three times, but for the more safety of your proceedings? Whether it is for the honour and credit of the house to vary Resolutions, I appeal to you. Those rules and measures our ancestors left us, are the safest way. The inconvenience every body is sensible of, in the ancient way of passing Bills by Item, where the king might reject and accept what he pleased. When the king shall come to take notice of what you do here, what becomes of your Liberty of Speech, and what becomes of your Freedom of Debates? It is contrary to the course of nature here, to make a general publication of what you do, before you make it in course of parliament. As for sending your Votes to Coffee-houses, it is a great crime; it is more for the service of the house that your clerks take not that liberty to publish them in Coffee-houses, and most for your honour not to print them.

Sir Rd. Temple. This matter is of more moment than at first it seemed to be; little benefit, and great inconvenience, may come from it. I dislike all innovations. In a great assembly, what is done must be with great reason: there ought to be no innovation. All that can be proved for printing it, is to rectify Coffee-houses, and for beyond sea. I saw, at Oxford Parliament, another thing gained, upon commissions that gentlemen had from their country about the Exclusion Bill. I hope we shall not imitate Holland, to go to our principals for Instructions; it may be of dangerous consequence to alter the government. I hear of balloting-boxes; they have had them in Scotland, but they are weary of them, as precluding all debates. This strikes at the essential privilege of parliament, when you have advanced in a Bill, and then reject it, and the people know not the reason of that. I would have sending the Votes to Coffee-houses redressed; but it is far less inconvenience than that your Resolutions should go about from yourselves with approbation: I never heard any good reason for it, nor any good success of it when done. It will prove a levity without doors, to alter your Vote already made, and

Mr. Hampden. I see gentlemen ready to put the question, when they think a man is against it. The question is, Whether you print your Votes? I am sorry this question is stirred again. I remember it at the Oxford parliament-(I know the wheels that moved it then) I know that printing your Votes sounded well abroad, and it seems a popular thing, like sit-your Reasons not known, ting at Charing-cross, but the people had much rather hear our Reasons than our Votes, and no more. I have seen a Vote in a full house, at six or seven o'clock at night; the tide would not be stemmed, but there was a Vote passed; and when they thought better on it the next day, that Vote was unvoted again; whilst this is in your book only, there is no hurt. Is this all the argument, or does it look like one, that the people should know what you do? No ordinary council does it. The lords have not done it. Should you desire their concurrence to print their Votes, they will laugh at it, and their books are Records. One great reason for it is for the sake of the booksellers, or that younger gentlemen may be able, when the elder are in their graves, to know the Proceedings of Parliament; but they will see no reasons for them. Bills are not written in para-printing them. graphs, but all of a piece, and there is a reason in it; not that the clerks may read blank, but the reason is, that there may be no forging in it. If you print your Votes, consider what it is. There may be an inconvenience of intercourse; the lords against our privilege, and we against the judicature of the lords. The lords may tell you, you have voted something derogatory to the crown, and send you word, What have you to do with it? If you print it, will it not be a strange Message, that the crown should send you word of what you do? You must send the crown word, you intended not any thing against the crown; and of what strange consequences may this be? I have no end in this but regularity and decency. I have as great reverence as any man has for this house; and when you reverence yourselves, the world will have it for you. I hope you will not print your Votes.

Sir Tho. Littleton. I am for printing your Votes, and I see no inconvenience by it; it will be great if you do not print them. England has from the clerks all you do, but not the truth of what you do; and it is fit England should know both. In former parliaments, when they were invading and undermining the people, they were ashamed of it; but we are now under a king that preserves our liberties, and there is no reason but the people should know it. It is fit the people should know the good things transacted betwixt the king and this house. Such a union may have great influence both abroad and at home. I am for printing them.

Mr. Arnold. I would not have L'Estrange and Nevil Payne write false news beyond sea. I desire the truth may be known, and am for

Sir Rob. Howard. Methinks the debate is, Whether you will publish your Votes tacitly, or expressly? If they are published without the stamp of authority, it seems you will rather permit it by an unjustifiable way, than a justifiable. If you will keep your Books secret, perhaps I shall be for that; but if you suffer them to be published by other means, then is not printing the honester and juster way? If the question be, Whether they be kept secret, or not, I have my opinion: I know not the methods of Holland, but now you have more justification for printing than you had formerly, when they were better not published at all, but kept secret. But this parliament has been chosen in better methods. Possibly some Votes are fit that the world should presently see; but whether they should be kept secret or not, I shall reserve my thoughts; but whether you will print them is much the more justifiable way,

Sir Wm. Williams. I am sorry this has been moved to-day. The legality of doing it is out of the question. Notwithstanding all I have suffered for printing, by your Order, yea I think it not politic to do it now. It seems, it was a weak think in me (when Speaker) to obey the house of commons, and I was turned out, the last parliament, and I believe that was the greatest reason for it. When you have vindicated the poor men who suffered for printing, then I shall be for it. As for precedents abroad, I shall not take my measures from methods abroad, but from our own constitution: they are a Commonwealth, and we under a monarchy. There every man has a share in the government, but here not. Your Reasons will not appear with your Votes; and the people will not apprehend the Reasons of your contradictions. You will arm your enemies by it, and they will provide against your counsels.

