་ next: It passed in the negative.—And the question being put, that the said Proviso be read a second time, it passed in the negative. general in his absence? If any misfortune | himself as required, before the 1st of August happen, I have done my part, and I tell you, I will go as far for the good of the nation as I can. The Amendments, reported by the committee, were then agreed to by the house, and the Proviso was ordered to be ingrossed. May 7. The Regency Bill was read the third time. Another engrossed Clause was likewise offered, That no person shall incur the Penalty, who shall at the next quarter-sessions, take the Oaths on the Statute for Abrogating the Mr. Foley. I suppose it is the intention of Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, and apthe house, that the king have the adminis-pointing other Oaths and make the Declatration of the government when he comes back.ration in the Statute 25 Car. 2. And the quesI proffer a Proviso to assert whose orders shall tion being put, That the said Clause be read, it be obeyed; viz. That the king's shall be passed in the negative. obeyed.' Sir Christ. Musgrave. This proviso supposes, that the queen will not obey the king's orders. I would lay it aside. Sir Tho. Littleton. The clause has no hurt in it: it is possible the queen may be surprized, and orders may be given unknown to one another, and both cannot stand good if such a thing should happen, there is no hurt in the clause. : Mr. Finch. The only reason I hear for accepting this clause is, Because there is no great harm in it' to let the clause remain is no great harm; but I never heard it was a reason to receive it, because there was no great harm in it. The Proviso was rejected; and the Bill, with the Amendments, &c. passed. May 8. The question being put, that the Bill for reversing the Judgment in a Quo Warranto, against the city of London, and for restoring the city of London to its ancient Rights and Privileges, do pass, the house divided, and it was carried in the affirmative: yeas 166, noes 76. Proceedings on the Bill of 500l. Forfeitures.] May 9. The house having resolved itself into a committee to consider of the Bill for vesting the 5001. Forfeitures in their majesties; and Mr. Speaker having resumed the chair, a motion was made to adjourn the house, but passed in the negative, yeas 76, noes 80.-After which the chairman of the said committee having not been directed to make any Report, the house again resolved into a committee, and the report was referred till the next day. May 10. The question being put for making the said report, it passed in the affirmative, yeas 176, noes 93. The chairman then made the report accordingly, and a Clause was admitted, to be part of the Bill, for the Money to be paid into the Exchequer, and that a distinct account to be kept thereof.'--The question was then put, That the Bill, with the Amendments, be engrossed, which passed in the affirmative, yeas 152, noes 106.-On the 14th, a motion being made for reading the said Bill, it passed in the negative yeas 92; noes 111. On the 15th the Bill was read the third time. An engrossed Proviso was then offered to be added, as a rider, That the Bill shall not charge any person, who accepted any office or commission, and executed the same without qualifying himself, if the said person do qualify : Another engrossed Clause was offered as a rider, That, whereas a Judgment was given in Easter or Trinity Term 1686, in a Suit between Goodwin and IIales, contrary to law, and it is enacted, That every Judge of the court who consented thereto, and also every judge and baron, who delivered any opinion for the giving the said judgment, or for dispensing with the statute, shall forfeit 'And, That every person, who passed any Patent, dispensing with the same, shall be for ever disabled from holding any employment or trust; and that every judge or baron, that were so in the said Easter or Trinity term, who shall not appear before the commissioners for that purpose appointed, and prove that he did deliver his opinion against the said Judgment; such judge or baron shall be adjudged to be convicted, and to incur the said forfeitures, and disabilities.' Resolved, That the blank be filled up with 5001. And an Amendment was then proposed to be made in the said Clause, by leaving out the part relating to the disabilities, which upon the question, was agreed to by the house. The question being then put, That the Clause be read a third time, it passed in the negative.-Another engrossed Clause was of fered as a rider, That this Act shall not extend to charge any person, who after Oct. 8, and before Feb. 13, 1688, accepted any office, or commission, and executed the same without qualifying himself: if such person do qualify himself before Aug. 1, next; which proviso was twice read, and the question being put, that it be read the third time, it passed in the negative, yeas 160, noes 150. Resolved, That the Proviso be made part of the bill. The question being then put, That the bill do pass, it was resolved in the affirmative; yeas 137, noes 91.