from making a formal grievance of the letter, and petitioning for access, that they might give him what they called 'satisfaction"— which always meant an argumentative demonstration that they were right and he was wrong. This danger was happily avoided for the present by another message,2 intimating his gracious acceptance both of the intention and the forbearance. But wounded hearts remain tender; and there were several businesses in progress which could hardly be handled without danger of fresh irritation. The Committee was still engaged in collecting evidence of the abuses of Purveyance. The composition for Wardship-a money-bargain for relief from an oppressive prerogative-was still under discussion. The struggle with the Warden of the Fleet over the body of Sir Thomas Shirley was at its hottest. A series of conferences with the Lords and Bishops was bringing them nearer and nearer to points of inevitable and irreconcileable disagreement. Not a word had been said as yet about Supply. And in the middle of all this there sprung up a new and unexpected cause of quarrel, in a book just published by one of the Bishops: a book tending (according to the description given by the member who brought it under notice) "to the derogation and scandal of the proceedings of the House in the matter of the Union; answering the objections made against the union in Name; and taking knowledge of many other passages of the House touching that matter; unmeet to be questioned by any, much less by any member of the Higher House."3 Here again their first impulse was "to go to his Majesty and express their grief, because it seemed to be done cum privilegio”. meaning (I suppose) that as a published book it must be held as authorized by the King. But being reminded that the Bishop was a member of the Upper House, they determined to make their complaint first to them; and it turned out, fortunately for the peace of the time, that he had no friends there: for after an exchange of one or two preliminary messages, it was answered in conference by Lord Cecil that he had been rebuked and made to own his fault and express his regret as we learn from the following note. Sir Francis Bacon reporteth the Conference had, touching the book published by the Bishop of Bristowe. A speech of a great Lord (E. S.) in three parts: 1 C. J. p. 197. In the debate on this question Bacon (2 May) spoke, apparently in deprecation of the proceeding. But the note says only, “Sir Fr. Bacon :-Sed motos præstat componere fluctus.- Qui dolorem habent et non sensum, iis mens ægrotat.-Nil adversus veritatem, sed pro veritate." 24 May. Ib. p. 199. 3 C. J. p. 226 (26 May). 1. Their good correspondence with this House. 2. A declaration of the proceedings against the Bishop. 3. Reason why they went no further. [1] That they were interessed as well as we : If not, yet the union of the two Houses gave them an interest. [2.] A rebuke to the Bishop. That which durst not shew his head in Parliament should go to the Press in mean hands. That any man should presume to let the King see more than a Parliament could.— The King the head, we the body: if any man will swell above the circumference, it must be a wert or a wenn. [3.] The Bishop made submission with them:-Peccavi, pœnitet, non putaram.-They remitted in respect of his coat. That he was a member.-That he came under the shadow of the Cypress-tree, the Union. Conclus. Less severely reported than performed.1 Here Bacon (who appears to have confined himself to a report of Cecil's speech) would probably have wished the matter to rest. And though the House was not quite satisfied, but (in order that the Press might better know the limits of its liberty) proceeded to demand the suppression of the book and the public delivery of the Bishop's submission in writing, that it might be placed on record,2 the compiler of the Journals seems to have been unable to discover 1 C. J. p. 236 (11 June). The proceeding of the Lords is recorded in their own Journals (5 June) thus: "After that the Lords had entered into speech and consideration of some meet course to be taken for yielding satisfaction to the Lower House touching that matter, they did all agree in opinion, that the same might best be done if the said Bishop would voluntarily acknowledge himself to have committed an error in that behalf, and to be sorry for it; which acknowledgment the said Bishop in the end did accordingly make; and did express the same in these words following, videlicet : "1. I confess that I have erred in presuming to deliver a private sentence in a matter so dealt in by the High Court of Parliament. "2. I am sorry for it. "3. If it were to do again, I would not do it. "4. But I protest it was done of ignorance and not of malice towards either of the Houses of Parliament, or any particular member of the same; but only to declare my affection to the intended Union, which I doubt not but all your Lordships do allow of.'" As we shall have to deal from time to time with questions bearing upon the just limits of liberty in speech and writing, I thought it as well to give this at full length, as a good illustration of what was thought by the guardians of liberty to be a transgression of those limits. 2 C. J. p. 244 (21 June). VOL. III. P what came of that demand: and therefore I suppose it was not insisted on. At the same time a more legitimate cause of remonstrance was given by a protest from the Convocation House against the pretensions of the House of Commous to "deal in any matters of Religion;" accompanied with a threat that if the Bishops would not desist from conferring with them, "they would appeal to the King, who had given them authority to deal only in such matters." This protest having been publicly read by a Bishop at a Conference, put them upon searching for "precedents "-a search which is sure to end favourably to the stronger party; and would undoubtedly have raised a storm, had either the King or the Lords taken part with Convocation. As it was, a declaration from the Bishop of London that "they conceived the privilege of Parliament to stand upright"3 was accepted as sufficient. 