Mr. Paul Foley. Orders here are of several kinds; some are unfit to be published. You have criminals come before you; it is unfitting their accusation should be published, and unfitting the evidence, that they may be prepared to surprize you.

Mr. Hampden, jun. Some gentlemen argue, as if you should keep your debates as secret as you can; but I think, if you print your Votes, you lay a sort of restraint upon yourselves. As for what is said of other countries, resolutions in council in Holland are final decisions, and fit they should be known; but when they are not finished (as in your Votes) it precludes your liberty of debate, and is a disservice to the house.

passed a Vote, that the Bill should be rejected. How will that stand in your books, that such a bill was rejected? You went an extraordimary way, to tack Reasons why you rejected it; and you send into the country to subject it to their judgments. It was ever held parliamentary, that the king and lords take no notice of what is done here, till communicated by the house; and you, by printing, go about to tell every body what you do. You put yourselves into an uncertain, unparliamentary condition, and I cannot agree to printing.

The question being proposed, That the Votes be printed accordingly; the previous question was put, that That question be now put: the house divided, Yeas 145; Noes 180. So it was resolved in the negative.

Debate on the King's Speech.] March 11. The house resolved into a grand committee on the king's Speech.

Sir John Guise. There are three points touched upon in the king's Speech, relating to Money. The first is in relation to the advantage we have had from Holland, and what they have done for us, which we ought to be mighty sensible of, and touched with: and gratitude becomes us. The danger for their fleet in winter, &c. and the hazard that may be brought upon them by it. The next is, the consideration of Ireland: I would willingly have seen the State of the Army, and the Expence. The next is the Revenue, of which I would have all the branches before you, that you may consider, whether it shall be settled for life, or years.

Mr. Papillon. The consideration of Ireland, the Fleet, and Holland, all depend upon the Revenue, of which some is for life, some for a term of years. Some, the other day, thought all the Revenue was vested in the king; others did doubt it; therefore we ought to put it past doubt. Therefore I move for an Act to give and grant the Revenue to the king, that it may be collected without dispute, and an indemnity for the collecting it since the vacancy; and if the State of the Revenue be ready, I would have it delivered in by sir Robert Howard.

Col. Birch. I humbly tell you, I am heartily sorry for this debate, since it is not easy to see the consequence; it will reflect every way; it will let the world see you are subject to change. One day, Money is to be raised on one thing, another day, you reject it, and the world sees not your reasons. I am one of those that are heartily sorry for Williams's great sufferings, when he took the employment of Speaker upon him, and was trusted with the printing the Votes; and he did take upon him the Solicitor General's place in king James's time, because he did not know any way to get his fine again, but by such an office. This I say, for satisfaction to myself: I would not have gentlemen take notice of it. When we debate here of projects to raise Money, perhaps the Book of Rates may save our lands, and this may argue to the world impotency and weakness. In the mean time, any gentleman may put out any thing in writing at his peril: it is an unseasonable time, and an unseason-position is, whether the Committee will take able question.

Mr. Sacheverell. I was against printing your Votes formerly, and am so still. I think certainly, it will destroy all good correspondence betwixt the two houses. Consider how things stand: if gentlemen please to remember, the lords sent down a Bill for the speedy Conviction of the Popish Recusants. This house

Sir Tho. Clarges. I would have the redundancy of the Crown Revenue, after the Government is supplied, applied to the uses desired in the king's Speech; I mean, take the Customs to be 600,000l. one year with another. The Excise is a Revenue by itself. See to have also the Addition upon Linen, Brandy, and Silk, and 400,000l. taken up upon them, and little to be depended on themthe Hereditary Revenue. The end of my pro

the Revenue as given in, or as I have reported it. I humbly propose, whether you will grant it for life, or years? I leave it to you.

Mr. Garroway. The Paper I have come by agrees with Clarges's account; but I think you are not ripe to come to that question, whether the Revenue be standing or not-Whether the Charges, for particular persons uses,

the Bill read a second time now, but to-morrow. to declare it is no revenue! Settle it one way

This learned gentleman did make a vindication of himself. I will not undertake to answer him presently; I may have occasion to answer him

to-morrow.

Sir Robert Howard. I cannot name lord Russel without disorder. I would neglect all things to read this Bill a second time. Perhaps the learned gentleman may tell us how large the law is then; it is a sufficient thing to name that noble lord. I am not able to say any more; but pray read the Bill.

Sir Tho. Lee. This Bill declares, that the Law-Books the learned gentleman has quoted were wrong; and if he doubts it, the reading it a second time will set that part right.-The Bill was read a second time.

Mr. Boscawen. I have hearkened diligently to the learned person's Law-cases. By the 25th of Edw. 3, we are Judges here of the true intent of that statute; and I would have it read [which was done]. I observe, by that statute, the abridging treason certain, which was before uncertain, for favour of the subject. It seems to me strange, if compassing the death of the king should be treason, and levying war, in another place of the statute: if that be false, it must be taken out of the Bill. To me it seems to be a great wresting of the law. It seems to be a transcendent wresting of the law. Pray read the Bill a third time.