* *"In the end of the reign of James, many of the Dissenters had been allured to accept of religious liberty, illegally tendered by the stretch of prerogative; and some of them had accepted places for which they were disqua lified by law. It appears to have been with a view to expose the transgressions of the Whigs, that the Tories now brought in a Bill, for vesting in his majesty all Forfeitures incurred by those, who had been in office in the late reign, without the legal qualifications; and, that none of the forfeitures might be alleviated or Debate on two Members attending the H. of Lords.] May 12. A Message from the lords, to desire, That sir Robert Clayton, and sir George Treby may attend their house concerning the Alteration of the Lieutenancy in London. Sir Henry Goodrick. For persons to go from your house, to be sworn for evidence to impeach your Judgment of the Lieutenancy of London, I hope you will consider of it. For your members to attack your Judgment-I hope you will not compel your members to that. Sir Tho. Clarges. I am sorry to hear such a Message from the lords; it is an unfortunate thing; it affects me very much. They are scarce good friends to this monarchy, that will make a difference betwixt the king and his people, to impeach the king's authority into the bargain. By an act of Charles 2, the king has power to place and displace in the militia, and the king has taken great care of the militia of London, which is the great chamber of the kingdom. The king has settled this by commission, and placed persons as he thought fit; and it has been so well received by this house, that they addressed with Thanks to the king; and it is reported, that the lords have sent for a List of the lieutenancy, to know whether the king has done well, or no, The consequence, whatever it be, must tend to make a difference betwixt the houses. As for one of the gentlemen (Clayton) he is a party in the lieutenancy, and as for the attorney-general (Treby) the lords have a claim to call him to their house to sit there. Is not this a sort of bringing of original causes before the lords? In appeals, and writs of error, they have judicature, but not on the commons: they are no censoris morum; and to send a si quis, whether the king should give men such authority! Examine this, whether the lords do it judicially, as an original cause, and send the lords Answer by messengers of your own. Sir Edw. Seymour. Some present answer you must give, and it is moved to send it by messengers of your own.' The Message is of great moment, for your members to attend the lords. In all the enquiry I can make, I find no instance of such a message, till the last parliament, that Mr. Hampden, junior, was sent for, (see p. 425). Since it may be a contest, whatever it is, I would have the right on your side. As for one of them, the attorneygeneral, the lords had a right to him before he remitted, a Clause was added, ordaining them to be paid into the Exchequer, and accounted for to the public. This bill, if it had taken place, must have affected their own friends; but the Tories were willing to suffer in their pecuniary interests, provided that they could reduce the reputation of their antagonists to the same level with their own. After having passed the house of commons, it was thrice read in the house of lords, where some amendments were proposed; but the adjournment of parliament took place before these were agreed to by the other house." Somerville. was your member; therefore I would not insist upon a person that sits here by their courtesy, and not your right. The lords never send for witnesses in matters of Impeachments, as Goodrick said; you prepare all that. By the same reason that the lords send for one of your members, they may send for ten; and, by the same rule of proportion, call for the very Chair for evidence. It is against the right being, and order of the house to send your members, and I am against it. Sir Wm. Williams, I offer, that, as to the attorney-general, the king calls him thither, and the lords cannot distinguish him as to themselves. The attorney is not in possession of his place there; it must be the king that calls the lords to parliament, as he may do any of your members. I would send the lords an Answer by messengers of your own, till you can search Books; it is the best answer that can be given. Sir Tho. Lee. It is said, 'The debate may be long, and the messengers will stay;' but the messengers must attend the fate of that. I hope, whatever Sawyer's opinion is, that the house did rashly in the Thanks to the king about the Lieutenancy, that you will not take the sole advice of the king upon you; and, in the last Message, when you might have asked the lords concurrence, you said, 'You thanked for the cause, and not for the persons;' the lords now enquire into the persons. Your best Answer is, by messengers of your own. In the last parliament instead of giving leave to your members to go to the lords, to give evidence, you should have let the lords know that you are prosecutors, though they are the judges. I am sorry you have shown the lords the way to the king without you. The lords have a right to begin an Act of Attainder, as well as you. If the lords should proceed upon this as criminal, you let them know you are the accusers; and the best answer, for the present, is, by messengers of your own. Col. Austen. It does not appear that the lords, in this, act as in order to Judgment; and therefore it is no original cause; but that the lords may second you in their Thanks, if they shall think fit, I cannot see that any of those cases mentioned stand in your way. To suppose they shall shock you, is more than you ought to do. I would send Auswer by messengers of your own. Resolved, "That the messengers be called in, and acquainted, That the house will return an Answer by messengers of their own." Then the question for adjourning passed in the affirmative, 159 to 156. Debate on preserving the Peace of the Nation.] May 13. Sir Edward Seymour. I will not enter into the history, how the sun has gone back upon our dial; only I desire we may be preserved for the time to come. If you can sit down with all the ill administration of affairs you have had already, there is an end of my motion. I