« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
provides (as the Bill is penned) that all manner of crimes may be tried by the peers.' Though the preamble of the Bill tells you of Trials of capital crimes,' yet the body of the bill is all Trials.'--All peers are on their Honour; and you alter the very constitution of the kingdom. It may so fall out that the number of peers cannot be had, that this law requires, and so there may be a failure of justice. The whole design of the Bill is, that there may be a number of peers, that may judge against law and right. But can you give any one instance, that any peer, in our memory, ever miscarried upon the ancient way of Trial? if we had found any lamentable experience and example of this ancient way of Trial-but there being none, why should you alter the law for a bare suspicion only? In James 2's time, lord Brandon was found guilty by his fellow commoners, and condemned:* lord Dela
part with the Habeas Corpus act for a time, | but is this the way to secure the government, to give liberty to the peers to conspire with James 2? I shall never think it for the peace of the government, if you pass this Bill, to let the peers do all they please with impunity. The end and design of the bill is, that the peers may have challenges, as the commons have. The bill is of no use to you. For here is a number of peers of the last parliament, or ought to be. Perhaps not above 80 temporal lords, and 60 summoned; some may be sick, or have business, or may be solicited to be absent: if 45 appear, and 20 are excepted against, there can be no trial. It was upon this argument before, when the lords sent down a Bill of this nature, that unless the lords were under the common safety of others, the king sitting in their house, and hearing their debates, they were in danger.' Is this a time to have that jealousy, now we are undermeret by his peers was acquitted. What adthis happy change? Were it for nothing else, vantage do we get by this bill? We would have pray let us not overturn the whole frame of fair and equal Trial, and shall we, in prejudice government for the lord's sake. Every clause, of the commons, give this challenge away y? It in the Bill, relating to the commons, is equally is almost impossible to have just trial this way. beneficial to the lords. In Indictments for The peers are most of a blood, (the ancient Treason, (the Bill tells us) we shall have coun- peers) and so a commoner can have no fair sel,' and it is for able Jurics; is it not as trial against a peer, and they have already well for the lords as us? For they must be more privileges than the commons. You, by tried in Appeals by common juries. The Bill this, advance the peerage against the common is abundantly less beneficial to the commons right of the commons, and make it neither in than the lords. The crown you can oblige by the power of the king, nor the commons, to intercourse of Aids, but there is none betwixt bring a peer to justice. The commons are the lords and you. Great purchases were straitened, and the crown is straitened. How made of these Honours. Notwithstanding the many men have been undone by Scandalum dangers the lords apprehend, the bill is of dan- magnatum! Commoners have had 20,000l. gerous consequence to the commons, and for verdict against them; and a peer thinks himthe honour of the house I would reject it. self dishonoured unless the jury gives what he demands. I would rather provide against these things. If the lords will set a limitation to Scandalum magnatum; (it may lie 20 years, and they may bring it about) if the lords will agree that no words shall be scandal, but where an action may be brought by a commoner against a commoner-Suppose a commoner say, 'He cares for a peer no more than a dog,' though a peer call me rogue and rascal-Let the lords frame a fair Bill, and we will pass it. If they will have ceremony, we will compliment them, and stand bare in their lobby, and the Painted Chamber, at conference; but matter of right we shall dispute.
Sir Wm. Pulteney. No man can deny but that the lords ought to have fair Trials. Whenever the crown has a displeasure to a noble peer, by practices he may be drawn into treason, and a high steward may be appointed, and seven of the summoned lords to try him may take away his life. Will you at this time differ with the lords? This is a time, when you have a good king, to get good laws. The peers were very instrumental in bringing about this good change, and they desire only that their posterity may be in good condition, and out of danger. Some clauses relating to the commons are inestimable, as that a Juryman shall have 207. per ann. of freehold to try a commoner;' and, that counsel shall be allowed in treason, &c.' Col. Sidney had not lost his life, if he had had counsel allowed him. Had that been four years ago, it might have saved the life of many a person. I hope you will take care for the future against the same danger. A commoner may exempt peremptorily against 35 jurors. I would have a good correspondence with the lords.
Sir Wm. Williams. I have a great honour for the peers, and as far as with justice I will do it. This Bill is not only dangerous to the commons, but to the crown too. There is a little sprinkling of Holy Water in this bill. It
* "In 1685, for conspiring with other false traitors (Monmouth, &c.) to raise a Rebellion, depose and put to death the late king, &c.' of which being found guilty by the prostitute juries of these times, he received sentence of death; but by applying properly made a shift to obtain a pardon; which sir John Reresby celebrates as a signal act of grace, because that lord had formerly been condemned for breaking a boy's neck in his cups, and had been admitted to mercy." Ralph.
