefe perfons. Nay, it was, ufual to fend for people by purfuivants, a kind of harpies, who then attended the orders of the council and high commiffion; and they were brought up to London, and constrained by imprisonment, not only to withdraw their lawful fuits, but also to pay the pursuivants great sums of money. The judges, in the 34th of the queen, complain to her majefty of the frequency of this practice. It is probable that fo egregious a tyranny was carried no further down than the reign of Elizabeth; fince the parliament, who prefented the petition of right, found no later inftances of it. And even thefe very judges of Elizabeth, * Sir John Davis's question concerning T Ibid. p 511. impofitions, paffim. tom. xv. p. 652, 708, 777. Franklyn's Annals, p. 250, 251. Appendix zabeth, who thus protect the people against the tyranny III. of the great, exprefsly allow, that a perfon, committed by fpecial command of the queen, is not bailable. IT is eafy to imagine, that, in fuch a government, no juftice could, by courfe of law, be obtained of the fovereign, unless he was willing to allow it. In the naval expedition, undertaken by Raleigh and Frobisher against the Spaniards in the year 1592, a very rich carrack was taken, worth two hundred thousand pounds. The queen's share in the adventure was only a tenth part; but as the prize was fo great, and exceeded fo much the expectation of all the adventurers, fhe was determined not to rest contented with her share. Raleigh humbly and earnestly begged her to accept of an hundred thousand pounds, in lieu of all demands, or rather extortions; and says, that the prefent, which the proprietors were willing to make her, of eighty thousand pounds, was the greatest that ever prince received from a fubject 2. BUT it is no wonder the queen, in her administration, should pay fo little regard to liberty; while the parliament itself, in enacting laws, was fo entirely negligent of it. The perfecuting ftatutes, which they paffed against papifts and puritans, are extremely contrary to the genius of freedom; and by expofing fuch multitudes to the tyranny of priests and bigots, accustomed the people to the moft difgraceful fubjection. Their conferring an unlimited fupremacy on the queen, or what is worse, acknowledging her inherent right to it, was another proof of their voluntary fervitude. THE law of the 23d of her reign, making feditious words against the queen capital, is alfo a very tyrannical ftatute; and an ufe, no lefs tyrannical, was fometimes made of it. The cafe of Udal, a puritannical clergyman, feems fingular, even in thofe arbitrary times. This man had published a book, called a demonftration of discipline, in which he inveighed against the government of bishops; and though he had carefully endeavoured to conceal his name, he was thrown into prifon upon fufpicion, and brought to trial for this offence. It was pretended, that the bishops were part of the queen's political body; and to fpeak against them, was really to attack her, and was therefore felony by the ftatute. This was not the only iniquity 2 Z Strype, vol. iv. p. 128, 129. |