Revolution were not duly appreciated, gives the following causes: the incompatibility of the Revolution with received principles; the cold nature of William, his foreign origin, and foreign favo rites; and the jealousy of the Whigs at the employment of such men as Nottingham, Danby, Halifax, and Godolphin.

2. William appoints his councillors. William's first act as a sovereign was to issue a proclamation,_confirming in their places all Protestants in office on the 1st of December last. He then chose his council, and filled up the offices of state. Nottingham and Shrewsbury were appointed secretaries of state; Halifax, privy seal; and Danby, president of the council. Bentinck was groom of the stole and privy purse; d'Auverquerque, master of the horse; Zulestein, of the robes, and Schomberg, of the ordnance. Smollett thus characterises the principal persons of William's ministry-"the fair talents, the vivacity, the flexibility of Halifax; the plausibility, the enterprising genius of Danby; the pompous eloquence, the warmth and ostentation of Nottingham; the probity and popularity of Shrewsbury. Godolphin now brought into the Treasury, was modest, silent, sagacious, and upright."

3. Increased importance of parliamentary proceedings. From this period of our history, the proceedings of parliament become of first-rate importance. Smyth pertinently remarks; "By the Revolution and the Bill of Rights, no doubt, the liberty of the country received a most important improvement. But the constitution was settling, not settled; and questions of great consequence to its interests were agitated during the whole reign of William. We have the Civil List, the Place Bill, the Triennial Bill, the Treason Bill, the question of the liberty of the press, the question of standing armies, of the responsibility of ministers, and finally, we have the veto of the king more than once exercised, and even a sort of debate in the Commons upon this assertion of the prerogative. We have all these questions making their appearance in the course of a single reign of thirteen years. They comprehend most of the points which belong to the formation of a good government." Moreover the Mutiny Bill, and the Appropriation of Supplies give, from this period, to the parliament, an almost omnipotent power; indeed the Commons, although simply a branch of the legislature possesses, in this way, the means of effectually controlling the entire executive.

4. The Convention declared a parliament. Feb. 13, 1689. To venture upon a new election being deemed hazardous, the king with the advice of his council, declared the Convention a parliament, by going in state to the House of Peers, and making a speech to the two Houses. A debate was raised in the Com

mons, as to the present being a legal parliament, not having been called by the king's writ. To this it was replied, that the essence of a parliament consisted in the co-operation of King, Lords, and Commons, and not in the manner of their being convokedwhether by writ or by letter. An Act followed declaring the Lords and Commons assembled at Westminster to be the two Houses of Parliament to all intents and purposes.

When the new oath came to be taken, the following prelates absented themselves; Sancroft, Turner, Lake, Ken, White, Lloyd, Thomas, and Frampton: also the Duke of Newcastle, Earl of Clarendon, and other temporal peers. It will be noticed, that the first five prelates named, were of the seven whom James committed to the Tower. The nonjuring peers, as indeed did many others, held the doctrine of the divine indefeasible rights of sovereigns, without limitation.

5. The Mutiny Bill. 1689. The purpose of this bill was to punish mutiny and desertion. It was occasioned this way. As the troops were somewhat discontented, William thought it desirable to retain in England the Dutch forces, and send over to Holland the disaffected. A Scottish regiment, which had been given to Schomberg, mutinied on the march to Ipswich, and declaring for king James, set out with four pieces of cannon for Scotland. The mutineers were overtaken by three regiments of dragoons, and being forced to surrender, were sent over to Holland. These men could not in justice be punished, for they could only be disposed of by the parliament of Scotland, which had not been assembled.

