for it, being thrice that number. But in the house of commons, when it appeared how the lords were inclined, they resolved to bring in a bill, that should oblige all persons to take this Abjuration. It was drawn by sir Charles Hedges. All employments in church and state were to be subject to it. Some things were added to the Abjuration, such as an obligation to maintain the government in king, lords, and commons, and to maintain the church of England, together with the toleration | for dissenters. Mr. Finch offered an alteration to the clause abjuring the prince of Wales, so that it imported only an obligation not to assist him; but, though he pressed this with unusual vehemence in a debate, that he resumed seventeen times in one session, against all rules, he had few to second him in it. The debate, whether the Oath should be imposed or left free, held longer. It was carried but by one | vote to impose it.

The Commons, after a long delay, sent up the Bill for abjuring the pretended Prince of Wales. In the house of lords the Tories opposed it all they possibly could; and, as it was a new Bill, the debate was intirely open. They first moved for a Clause, excusing the Peers from it. If this had been received, the Bill would have been certainly lost, for the commons would not have yielded to it. When this was rejected, they tried to bring it back to be voluntary. This motion was thought a strange inconsistency in those, who had argued against even the lawfulness of a voluntary oath; but it was visible, that they intended by it only to lose or at least to delay the bill. When this was over-ruled by the house, not without a mixture of indignation in some against the movers, they offered next all those clauses, which had been rejected in the house of commons, with some other very strange additions, by which they discovered both great weakness and an inveterate rancour against the government; the opposition ended in a protest of several Peers, when it passed on the 24th of Feb. Burnet, Boyer, Tindal.

Protest thereon.] This protest was as follows, 1. "We conceive, that no new oath should be imposed upon the su ject, forasmuch as those, established by an act made in the first year of the reign of his majesty and the late queen Mary, were, together with our rights and liberties, ascertained in that act under the terms of our Submission to his majesty, which were enacted to stand, remain, and be the law of this realm for ever; and which, we conceive, do comprehend and necessarily imply all the duty and allegiance of the subject to their lawful king.-2. And much less should any new oath be imposed upon the lords, with such a penalty as to lose their seats in parliament, upon their refusing it; such a penalty being, in some measure, an intrenchment upon our constitution, and expressly contrary to the standing order of this house made he 30th day of Apr. 1675.-3. And, if such an infringe ment of the rights of Peers might be admitted,

yet, in a matter of so great importance to all the Peers, we conceive, that in justice they should all have had notice of this matter, and been especially summoned to have attended the house upon so great an occasion; which has not been done, though it was moved and humbly desired on behalf of the absent lords. -4. And, if any further evidence of the subjects fidelity were, at this time, necessary to be required, we conceive a new oath is no such evidence, nor any additional security to the government; because those who have kept the oaths, which they have already taken, ought in justice to be esteemed good subjects; and those, who have broken them, will make no scruple of taking or breaking any others, that shall be required of them. And consequently this new oath may be of dangerous and pernicious consequence to the government, by admitting such ill men, who do not fear an oath, into the greatest trusts, and who, under the specious pretence and protection of this new oath, which is to free them from suspicion, will have greater opportunities of betraying their king and their country.-5. If a new oath were necessary, as we conceive it is not, yet the words of this oath are so very ambiguous, and have been so differently construed by several lords, who have declared their sense of them, that this may become a snare to men's consciences, or tend to overthrow the obligation of an oath, by allowing men liberty to take it in their own sense; whereas this, as all other oaths, ought to be taken in the sense of the imposer, which hath not been declared in this case, though we earnestly pressed it, and though it has been done in other cases of the like nature.-6. And we conceive, that it necessarily follows from hence, that this oath can be no bond of union among those, who do take it, nor any true mark of distinction between the friends and the enemies of this government; and therefore repugnant to the very nature of a test. (Signed) Winchelsea, Denbigh, Guilford, Craven, Weymouth, Plymouth, Nottingham, Scarsdale, Stawell, Jeffreys."

Proceedings against Fuller for libelling the last House of Commons.] Jao. 22. Fuller, the famous Impostor, who had undertaken to prove all that bad been alledged concerning the sunriousness of the pretended Prince of Wales's birth, who had otherwise made his court to the government in the year 1691, y un sertaking to discover a Plot of his own contraing, and who was at this time prisoner in the Fleet, had set forth several Libels, in which be had strained his invention to counter "ce all that had been said, concerning the discibucion of French money among Men hers of Pbament; upon which occasion the house first appointed a Committee, to consider et mot ods for preventing Libe's and scandalous Pipers, and then ordered the said Fuller to be bought to the bar, in order to he examined concerning the Libels he had written, and how he had been supported and maintained? But, instead of shrinking under this Examination, with an

:

:

for the said borough, and not for Hedges and Paunceford; in verification of which, he produced, and delivered to the clerk of the house, a bag of gold, and a bank note of 2001. which he said, he had received from the said Daniel Park.

impudence peculiar to himself, he took upon | persons, in order to their being elected memhim to produce in ten days time, two gentle-bers for the said borough; and that by those men of fortune and character (whom he was and other unlawful practices, they had carried pleased to call Thomas Jones, esq. and John their election accordingly.--But on better conEnglefield, gent.) and who, having the protec-sideration, the Vernons thought fit to apply to tion of the house, would make no difficulty to the house for leave to withdraw their Petition : manifest at the bar of the same, That they had and as to the other, it took a turn upon the in such manner distributed, &c. more than hearing at the bar of the house, which was alto180,000l. by order of the French king, with gether extraordinary: For Adey, in person, de their own hands. All that he required was clared his concern in that affair had been in granted, and more than all; for he was allow-behalf of Daniel Park, esq. another candidate ed a fortnight instead of ten days and in that interval, he amused the house with no less than four Letters; the last of which was to signify, That the said two gentlemen were come near the town in order to attend the house; and that he himself desired to be heard on the morrow, being the 5th of Feb. and the Certain petitioning Burgesses of Malmsbury result was, That he found himself entangled in ordered into Custody.] Upon which, and after his own snare, without any possibility of an the usual hearing of council on both sides, it escape for the house ordered, that he should, was resolved, without a division," That Hedges at his own desire,' be brought up, and that and Paunceford were duly elected: that the he should also bring the said two gentlemen Petition of the said burgesses was scandalous, along with him. But this was out of his false and vexatious: that the said burgesses power; no such persons were in being all should be taken into the custody of the serthat he aimed at was to lay such a story to-jeants: that Park had been guilty of notorious gether as might corroborate the suspicions al- bribery and corruption, in endeavouring to proready entertained, and the calumnies already cure himself elected; and that he also should propagated, and on the merit thereof, to quar- be taken into custody, and prosecuted by the ter himself for life on the party who had set Attorney-General." them abroach: and in regard to that merit, it must be presumed, all our historians have either passed over this incident in silence, or else have barely mentioned, that he fell under the censure of the house, without the least hint of his offence.-And yet the said censure is one of the most remarkable that is to be found in the Journals of Parliament. To wit," Resolved, nem. con. That William Fuller, taking no warning by the just censure he received from the house of commons the 24th of Feb. 1691 (p. 690), and the punishment he suffered by judgment of law, bas, again, repeated his vile practices, by several false accusations in divers scandalous Pamphlets by him published, and having undertaken to produce Thomas Jones, esq. and John Englefield, gent. to make good the said Accusations, and not performing the same, this house doth declare the said William Fuller to be a Cheat, a false Accuser, and an incorrigible Rogue." The Attorney-General was moreover ordered to prosecute him. Ralph.

Some remarkable Proceedings in controverted Elections.] Under the head of Controverted Elections, it is farther to be remembered, That on the one hand, Mr. Secretary Vernon (who sat for Westminster) and his son, petitioned against sir Joseph Tredenham and his nephew, who according to the allegations of the said Petitioners, had been unduly, and illegally returned for St. Mawes: And that on the other, several of the burgesses and inhabitants of Malinsbury, petitioned against sir Charles Hedges, (who was also Secretary of State during the election) and Edw. Paunceford, esq. under pretence, That one Adey, an attorney, had corruptly treated and contracted with several

A Censure passed on the Earl of Peterborough for indirect Practices in favour of the said Park.] Nor did the Affair end here; for in the course of the hearing, it had been made appear, that the earl of Peterborough had interfered on the behalf of Park, which the house being disposed to resent, as a trespass upon one of their fundamentals, his lordship desired to be heard, and was heard with the usual ceremonies, accord. ingly: Notwithstanding which, and after two several motions, the one to adjourn the house, and the other the debate, had been severally over-ruled, it was resolved, "That it appeared to the house, that the said earl was guilty of many indirect practices, in endeavouring to procure the said Park to be elected a burgess, &c." On every one of these points the house divided, and the difference of the numbers serves to shew in some degree the agitations of the day. For the first division was 156 to 76, the second 158 to 144; and the third, by which time it was very late, 141 to 56.