hope the king, upon passing the Bill of Regency, will leave us some time to consider; and it is worth your thoughts to cou- | sider to provide for the safety of the Nation in his absence, whether by the Militia, or otherwise. My motion is, To resolve the house into a committee of the whole house, to consider how to preserve the Peace of the Nation in the king's absence.' Lord Castleton. I am seldom of that gen tleman's opinion, but I am now, and I second his motion. hands, and putting it into others. It is both the right of the crown, and a necessity of putting the government in the queen, a princess of great judgment, and the king may well put her in that trust. I wish Seymour would be more particular in his motion; if not, you may proceed upon general Heads of a bill for the Militia; but if he will make no farther explanation of himself, I would adjourn. Sir Ch. Sedley. We are all contented, that the queen should have the administration of the government, in the king's absence; and we now consider how to make it easy to the queen. She is a wise woman, but she is a woman. The Col. Granville. I have heard the motion, and I think it so necessary, that I would not let it pass over. I am ready to embrace any remedy that may be offered. If we are in danger, now the king is here, and an army to de-king will leave her some of his own council, fend us, we cannot be safe when he is out of and some of king James's council, a mixed England; therefore I second the motion. council. What concerns all people ought to be handled by all; and I move as Seymour, &c. Sir Christ. Musgrave. The motion is of great importance; and that of the Militia, moved by Coningsby, is but one part of our safety; therefore I concur with Seymour's motion. Sir Tho. Clarges. I confess I do not understand the motion. You have had the Militia under consideration, and disarming Papists. The persons most likely to endanger us are the Papists, who, in the North, are gone from their houses, and are in confederacies. I would not lose the fruits of that Bill, so much for your safety, but I would speedily proceed upon it. Sir John Guise. This is too weighty a matter to speak to it off-hand. It is worth your time to consider, that a great part of the business of parliament is consulatory. Many words are not requisite now; and I move to go into a grand committee to-morrow.' Col. Birch. I am not fit to speak to this business: I cannot dance about it as others can. Nobody can doubt but the queen is but a woman still, and must have council. This is the great council. What will the people say? You have passed a Bill of Regency; but who shall advise and manage the queen in the king's absence? If Seymour meant not that, in his motion, I know not what he meant. It to have the kingdom managed for its safety be the meaning of it, I am for the question. Sir John Lowther. I do not well comprehend the meaning of this Vote. I wish it may be explained, that we might. No motions should be made without the subject-matter before you, and the meaning of it. I would not willingly anticipate any thing. If, by the debate, we delay the king's journey, or create Sir Tho. Lee. The question is of great apprehensions in the people, we make the weight, and it is late in the day. I cannot say, danger greater, and the enemies to the govern(as lord Castleton) That I am seldom of Sey-ment will proceed more boldly, when they see mour's opinion;' but I must say, I have been you apprehend your own weakness. Unless more of late than formerly. I should be glad | the motion be explained, I second the motion if he would propose something for you to go to adjourn. upon. I should be glad to have a little light what you have to do: but it falls oddly to have this motion come on the same day you have agreed the Bill of Regency with the lords;* now to put it in the people's heads, that they are insecure. It may be of some danger to publish your Votes now, at a time when you have passed a bill to be secure in a Regency, and that now you declare yourselves insecure. Sir Edm. Jennings. I suppose there is something latet in herbis in this motion. I think it is time to adjourn, and go to dinner. Col. Austen. I wonder to hear gentlemen speak of the security of the Nation in the king's absence,' and the next motion, to go to dinner.' I will trouble you with nothing more than what has been said. I reckon there is to be a management by council, and it is no disparagement. I think, if the motion be not agreed to, it will look ill abroad. Sir Henry Goodrick. Perhaps this motion may tend to taking the ministry out of some * This Bill had been returned by the lords just before. Sir John Thompson. I am for the motion, and I wish it had been sooner, and for a reason not touched : in the last parliament, when we were upon the consideration of the State of the Nation, and an Address preparing to the king, we were prorogued: we are doing what we were about then, and may be prorogued as we were then. After we have been hit twice in the same place, I am for the motion for a grand committee to-morrow. Sir Edw. Seymour. I had not gone on, but that the house seemed to acquiesce in my motion, and that gentlemen should be surprized to consult their own safety! I should be glad to be so surprized. My motion is plain and intelligible. He is a bold man that dares present you with a remedy to that end, otherwise than as a general proposition. If the motion be not entertained, the world may think we are in safety, and we need not consider of it. Sir Wm. L. Gower. I cannot imagine what explanation the motion needs; it is as reasonable as ever I heard. Though Seymour be able to propose, yet that no man will do but