Lord Delamere's charge was 'for being an accomplice with Monmouth, in his late Rebellion."
Pray lay aside the Bill. What relates to the commons that are Grievances already, your Bill may do; and they are put into this Bill for a handle.
Sir Rob. Howard. By the consequence of Williams's discourse, he is for the Bill and against it. I think the Bill is rather descending to us than taking from us. That of Scandalum magnatum added to the bill may be of use. The bill does us no hurt. Methinks Juries of finding the Scandalum magnatum at excessive damage, and fines with salvo contenemento, may be remedied, and I am for the Bill.
Mr. Hampden. I am not for throwing out the Bill, nor for a second reading of it. Let it lie upon the table. I hear an instance of passing lord Clarendon's Bill of Banishment, &c. The house was then very thin. All Clarendon's friends were for passing it. A relation of Clarendon's for not passing it was at a distance-I am not for throwing it out, nor for a second reading, for I do not know the parts of it. Let it be well considered. If you cast out the bill, you can receive no bill of this matter this session. I would read it a second time in a full house.
Mr. Finch. I am for letting the Bill lie upon the table, and so be read in a full house. The objection for throwing it out is, because the peers have an equal benefit with the commoners, which is no objection. The number objected of the peers, that they may be solicited to stay away, &c.' they may be so to appear too.
The Speaker. To let the Bill lie upon the table, and order it no second reading, I never saw. The proper question is, 'Whether you will read it a second time.'
Sir Christ. Musgrave. The natural question is, Whether you will read it a second time.' The reason why you let the Bill lie upon the table, after you have read it, is, you are masters of the parts of it. In former parliaments, we were well acquainted with this Bill. I would have a question that every body may be gratified in. I would adjourn the debate.-The debate was adjourned till Monday fortnight.
Account of the Produce of the Excise.] Col. Birch, according to order, delivered in
An ABSTRACT of the gross and neat Produce of the EXCISE of England and Wales, in four years, ending 24th June 1688, viz. Year ended 24th June, 1685. Gross Excise of Beer, Ale, Cyder, Metheglin, Strongwaters, Coffee, &c. Gross Excise of Brandy, Mum and Cyder, imported
Charges of Management
Exported Beer, &c.
£. S. d. 627,523 18 81
48,491 3 84 676,015 2 41
86,263 11 0
1,138 11 5
3,721 5 4
584,891 14 6
676,015 2 44
By Poundage allowed to the
From the 24th June, 1686; to the 24th June, 1687, The gross Produce of the additional Excise upon Brandy imported The gross Produce of the additional Excise upon inland Strong-waters
By neat Produce
Sundry Fees and Salaries paid
- 37,365 2 0
261 7 8 34,324 17 3
8,614 9 11
45,979 11 11
£. s. d. 946 16 7
Estimate of the Charge of Government.] Sir Rob. Howard, according to order, delivered in the following Accounts and Estimates:
348 17 6 44,632 4 3
45,979 11 11
AD ABSTRACT of the Medium Expences of the late king James II. by actual Payments in Money, for Three Years, from Lady-day 1685, to Lady-day 1688; viz. To the Navy 417,462 12 10 83,493 9 3
610,883 1 5
15,125 3 11
2,676 14 24,663 19 3
998 10 11
322 7 7 53,226 11 114 54,516 19 7
32,657 9 7 11,045 13 0
56,495 12 7
146,703 17 3
6,000 0 0
27,680 10 8 89,968 8 2
6,066 13 4 9,333 6 8
26,416 13 4
45,224 6 2 was paid by peculiar Warrants.
9,292 13 5
Forces. In the last six years of king Ch. 2. the Expence of the Force amounted to about 300,000l. per ann. Treasurer of the Chamber.-The annual 54,516 19 7 Expence, in Ch. 2.'s time, was computed at 30,000l.
15,740 6 0
96 12 0
22,403 6 3
£. 1,699,363 2 9
Memorandum. The Principal and Interest to the Bankers and their Assigns, and the Interest of Monies borrowed.
NOTES referring to the Estimate of the Expence of the Crown.
Robes.-King Ch. 2. when all Heads were retrenched, coutinued the Robes at the Ex968 0 14 pence of 5000l. per anp.
Pensions and Annuities.-By the medium, it appears, one year's payment 146,7037. 17s. 3d. In these years 50,000l. paid to the Queen Consort every year. To the queen dowager 18,2001. yearly. To the prince and princess of Denmark yearly 32,000l.: but their Expences have exceeded this about 8000l. a year; which has been paid out of Bounty, in gross.
