A Book of Parliamentary Anecdote

Front matter

00022898

NOT TO BE ISSUED OUT OF THE LIBRARY.

ON SS SS NY SS EN EN eee ow ys st

Preface

In the following-pages an attempt has been made to bring

together for the first time, in the form of anecdote, some

of the more striking facts in the history of our Parliaments — and the public lives of distinguished statesmen. As the

value of such anecdote must mainly depend upon its

authenticity, the: compilers have gone for their material

only to sources of established repute, appending in each ‘case the authority from which the facts are quoted. It

would have been a comparatively easy task to collect a

mass of unauthenticated incidents, but the result would

have been worthless in proportion to the facility of the

undertaking. To interest and amuse is but a part of the

aim of the book. It is also designed to furnish informa-

tion of a useful character, and to form a reliable work of reference ; and it is hoped these objects havé been in

some ‘degree secured. -

The public career of living statesmen, and of those lately deceased has been sparingly dealt with., Statevi PREFACE.

,ments respecting recent events are more frequently disputed than matters which have passed into the domain of history ; and, moreover, the narration, in such cases, of incidents which belong to the region of mere party feeling has been thought undesirable.

In the Index will be found references to a number of the celebrated expressions which have become political household words. Some of these not given in the Personal division of the book have been included in the

Miscellaneous section.

MISCELLANEOUS ANECDOTES

PAGE

A BOOK OF

PARLIAMENTARY ANECDOTE.

Part I. Illustrations Of Parliamentary History

ANTIQUITY OF ParLttamMents.—Parliaments, or General Councils, are coeval with the kingdom itself. How those Parliaments were constituted and composed is another question, which has been matter of great dispute among our learned antiquaries, and, particilarly, whether the Commons were summoned at all; or, if summoned, at what period they began to form a distinct assembly. * * * In the main, the constitution of Parliament, as it now stands, was marked ‘out so long ago as the seventeenth year of King John, A.D. 1215, in the great charter granted by that prince; wherein he promises to summon all archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, and greater barons, personally ; and all other tenants-in-chief under the Crown, by the sheriff and bailiffs, to meet at a certain place, with forty days’ notice, to assess aids and scutages when necessary. And this constitution has subsisted in fact at least from the year 1266 (49 Henry III.), there being still extant writs of that date to summon knights, citizens, and burgesses to Parliament.—Blackstone's. Commentaries.

2 AA Book oF PARLIAMENTARY ANECDOTE.

“ENGLAND CAN NEVER BE RUINED BUT BY A Par- LIAMENT.”—It was a known. apothegm of the great Lord Treasurer Burleigh that “ England could never be ruined but, by a Parliament ;” and, as Sir Matthew Hale: observes, this’ being the highest and greatest court, over which none other can have jurisdiction in the kingdom, if by any means a misgovernment should any way fall upon it, the subjects of this kingdom are left without-all manner of remedy. To the same purpose Montesquieu—though, I trust, too hastily —-presages that as Rome, Sparta, and Carthage have lost their liberty and perished, so the constitution of England will, in time, lose its liberty—will perish : it will perish whenever the legislative power shall become more corrupt than the executive.—/bid.

Tue First PARLIAMENT AFTER THE CONQUEST.— A Parliament was elected and called together in the fourth year of William I. (1070). Twelve representatives were elected in each county in the whole kingdom, and were sworn before the King. In this Parliament the laws of Edward the Confessor were adopted and confirmed.— Oldjield’s “ Fistory of the Hottse of Commons.” * :

Tur Mad PaRLIAMENT.—In the year 1258, on: April roth, a Parliament met at London, which jas called insanum Parliamentum. Simon Montford, Earl of Leicester, complained very boldly to the King (Henry III. ), appealing to the Parliament for justice; upbraided the King that he promoted and enriched strangers, and despised and wasted his own people; neglected his subjects that faithfully served him, as he had charged the King six years before ; that he had not performed his promise of rewarding him for his services and expenses in Gascoigny. To which the King answered, that he would not stand to any promise made to one that proved a traitor. The earl teld the King he lied, and, were he not a King, he would make him eat his words. —Gurdon's “ History of Parliament.”

HIISTORICAL ILLUSTRATIONS. 3

THe PARLIAMENT DE LA BonD.—One of Edward II.’s Par}jaments (1321) was called “Parliament de /a Bond,” from the barons coming to Parliament armed against the two Spencers, wearing coloured bands upon their sleeves for , distinction.—Lbid,

Tue WonpERFUL PaRLIAMENT.—The Parliament which was summoned in the eleventh year of Richard II. (Feb. 3rd, 1388) has been called by some historians “the Par- Jiament that wrought wonders ;” by others, “the Merciless Parliament.” In it articles of high treason were exhibited against ‘the King’s ministers, who were, accordingly, sentenced to death or-banishment.— Parry's “Parliaments of England.”