at a grand committee. We must consider this whilst the king is here, else, when he is gone, we shall want him to help us. Provision for our safety, whilst the king is here, is much better. I cannot apprehend what gentlemen fear from this consideration. The Bill of the Militia will not reach your end. Since all conclude it difficult to keep us in peace in the king's absence, pray put the question. Resolved, "That this house will, to-morrow, resolve itself into a committee of the whole house, to consider of ways and means to preserve the Peace and Safety of the Kingdom, in the absence of the king." May 14. The house went into a grand committee, on ways and means to preserve the Peace and Safety of the Kingdom, in the king's absence. Mr. Holt. I hope this day will not prove as others have done. We find fault, and do nothing. Great complaints are made abroad, and, I fear, jealousies. The papists say, We dare do nothing.' The nation can never be safe, nor at ease, till Ireland be reduced. Now, consider what hands we shall leave the queen in, in the administration, &c. It is of great consequence to be in hands we confide in. I hear that one Shales is come over. I would have him come up to give you account of the state of Ireland: they say, he is at Chester, and I would farther proceed to settling the Militia, and what else is requisite. Serjeant Maynard. We have had discoveries made of conspiracies, but never bring them home to any body. We have sent for this man, (Shales) and cannot get him. I would know who has obstructed it. Sir Wm. L. Gower. You have been moved for Shales to be sent for Will that be any security to the government? I hope you will think of something else. 6 Sir John Guise. The Order is, To consider how to secure the Nation, &c.' I know not how Shales comes directly into this case. If the errors of the last year must not be redeemed but by Shales's coming over now, I think that strange. Perhaps the queen may be very well satisfied without this; but it may satisfy her to have the Advice of this house; not that she wants advice, but is it not usual for us to give advice? The credit of the government may be in that advice. I have laid down some of my own thoughts for the present: I hope other gentlemen will do the same. Sir Henry Goodrick. Certainly Shales is in custody by duke Schomberg's order. One thing weighs upon me extremely; there is a wicked party in this kingdom, that incline too much to their opinion. I wish the public good may be the common standard: when I hear of such assemblies of men, and that the Scotch party increases in arms, and some whom the king has extended his grace to; when I see several persons taken in Kent and Essex, &c. I have reason to believe a general conspiracy. In four or five weeks they go loose again; every man will make friends of the unrighteous mammon, and favour them. I hope VOL. V. you will leave some such power to prevent this. Let us not enter into any thing now to breed distinctions, nor sow such seeds of discord as cannot become prolific, but by a separation amongst ourselves. I would consider such as are in actual opposition against the government, that they may be secured. Sir Wm. Whitlock. What I heard from Goodrick calls me up. That persons should be secured, seems to me to be a retrenching the Habeas Corpus Act. If an angel came from heaven that was a privy-counsellor, I would not trust my liberty with him one moment. I would not now have a way to break in upon that law; for this very reason, I would not touch upon that law, for there never can be greater discontent than breaking in upon that law. Mr. Coningsby. For some time I would repeal that law; it does not so much save you, as that your enemies, that would destroy the government, may not have the benefit of the government. Sir Joseph Tredenham. Our circumstances are very ill, if inconsistent with that law. Sir Henry Goodrick. I appeal, how irregularly those gentlemen speak to a thing never proposed. We are told of Saints and Angels,' by Whitlock, but I think there are none under his cassock; but I offered only, whether it was not fit, some way or other, to save the government; which it cannot be, unless the persons that conspire its ruin are prevented from walking about, &c. Sir John Guise. I desire that nothing may be done with the Habeas Corpus Act, which is part of the Bill of Rights; but a little severity to these men will be ineffectual. There is a writ Ne exeat regnum, and I hope the lawyers will tell you, that that writ may be extended without violating the Habeas Corpus act. I Sir Edw. Seymour. I consider the motion that brought you into this committee to preserve the nation in the king's absence. I saw, in the Bill of Regency, the same dissatisfaction; if there be reason, there may be remedy. I expected to have heard another debate than about Shales. The Habeas Corpus act, the best security of the nation, I would not meddle with. I thought it had been the best part of the security of the nation, the council about the queen in the king's absence. thought we could not be safe in the continuauce of those hands who had so much shaken the government. Whether it was their design, their ignorance, or misfortune, I would have no such bottoms to trust the government upon. The king being here, the government is assisted with vigour; if we have those Miscarriages now, I have no reason to believe we shall be safe in his absence. I believe no man will justify the miscarriages. Now, reflect how ourcondition will stand, in such arbitrary and uncertain hands. If a man be sick, and can have no remedy, when he finds one, and will not apply it, he is in a worse condition. I am afraid, if