Privy-Purse. In Ch. 2.'s time the PrivyPurse was computed at 30,000l. per ann.
Impost Bills.-In Ch. 2.'s time, was 3,600/. per ann.
Navy. In the last four years of Ch. 2. the Charge of the Navy was never less than 400,000l. per ann.
Household.-In Ch. 2's time computed at 107,000l.
Ordnance.-The Ordnance was always paid 1000l. the week, and 20007. the quarter, which is per ann. 60,000l. And this Ordinary was never less; what was more, as in the Medium,
Contingencies, &c. As Clerkships, Repair-
In Ch. 2.'s time, the Charge
£. s. d. 1,699,363 2 9
300,000 0 1,399,363 2 9
the Navy and Army are not to be considered in the constant Charge. I doubt not but we shall give what is necessary; but I would consider the Navy and Army as an extraordinary Charge.
47,000 0 0
Mr. Guy. I hear my name mentioned upon the head of great Sums, though under the denomination of Secret Service. The reason was, to ease the charge of the great 5,000 0 0 seal : But, be it what it will, I am ready to give account, to a penny, of what I received. Mr. Garroway. I am ready to serve you to come to an end. I agree not to the MeO dium; but if you will come to make a Revenue for the king, we cannot say the Revenue will stand to 1000, or 10,000l. there being several variations of the Customs in several years. We are now providing for a War, and something of the Revenue may be applicable to it. I except not against the accounts of the several particulars of the small branches of the Revenue, but I hope the king will contribute to the War as well as we; it is for his safety. Shall we be worse husbands now, than in the late kings reigns, in all the extravagancies of expences? Compute the necessary Charge of the Crown, and let the remainder be applied to the Charge of the War.
477,400 5 0
Col. Birch. I would refer all the Charge of the Government, and that of the Houshold, to the privy council, except that of the Navy, the family that rises and falls upon occasion. This being presented to the house, you will immediately see the Charge; else you will be long in your Resolutions.
Mr. Harbord. Here have been several motions. You may be sure, that the money you give will not be spent in debauchery and lewdness, but employed as you would have it. Either to make particular provision, &c. or in gross, I am indifferent. In another thing, you must give the king your helping hand, or else you do nothing: There is a farm given out of the Customs to the dutchess of Portsmouth's children, which is the farmage of coals, and that is in papists hands.
£ s. d. 20,000 0 o
20,000 0 O 185,525 0 O
Resolved, "That the said Accounts be referred to the Committee of the whole house, who are to take into consideration the Revenue, and the constant and necessary Charge of supporting the Crown."
Farther Debate on the King's Revenue.] The house then resolved into a Committee of the whole house to take into consideration the Revenue.
Sir Wm. Williams. I take the Revenue to be 1,580,000l. out of this certainty I deduct the Hearth Money, 200,000l. Your immediate Charge then is the constant Charge of the crown. If you give the crown too little, you may add at any time; if once you give too much, you will never have it back again. Therefore I would declare the constant Charge of the crown.
Mr. Sacheverell. I agree, that it is necessary to consider the constant Charge of the crown in time of peace. By the Charge of the Navy and Army, in king James's time, we cannot make computation, nor from the calculation made from king Charles's, when the Expence was extravagant. Rather then compute the moderate Charge in king Charles's time. I would know whether, in the years 1673, 4, 5, 6, the Customs did not arise to as much as in all the severe way of management? 'Tis necessary that you agree what the common Expence of the Government is, under Heads, as it was drawn up in the time of sir Win. Coventry; the Pensions were never heard of till Mr. Guy's time. Expences are much lessened, and the Revenue advanced. Bating the Navy and the Army, I would see if the constant Charge is not above 400,000l. per As if 600,000l. for an Army for everTo find all the Navy out of repair, and cost as much as when in service, I cannot agree. Because the Army and Navy cannot but be maintained, therefore I am of opinion, that
Sir Henry Capel. You are pretty near a question. The establishment of the Government is agreed on all hands: there remains nothing but provision for the Ordnance, Army, and Fleet. Though in peace you'll allow for a summer-guard, and in winter for the safety of trade: the Plantations, Indies, (and they had more men of war there than we here) these are to be considered, in time of peace, as part of the Government in peace. I do not understand, that what is established for the Fleet and Ordnance is for the sum total of the extraordinary Charge. The question is only now, of having an account brought you. You will have no head of it of Secret Service to trouble you. There must be an Establishment for the Queen, and princess Anne, who has deserved very well of the nation.