The preamble of the Mutiny Bill states that it is unlawful to keep a standing army without the consent of parliament, but it is adjudged necessary by the sovereign and the parliament, that a body of forces should be continued for the safety of the kingdom, the defence of our dominions, and preservation of the balance of power in Europe. The Act itself, which has subsequently been amended and enlarged, is now a code of law defining military offences and their punishment. The offences of the higher class, for which the Act prescribes "death, or such other punishment as a general court-martial shall award", are any officer or soldier exciting mutiny, or not using his best endeavours to suppress it; misbehaving before an enemy; abandoning or delivering to the enemy any garrison, fortress, or post; compelling or using means to induce the governor of such fortress to do so; quitting his post without leave, or sleeping at his post; holding correspondence with the enemy, or entering into terms with the enemy without license; striking a superior officer, or disobeying his lawful commands; and deserting the service. To offences of a minor character may be awarded corporal punishment, imprisonment, forfeiture of additional pay accruing through length of service, and forfeiture of pension; or by another clause, imprisonment with or without hard labor, and solitary confinement.

In addition, the Act defines the constitution and powers of courtsmartial; and contains clauses relating to the enlistment of recruits, the issue of pay and marching money, the quartering of soldiers, and supplying carriages for the conveyance of troops and baggage. It further declares that the ordinary course of law is not to be interfered with, when a soldier is accused of a capital crime, and that a man cannot be taken from the service for a debt under thirty pounds. As the Mutiny Bill must be renewed year by year, Hallam remarks: "Thus it is strictly true that, if the king were not to summon parliament every year, his army would cease to have a legal existence; and the refusal of either House to concur in the Mutiny Bill would at once wrest the sword out of his grasp. By the Bill of Rights, it is declared unlawful to keep any forces in time of peace, without consent of parliament. This consent, by an invariable usage, is given only from year to year; and its necessity may be considered perhaps the most powerful of those causes which have transferred so much even of the executive power into the management of the two Houses of Parliament".

6. Settlement of the Revenue: appropriation of supplies, 1689. The settlement of the revenue question, and the adoption of the principle of appropriation, are considered by our best writers as ranking amongst the most important results of the Revolution. Always, but more particularly during the reign of the Stuarts, the revenue was a fruitful source of discord between the sovereign and the Commons. When money had been wanted for any particular exigency of the public service, the ordinary grant was by so much increased, and the entire amount passed into the hands of the sovereign, without any guarantee that the additional grant made would be appropriated to the particular service named. It was indeed known that much had been embezzled and misapplied. The Commons now voted a revenue of £1,200,000, not for life, but for the current year only; one half of the sum to be appropriated to the civil list, the other half to the public defence. To re-imburse the Dutch for their outlay in connexion with the Prince of Orange's expedition to England, a grant of £600,000 was made. William was offended with the latter grant, because it was less by £100,000 than he asked for, and with the former, because it was not for life. The Whigs proposed, by making the grants annual, to keep the king dependent on his parliament; but William took it to be expressive of a want of confidence, and complained that they had dealt less liberally with him, than with preceding sovereigns. After war was declared against France, a sum of £2,000,000 was voted to be raised by a land-tax of three shillings in the pound, and additional duties on tea, &c. The hearth-tax of two shillings per annum was remitted for ever.

The principle of Appropriation of Supplies was introduced in the

reign of Charles II., though not invariably adopted till after the Revolution. At first, instead of the old practice of placing in the hands of the sovereign the entire disposal of the public revenue, one half was appropriated to the maintenance of the king's government and royal family, the other to the public defence and contingent expenditure. The original scheme was improved upon by the House requiring estimates of the probable expenditure of the several departments of the public service, and the grants made were appropriated accordingly. And by a clause repeated in the appropriation act of every session, the lords of the Treasury are forbidden, under severe penalties, to order the issue of any moneys, except for the purposes for which it was granted. Hallam, speaking of the appropriation of the public revenue, observes, "This has given the House of Commons so effectual a control over the executive power, or more truly speaking, has rendered it so much a participator in that power, that no administration can possibly subsist without its concurrence: nor can the session of parliament be intermitted for an entire year without leaving both the naval and military force of the kingdom unprovided for.