we do not apply to the king, to 2 T alter the administration of the government, in his absence, from the hands it is in now, your government cannot last long. Sir Ch. Sedley. That there are misfortunes from counsellors, I believe: I know not who they are, nor whether they are our friends. I have no accusation against any of them. I have been at cooking this dish many a time. To put the king upon this enquiry, now he is going away, would be unseasonable. Perhaps we are dissatisfied that some are in, and perhaps some would be dissatisfied if some of us were in. Pray let us go to some other business. Mr. Foley. I have had experience how hard this has been. Heretofore none of the privycouncil were ashamed of the Advice they gave; they set their hands to the Privy-Council book. I propose, that, for the future, all orders passed by the Privy-Council may be fairly entered, and that those present may enter their assent or dissent. Thus we may know, for the time to come, who gives Advice. Sir John Guise. I do not doubt of Sedley's eating well, and cooking;' but I know no meat you have before you: I think this is not a jesting matter. I am of opinion, two ways must secure the peace of the nation; by those who have done amiss formerly, not to be employed, to distaste the people. I know not who they are. We all know the privy-council who are present, and who the rest; it is an easy matter to take them down, to see the characters of men. If the characters have been formerly before you, if in former reigns, or this, they have given distaste. Let names be after things. If all be well, and you have nothing to say to any body, pray let us go to dinner. Sir John Thompson. When I hear the several discourses to-day of our condition, and the remedies, I would not leave them upon your hands. If you do not all the good, do some. I am only afraid of this, that they that have done you the mischief in time past will put you out of all power of remedy. They who sold you to France once, may do it twice. I desire to do something, and leave the rest to Providence. I would form it into a motion, viz. That all those who advised the king to dissolve the last parliament, may be removed from his council.' Mr. Hutchinson. I would have the Journals searched. I think those under Impeachments, in former parliaments, not fit to be near the king. able man, capable of making attempts on English spirits. When we reflect upon the arbitrary actions and counsels by the marquis of Carmarthen, in king William's time, it reminds us of the same actions in king Charles 2's time. I have heard of his merit in the Revolution. A private life would have better become him, and been more for his interest. I cannot wonder if people be cautious in sending Money to those that have so often miscarried. At one leap, from being prisoner in the Tower to be President of the Council, sticks with me. He has been impeached by the commons of England, and now to grasp at power to satisfy his revenge upon those who have impeached him, for betraying the liberties of England! I would pass some censure upon him, and pull him down, though he were greater than he is: and I will be ready to do always so to those that betray the liberties of England. Sir John Lowther. I did not think we should have had so profound a silence, if the danger had been from so great, so bold, and so able a man as lord Carmarthen. For an Impeachment against him, and he never tried, if that be a reason why he should be kept out of the Council, it may be a reason why he should come in. I think those were great crimes in the last reigns, of surrendering Charters, and those were not called to account. We were told then to lay all things asleep; but if you will look into Grievances, look into the last occasions of your ruin, not only into 1678, but 1684, and the rest. Sir John Guise. Mention has been made of other people in other parliaments, &c. that have been well spoken of in this house; but f wonder that so knowing a person speaks of justification, when pardons have been pleaded. In this case you have one mentioned; you may demand Judgment against him, and he has no thing to plead but the pardon; a man at that time questioned for French money; and 'tis an easy inducement for me to believe he will do so again. This nobleman has formerly been concerned in this house; we know how that went off. We had such reasons as I can never forget, why a Pardon cannot be pleaded to an Impeachment. He is President of the Council, and I could wish Lowther would tell us the good that council has done. For my own common safety, I confess, I cannot have confidence in him. I second the motion, and desire, 'That, during the king's absence, the lord marquis of Carmarthen may not be left one of the Council.' Col. Granville. I hope we shall have some good effect of this day's debate. If we knew from whence our misfortunes come, they might Mr. Shadrach Vincent. Since I see it is now be the easier remedied. I have heard persons the fashion to name privy counsellors, I will described. I am for the head of the Privy-name another, who I desire may be turned out: Council; a great man, a bold man, and an "He is said to have pushed for the Treasurer's staff, a post he had formerly enjoyed, but was refused by the king, who was resolved the Treasury should be in the hands of ComReresby. "The earl of Danby had been made Lord President, and created marquis of Carmarthen. He had, by his accomplishing the king's marriage with the queen, and heartily concur-missioners." ring in the Revolution from the very beginning, * When earl of Danby. See vol. iv. p. 1060, atoned in some measure for his proceedings 1067. under Charles 2." Boyer. |