Tue LACK-LEARNING PARLIAMENT.—Speaking of this Parliament, which assembled in 1404, Lord Campbell, in his “ Lives,” says, the recklessness of the Commons may have arisen from their not having had a single lawyer among them. Lord Chancellor Beaufort,.in framing the writs of summonses, illegally inserted a prohibition that “no apprentice or other man of the law should be elected.” * * * In return for such a slight our Jaw books and historians have branded this Parliament with the name of Parliamentum indoctum, or the “ lack-learning Parliament.”

THE PARLIAMENT OF Bats.—In the 4th of Henry VI. (1426), a Parliament was summoned to meet at Leicester, and orders were sent to the members that they should not

» wear swords, so they came to the Parliament (like modern butchers) with long staves, from whence the Parliament got the name of “ the Parliament of Bats.” And when the bats were prohibited, the members had recourse to stones and leaden plummets.— Gurdon’s “ History of Parliament.”

THE DIABOLICAL PaRLIAMENT.—In the 38th year of

| Henry VI. (1460), a Parliament was summoned to meet on the 2oth November, at Coventry. It was there enacted that all such knights of any county as were returned to the

Parliament by virtue of the King’s letters, without any other election, should be good, and that no sheriff, for returning them, should incur the pain therefore provided in the Act of the 23rd of Henry VI. And as to the Upper House, the lords of the house of York, then allies and friends, were in a great measure neglected. The Queen and her party carried all before them in this Parliament, which, from its works, was called Parliamentum diabolicum.—ILbid.

THE Lonc PartiamMent.—The Long Parliament, or the fifth of Charles I., assembled November 3, 1640—“a Parliament which many, before that time, thought would never have had a beginning, and afterwards that it would never have had an end.” It was, however, abruptly and violently dispersed by Cromwell, April 19th, 1653. He came with a body of soldiers (says the “‘ Parliamentary History ”), and entering the House in a furious manner, bid the Speaker leave his chair; told the House that they had sat long enough, unless they had done more good; that some of them were whoremasters (looking then to Henry Martyn and Sir Peter Wentworth), that others of them were drunkards, and some corrupt and unjust men, and scaridalous to the profession of the Gospel ; and that it was not fit they should sit as a Parliament any longer, and desired them to go away. The Speaker not stirring from his seat, Colonel Harrison, who sat near the chair, rose up and took him by the arm, to remove him from his seat, which, when the Speaker saw, he left his chair. Cromwell bid one of the soldiers take away that fool’s bauble, the mace, and stayed himself to see all the members out of the house, himself the last, and then caused the house to be locked up. The next day there was a paper by somebody posted upon the Parliament House door, thus: “This House is to be Lett, now Unfurnished.” After various vicissitudes 4 bill was read a third time for “ Dissolving the Parliament begun and holden at Westminster 3rd of November, 1640, and that -

FTISTORICAL ILLUSTRATIONS. 5 the day of dissolution shall be from this day, March 16th, 1659.” Macaulay describes it as “that renowned Parliathent which, in spite of many errors and disasters, is justly entitled to the reverence and gratitude of all who, in any part of ‘the world, enjoy the blessings of constitutional government.” On the other hand, Cobbett, in his ‘“ Parliamentary History,”, observes, “Thus ended the Long Parliament, which, with innumerable alterations and several

. intérmissions, had continued the scourge: of the nation for nearly twenty years.”

Pripe’s Purce.—When the Commons were to meet on Dec. 6th, 1648, Hume says, Colonel Pride, formerly a drayman, environed the House with two regiments, and, directed by Lord Grey of Groby, he seized in the passage’ forty-one members of the Presbyterian party, and sent them to a low room, which passed by the appellation of “hell,” whence they were afterwards carried to several inns. Above 160 members more were excluded, and none were allowed to enter but the most furious nd the most determined of the Independents ; and these exceeded not the number’of fifty or sixty. This invdsion of the Parliament commonly passed under the name of “Colonel Pride’s Purge,” so much was the nation disposed to make merry with the dethroning of those members who had violently arrogated the whole authority of government, and deprived the King of his legal prerogatives. The remains of the Parliament were called the “ Rump.”