Sir Tho. Clarges. I think the Bill is carefully penned, and I think the most that lord Russel could be guilty of, was but misprision of treason; war being not actually levied.

Sir Tho. Lee. If there be no objection against the Bill, it need not be committed.

Sir Tho. Clarges. In one clause of the Bill there may be two or three words left out. It is said, It is at the request of the earl of Bedford and lady Russel only. The justice of the nation is greater to you than any particular persons inducement. This Bill is not ex gratia, all the nation is concerned in it. When it is ex gratia, it ought to be signed by the king.-The Bill was ordered to be committed.

or other, without any thing of gathering it for three months upon uncertainty. This will lead you into such a course that you will not know the end of it.

Sir Tho. Lee. I think this does not lose your time, if you will settle the Revenue. You saw, since Pollexfen declared his opinion, the people have been still more in doubt. The motion is made for all the Revenue, in the lump, and this may be passed in two or three days. Then you will consider Ships, the king's Family, Ambassadors, Judges, the Army, and a part for the king's necessary support. Then you will find what may be spared for the public, and how to supply it; till this be considered, what in time of peace is requisite, and what in war; if three months be too little, make it six. When the state of war is known, you will know how near this will go to the payment.

Sir John Lowther. I will speak plainly what every man's heart is full of. The king has expressed himself in all kindness. He has trusted you with all he has in the world, and given into your hands a considerable part of the Revenue; and if you have the same jealousy of him, after all he has done and may do, this will gratify the Jesuits and France more than 200,000l. distributed and well given in the house of commons, to bring about their interest

Sir Christ. Musgrave. Seeing you have not taken notice, Mr. Hampden, of what has been said to the orders of the committee, I do take notice of it.

Sir John Lowther. What I said of Money, I meant to particular persons. There have been people who have received Money, and seeing the Jesuits and Papists have spread these reports abroad, and foreign ministers will make Alliances with the States of Holland, and then if that State cease their intercourse with the king, application will be made to the house of commons, who give the Money, and not to the king. The wise part of the house of commons will understand this, though the weak do not.

Farther Debate on the King's Revenue.] Mr. Pollexfen. From doubting one part of Sir Tho. Clarges. I am sorry that, at this the Revenue or another, we may come to time, when all manner of duty has been exthink there is no revenue at all; and now pressed to the king from this house, there should settle it by Bill. You have brought in question be reflections of 200,000l. well given here.' the collecting of the Revenue, and given in- I remember, persons in former parliaments had demnity to those that gathered it, and, in the places, and were to receive the Money they mean time, you give the revenue to nobody. gave, therefore were freer to give money than This is so great a loss of time, that it is not others, and we did fear to give money to others, serviceable to you, nor the present occasion of and not to the king. Though we are not all the nation, nor for the reputation of your upon one footing of honour and trust, we are affairs abroad. I thought it was taken for upon one equal footing of trust for our coungranted that it was a Revenue in the crown, try. I cannot make the Revenue be for longer &c. and when you have done, three months time than has been proposed. Is it not fit hence you will be in the same doubts. You that you should have three months to turn you will have as much to do in this, as to deter-in, that abuses may not be in the collection of mine whether it shall be for life, or years. To talk of assisting the king with your Lives and Fortunes,' and not to enable the king! To give him power to take the Revenue, and now

the Revenue? Therefore it is fit that for this temporary Bill you give it for three months, or as long as you please.

Sir Wm. Williams. In the last parliament,

the spareable part will be treasured up for the good of the subject.

Sir Tho. Littleton. It has been well moved a great while since, and I wonder at no conclusion upon it. To settle it for three months is the most acceptable and expeditious thing you can do. The king does not expect that you should settle the Revenue immediately, without great caution and consideration. Therefore that the king may be in no inconvenience, settle it for three months; which will be so far from a distrust, that it is kindly and gratefully done by the people, and the king will take it well from you.

Mr. Finch. You give the king double the Revenue, if you do it for three months. You give him the Revenue, and the hearts of the people. This you will do in two days, and perhaps the other way not in two months.

Mr. Pollexfen. If you say, I will not give the king this Revenue, but those that pay it not shall be under all the penalties as if it was sud-given,' this will raise all the jealousy and shame upon us imaginable abroad.

Sir Henry Capel. It is not the intention of any man here to give the king the Revenue Sir Rob. Howard. I speak not for the poor for three months, and Pollexfen mistakes the or the rich, the weak or the strong, of the thing. We are beholden to those gentlemen house. I have an office, but in some offices I who put us in this method at first. The Book would not have been employed-[reflecting of Rates, the Act for Excise, we do not yet upon Williams]. By the way, I would show know; there are complaints of the ill admiby a motion to continue the Grand Committee, nistration of them; now is the time to correct and to proceed on the Settlement of the Re-it. I speak it to the honour of the gentleman venue; though for the present we proceed only on the temporary Bill.