In time of war, or circumstances that may induce war, it has not been uncommon to deviate a little from the rule of appropriation, by a grant of considerable sums on a vote of credit, which the crown is thus enabled to apply at its discretion during the recess of parliament; and we have had also too frequent experience that the charges of public service have not been brought within the limits of the last year's appropriation. But the general principle has not perhaps been often transgressed without sufficient reason; and a House of Commons would be deeply responsible to the country, if through supine confidence it should abandon that high privilege which has made it the arbiter of court factions, and the regulator of foreign connexions. It is to this transference of the executive government (for the phrase is hardly too strong) from the crown to the two houses of parliament, and especially the Commons, that we owe the proud attitude which England has maintained since the Revolution, so extraordinarily dissimilar, in the eyes of Europe, to her condition under the Stuarts."

William had pro

7. The Toleration Act. May 1689. posed the repeal of the Test Act, but the Lords rejected the proposition, It was next proposed to excuse the clergy from the oath to the new government, on condition that the Dissenters might be exempted from the sacramental test; this was rejected by the Commons. A comprehension bill was next attempted, by which it was hoped, the Church of England, the Kirk of Scotland, and Protestant dissenters might by degrees be united; this shared the fate of its predecessors. William was not however to be turned aside from his design of giving toleration to dissenters. A bill was therefore prepared by Nottingham, and after some difficulty passed under the title of "An Act for exempting their Majesties Protestant subjects dissenting from the Church of England from the penalties of certain laws". The Act consisted of nineteen clauses, of which the substance only can be given :

That none of the existing penalties against separate conventicles, or absence from the Established Church, be enforced against such dissenters as shall take the oaths of allegiance, and subscribe the declaration against popery-Quakers to make a declaration: That the ministers of such congregations shall in addition declare their approbation of and subscribe the Articles of Religion mentioned in the statute of 13 Elizabeth c. 12, except the 34th (of the Traditions of the Church), the 35th (of the Homilies), the 36th (of the consecration of bishops and ministers), and the words of the 20th Article (the church hath power to decree rites and ceremonies, and authority in controversies of faith; and yet). And in the case of those who scruple the baptising of infants, it is enacted that they be further relieved from subscribing part of the 26th Article touching infant baptism: That no conventicles be held with doors locked br barred: That all such meeting-houses be registered, and be protected from insult by a penalty: That this act shall not excuse payment of tithes, neither shall it discharge from the offices of constable, church-warden, or overseer: And that no part of this toleration be extended to papists, or such as deny the Trinity. [This act was much modified by an enlarged measure in the reign of George III.]

8. The Bill of Rights. Dec. 1689. This was simply the Declaration of Rights embodied in a bill, "declaring the rights and liberties of the subject and settling the succession of the crown".

In the Convention Parliament which now closes its eventful career, the following minor transactions may be recorded. The attainders of Lord Russell, Algernon Sydney, Alderman Cornish, and Lady Lisle were reversed; the sentence against Samuel Johnson annulled, and a compensation made him; and Oates of infamous memory, received a pardon and a pension. The court of the Council of Wales was abolished on account of its oppressive character, and replaced by Courts of Conscience at Bristol, Gloucester, and Newcastle-underLyne. A bill of Indemnity which William much desired should pass, was kept back during this parliament by the influence of the Whigs, who had a fear that the opposite party was gaining ground in the king's favor. In both Houses so many exceptions were made, that the bill fell through; in the next parliament, William took the matter into his own hands by sending down an act of grace.

SECTION II. AFFAIRS OF SCOTLAND.

1. The Scotch Convention meets. March 14, 1689. Through the management of Sir James Dalrymple, afterwards Lord Stair, a majority was returned in favor of William, for whom already the Duke of Hamilton, and the Presbyterians had declared. The cause of James was supported by the Duke of Gordon who held the castle of Edinburgh, and Graham, Viscount Dundee. When the Houses met, the bishop of Edinburgh, who officiated as chaplain, prayed for the restoration of king James, and the Duke of Athol was set up by the king's friends for president, Hamilton however was elected by a large majority. On