Besides, so great the indignation of the house appeared to be against the Burgesses in custody, that when they petitioned to be enlarged, without acknowledging their fault, no notice was taken of their Petition; and when they presented a second petition, acknowledging that fault, expressing their sorrow for it, and begging pardon for the same, the motion made for their discharge was over-ruled on a division of the house, by 158 voices against 152; Upon a farther application, they were, however, enlarged; and lastly, the Money and Bank Bill deposited in the hands of the clerk, were redelivered by order, to be made use of upon the prosecution against the said colonel Park,

Case of Mr. Colepeper the Kentish Peti- | Resolution at all.-On the 19th, however, in tioner.] It was also the misfortune of Mr. consequence of a new motion, to the like effect, Tho. Colepeper, the undertaker of the Kentish the 26th was appointed for the farther consiPetition, (p. 1251), to be now a petitioner in his deration of the Rights, Liberties, and Privileges own case, against Thomas Bliss, esq. returned of the house of commons: And on the 24th, for Maidstone by a majority of only two votes. the marquis of Hartington, by way of counterIn the hearings before the committee of privi- measure, moved, for an instruction to the Comleges and elections, the cause had been so mittee of the whole house, appointed to sit on managed that it appeared wrong on his side that occasion; "That they should also take and right on his adversaries; so that every point into consideration, the rights and liberties of was decided against him: Bliss was declared all the commons of England;" which was agreed duly elected; and it was resolved, that he had to accordingly. been guilty of corrupt, scandalous, and indirect Thus the two parties were so far set upon practices.—Finding, therefore, the current set even ground; and it was apparent that in this so strongly against him, he endeavoured to be-contest neither would be able to obtain any speak the clemency of the house, by a Letter, considerable advantage over the other: and, which was read from the Chair by the Speaker: indeed, unless a large body of Tories withdrew But all the effect it produced was, an angry before the house was resumed, which for want motion, That the house would appoint a day of sufficient lights, cannot be ascertained, we to take into consideration the Rights, Liberties ought to conclude, perhaps, that the party split and Privileges of the house of commons; and upon a measure which some foresaw would be a violent debate thereon; which was suspended unprofitable: for, according to the Journals, only for the sake of deriving fresh matter the attendance on that side was, by no means, against him from the Report, then to be made suitable to the stress which seemed to be laid by sir Rowland Gwinn, chairman of the said upon it: for those who did attend, though, at Committee. first, so earnest for having the day appointed, were so ill satisfied with the issue of it, that they were for postponing the Report; while their antagonists, on the contrary, insisted on its being made immediately, and upon a division of the house, carried their point by 102 voices against 62.

The Aspersions cast on the last House of Commons voted scandalous, villainous &c. And the said Colepeper committed to Newgate.] Accordingly, when the house had confirmed the first Resolution in favour of Bliss: An Amendment was offered to the second concerning Colepeper, in these words: "Who was one of the instruments in promoting and presenting the scandalous, insolent and seditious Petition, commonly called the Kentish Petition, to the last house of commons:" And though the said Amendment was liable to many objections (nothing transacted in a former session; or, at least, in a former parliament, being properly cognisable by a new one) it was agreed to without a division: As were also the two following Resolutions, to wit, "That the aspersing the last house of commons or any member thereof with receiving French Money, or being in the interest of France, was a scandalous, villainous, and groundless reflection; tending to sedition, and to create a misunderstanding between the king and his people; that Thomas Colepeper, esq. is guilty of promoting the said scandalous, villainous and groundless reflection upon the said house of commons." And the two following orders, "That the said T. C. esq. be for his said offence committed to Newgate: And that his majesty's attorney-general do prosecute the said T. C. for the said crimes."

Proceedings on the Rights and Privileges of the House of Commons.] The adjourned debate on the motion above specified, was then resumed; and after much altercation, a day was appointed for the purposes therein men tioned. The day came, to wit, the 16th of Feb.: the house resolved itself into a committee: Col. Granville had the chair: many warm speeches were made, which were as warmly answered: and upon the issue, both the committee and the house broke up without coming to any

The said Report consisted of five Resolutions; to wit: Resolved, 1. "That it is the opinion of this Committee, That to assert the house of commons is not the only Representative of the Commons of England tends to the subversion of the Rights and Privileges of the house of commons, and the fundamental constitution of the government of this kingdom. 2. That to assert the house of commons have no power of Commitment but of their own members, tends to the subversion of the constitution of the house of commons. 3. That to print or publish any Books or Libels, reflecting upon the proceedings of the house of commons, or any member thereof, for or relating to his service therein, is a high violation of the Rights and Privileges of the house of commons. 4. That it is the undoubted Right of the people of England, to Petition or Address to the king, for the calling, sitting, and dissolving of parliaments, or for the redressing of grievances. 5. That it is the undoubted right of every subject of England, under any accusation, either by Impeachment or otherwise, to be brought to a speedy Trial, in order to be acquitted or condemned:" and these Resolutions were severally confirmed by the house. Ralph.

Message concerning an Union with Scotland.] Feb. 28. The king being very sensible, that the Protestant Succession would not be so easily settled in Scotland, where it might be retarded, on purpose for a claim to an independence on the crown of England, and that nothing was more seasonable at this juncture, than an union of the two kingdoms, sent the following message