Sir Tho. Clarges. What Charge is for the Fleet in time of peace, must go into that in time of war. There is a Charge of the Ord
nance of 60,000l. per ann. for yatchs, and
great difference. All of us have confidence in
The sum computed is
Mr. Hampden. 640,000l.
Sir Rob. Howard. I would not have you make good husbandry, at the expence of our own hazard. 'Tis said, You may raise it at so much a quarter.' You must consider, you cannot raise this but by annual things. There is 600,000l. for the Dutch. The next you are to raise, must be so much a year for so many years. Ireland is not able, in the least manner, to afford subsistence. Those who are up, and assist you, must have pay from you. He that has done so much for us, will not turn upon us, to take any thing from us unreasona bly.
Sir Tho. Lee. I know not how the condition of the War may leave you. I love not to please myself with the names of a Navy and Army. But not so properly till we see how things stand abroad; how Alliances are concluded: but I think the debate leads you to consider of Ireland, and to support the Charge of this year's War, and to know what of the Revenue will do. What the constancy of the Revenue must be, men are tender, but will be willing to supply the present emergency.
Sir Christ. Musgrave. 'Tis absolutely necessary, when you consider the Revenue, that you consider the summer and winter-guard, and likewise the Ordnance and Garrisons; and all these must be in your eye. As for the Expences of the Civil Government, you have as much before you as is desired. You must likewise consider the queen, and the princess of Denmark; and when that is done, I would not be pinching to support the government at ease. I know we are under great necessities for raising Money, and for the Charge of the Ordnance, I can do it to a farthing. I believe England can never be without some standing force. I deal plainly with you.
Mr. Sacheverell. I would gladly settle the Revenue; but I would know, when you have voted the sum for the Revenue, how you can deduct any thing. Therefore I would have had particulars.
Col. Birch. I never was so puzzied in a question, in my life as in this. We are establishing a Revenue, as in time of peace; pray God we may see it! I understand the debate to be this; they that know the Revenue, to bring in what particulars there are for the Government. I really would vote 1,200,000/; and I would have the world know that the king has such a Revenue; and the privy council will tell you what is for the Civil Government; else it is in effect to settle a Revenue of 400,000l. per ann. only.
1,200,000l. voted for the Annual Revenue.] Resolved, nem. con." That it is the opinion of this Committee, that there be a Revenue of 1,200,000l. per ann. settled upon their majesties, for the constant necessary Charge of supporting the Crown in time of peace.' Which was agreed to by the house.
Debate on the Supply for Ireland.] March 22. The house resolved into a grand committee on the Supply for Ireland; Mr. Hampden in the Chair.
Sir Wm. Williams. All are agreed for a Supply; 'tis before you, the sum and the time. You have had computations; and you may conjecture, probably, what will do. Tis your present consideration, whether you will give an Aid for 6 months or 12; which I see is no VOL. V.
Mr. Garroway. I would know upon what we are to lay the Money, before we think of the way of raising it, lest we should have recourse to land-tax at last. I move, to raise 310,000/. for six months, and so from six months to six months.
Sir Christ. Musgrave. Not one point of the Estimation is disputed; but some part of the Charge cannot come in the rest of the six months; all the rest to be deducted from the rest of the six months. But I am for the question of the whole sum.
Mr. Harbord. This 300,000l. will not carry your forces into Ireland. Persons have been sent into the north of Ireland, and there are not oats for your horses, only grass; they must be had out of Cheshire, Wales, and Lancashire. Money must be spent in bread, barley, and beef. What with the levy-money and arms, you will not have one shilling to keep them the rest of the time. They have commissions in Ireland for 30,000 men; and as soon as the king shall land these men, all must be supported at the king's charge. This way will be fatal to the king and yourselves.
Mr. Hampden, jun. The charge of one year is partly agreed upon; and I think it must be for a year, for this reason: 'Tis more than an Irish war; I think 'tis a French war. The French king has carried king James into Ireland; and there is no way possible to bear that great force, but by securing Ireland. You must give the king such a fund of credit, as that foreign protestants may come into alliance with him. Always, the computation of Germany is for a year; if for half a year only, no body will ever join with you. If for common defence, do it for a year, that they may join with you. Therefore I move for 700,000l.
Sir Joseph Tredenham. If you had a pros pect to end the war in a year, I would give it for a year. 1 fear it will be a longer time; and, let it cost what it will cost, and for as long a time as it will, it must be maintained. Q