4 All these incidental troubles must have been very annoying to the King, if only as delays and interruptions, though he had the prudence to keep personally clear of them: and there were other measures coming on, in which it was hardly possible to avoid a direct disagreement. He had settled the Church question to his own satisfaction at the Hampton Court Conference; and now the Commons were urging a large measure of reform, in the interest of the nonconforming clergy. He had taken order for the revocation of all monopolies which should appear to himself and Council prejudicial to the subject and now they were preparing a large measure for the liberation of Trade, aimed at the monopolies of the great companies. The discussion of the terms of the proposed composition for Wardship and Tenures led inevitably to enquiries into the true state of the Crown revenew; which was then reckoned one of the arcana imperii,-no fit subject for popular criticism. Under these various trials, the scanty measure of patience with which he was endowed by nature had begun to fail, and the distastes against which he had hitherto been struggling, to re-assert themselves-encouraged no doubt by the sympathy they were sure to meet with from the conservatism which prevails in all Upper Houses, whether temporal or spiritual; when this same Wardship and Tenure question, which had been opened under Bacon's management at the beginning of the session with fair words and prospects, came at last (30 May) to be discussed in a conference managed by Sir Edwin Sandys, and found the weather quite changed. Not that the Commons 1 "For the submission, that being a fault committed, etc., quære."-C. J. p. 251 (2 July). 2 C. J. p. 235 (8 June). 3 Ib. p. 251 (2 July). 4 lb. p. 199. 5 Ib. p. 218. had changed their ground. What they desired was no more than the Lords had already in a general way and with seeming alacrity agreed to, namely that they would join with them in a petition to the King for leave to treat the particulars being to be arranged in conference. But they now discountenanced the proposition altogether; and besides answering the reasons urged by the Commons, went on to expostulate with them on the manner in which they had spent their time—all speaking in the same sense. Sensi ex composto rem geri, said Sir E. Sandys in concluding his report. And to make matters worse, no sooner had the conference broken off on these unsatisfactory terms, than the King, by a coincidence which if undesigned was unlucky, desired the attendance of the whole House, that he might speak to them. And his speech, being (as we gather from what followed-for I find no report of it) a review of all their proceedings during the session in a tone of censure and dissatisfaction, had the usual effect of hurting their feelings and provoking them to reply. But the state of feeling which it produced will be best understood from the 'order' entered in the Journals the next day—the result of the debate on Sir E. Sandys' report. Which, though very clumsily drawn up, I give as it stands. Veneris 1o Die Junii, 1604. This day Sir Edwyn Sandys, making report of the late conference had with the Lords, according to a former commission of this House, touching the matter of Wardship and other the incidents thereunto, instead of acceptation and assent to join in petition to his Majesty, delivered from their Lordships no other than matter of expostulation, opposition of reason to reason, admonition, or precise caution, in proceeding: which suiting with the grounds of his Majesty's speech subsequent, advisedly and of purpose made upon that occasion to the whole House, assembled by his Majesty's direction at Whitehall, on Monday last (wherein many particular actions and passages of the House were objected unto them, with taxation and blame), summoned the duty and judgment of the House to consider, what were fittest to be done; and amongst others the motion of Sir Thomas Ridgway, one of the Knights for Devonshire, induced the House to this consideration; that since it appeared his Majesty had made such an impression of mislike of the proceedings of the House in general, as also that the grounds conceived touching Wardship and matters of that nature, seemed to be so weakened and impugned; it were necessary and safe for the House, and dutiful and convenient in respect of his Majesty, instantly to advise of such a form of satisfaction, either by writing or otherwise, as might in all humility inform his Majesty in the truth and clearness of the actions and intentions of the House from the beginning, thereby to free it from the scandal of levity and precipitation; as also of the proceedings in particular touching the said matter of Wardship; with this special care, that a matter so advisedly and gravely undertaken and proceeded in, might not die or be buried in the hands of those that first bred it.1 A proceeding like this,―entailing as it must a personal controversy with the King on points to which he had thus publicly committed himself,-could not be expected to have a satisfactory result. But it would take time. Time would allow feelings to cool on both sides and meanwhile they could give satisfaction of a more promissing kind by making haste with what remained to be done. The Union Act, which had just been sent down from the Lords, had been read once. It was now read a second time, committed, reported, passed, and sent back to the Lords, by whom it was received with great applause—all in a day: the day after the King's speech. And it was agreed at the same time that all further proceedings in the matter of Purveyors should be allowed to sleep till the next session. Measures which were not lost upon the King: as may be seen by the message which he sent to the House only three days after. Mr. Speaker delivereth from the King a message of three parts: Matter of his relation to us : Of his princely satisfaction. When he looked into the gravity and judgment of this House, and of the long continuance of the Parliament; so few matters of weight passed, and that matter of Privilege had taken much time (which, notwithstanding, he was as careful to preserve as we ourselves); he was moved with jealousy that there was not such proceeding as, in love, he expected. This the cause of unkindness. That we should not think this declaration to us was any condemnation of our ingratitude or forgetfulness of him; but by way of commemoration and admonition, as a father to his children; neither did he tax us; but only remember us of expedition, omitted and desired. Lastly, that he is resolved, we have not denied anything which is fit to be granted. That he had divers arguments of our good affections : 1. Our doubt of his displeasure. 2. Our desire to give him satisfaction; which he accepteth as a thing done, because desired by us. 3. He observeth the difference of our proceeding, sithence his speech unto us, with greater expedition in those things desired to be effected by him, than before: He giveth us thanks, and wisheth we would not trouble ourselves with giving him satisfaction. And he giveth what time we desire for finishing the matters of importance depending.3 1 C. J. p. 230. 2 Ib. p. 231. 3 Ib. p. 232 (5 June). |