Tue Rump.—‘The nickname originated,” says Isaac D'Israeli, “in derision on the expulsion of the majority of the Long Parliament by the usurping minority. * * * The collector of ‘The Rump Songs’ tells us, ‘If you asked who named it Rump, know ’twas so styled in an honest sheet of prayer called the Bloody Rump, written before the trial of our late sovereign ;, but the word obtained not’ universal notice till it flew from the mouth of Major-General

Brown, at a public assembly in the days of Richard Cromwell,’ ”

BaREBONE’S PARLIAMENT.—This Parliament, summoned by Cromwell, met for the first time July 4th, 1653. Hume says, “Among the fanatics of the House there was an active member much noted for his long prayers, sermons, and harangues. He was a leather-seller in London, his name Praise-God Barebone. This ridiculous name, which seems to have been chosen by some poet or allegorist to suit so ridiculous a personage, struck the fancy of the people, and they commonly affixed to the assembly the appellation of “Barebone’s Parliament.’ ”

- PARLIAMENTARY Hostaces.—In the sixth year of King John (1205), a Parliament was held, at which the children of the barons were required as hostages for their allegiance. —Oldjied’s History.

An Unwise CounsEeLLoR.—Henry III., being straitened for money, issued a warrant ordering the nobles to meet him in London. Accordingly, on the day of St. Hilary, 1237, a countless multitude proceeded to the palace at Westminster to hear the King’s pleasure. Having heard with consternation the royal demand for a thirtieth of all movable property, they were about to retire for the purpose of con sultation, when Gilbert Bassett said to Henry, in the hearing of all, ‘‘My lord King, send some one of your friends to be present at the conference of your barons.” In reply to his speech, Richard Percy said, “ What is it, friend Gilbert, that you said? Are we, too, foreigners ; and are we not among the number of the King’s friends?” And Gilbert felt himself rebuked for his unpleasant speech.— Matthew Paris, :

SELECTION OF ParTIaAL PARLIAMENTS. —In ancient times it was ordinary for kings to make a show of summoning Parliaments, whenas properly they were but parliamentary meetings of some such lords, clergy, and others as, the King saw most convenient to drive on his’ own «designs ; and therefore we find that Henry III., about the latter part of his reign, when his government drew towards the dregs, he having in the kingdom two hundred and fifty baronies, he summgned unto one of these parliamentary ineetings but five-and-twenty barons and one hundred and fifty of his clergy.—WVathaniel panes “ Discourse on the Government of England.”

NEGLECT OF THE KING'S Suacibie TO PARLIAMENT.— Edward III., being troubled with a quarrel between the two Archbishops of Canterbury and York, concerning ‘superiority in bearing the cross, and the important affairs of Scotland so urging, summoned a Parliament at York, which was fain to be delayed and adjourned for want of appearance, and more effectual summons issued forth; but at the day of adjournment none of the clergy of the province of Canterbury would be there; and upon this occasion the Parliament was not only interrupted in their proceedings, but an ill precedent was made for men to be bold with the King’s summons in such cases as liked not them; and thereupon a statute was made to enforte obedience upon citizens and burgesses, and such ecclesiastics as held per baroniam. * * * Nor did Edward IIT. ever after hold the presence of the prelates at so high repute at such meetings; and therefore.summoned them, or so many of them as he thought meet for the occasion—sometimes more, sometimes fewer; and at a Parliament in his forty-and-seventh year he summoned only four bishops and five abbots. Albeit the clergy still made their claim of vote, and desired the same to be entered upon record.—lbid.

REPRESENTATION AN EXPENSIVE Luxury.—A correspondent ‘of Votes and Queries (Third Series) writes :— “Whatever estimate the people of the present day may put

' upon the elective franchise, it would seem that our ancestors held the privilege very lightly ; for although the wages to . be received by members of ‘Parliament were fixed by the 16th of Edward II. at the low rate of 4s. a day for a knight of the shire, and 2s. for a citizen or burgess, yet we are told by Prynne that many boroughs petitioned to be excused from sending members to Parliament, on account of the expense ; and in a note to “ Blackstone ” we learn that from the 33rd Edward III., uniformly through the five succeeding reigns, the Sheriff of Lancashire returned that there were no cities or boroughs in his county that ought or were used, or could, on account of their poverty, send any citizens or burgesses to Parliament. There were some instances where even a less sum than that established by statute was allowed ; and it is on record that in 1463 Sir John Strange, the member for Dunwich, agreed to take a cade and half a barrel of herrings as a composition for his wages.”

A MEMBER SUING FOR HIS WacEs.—Mr. Hall, member for Grantham, having published a book in 1580, which gave offence to the House, was ordered to be expelled, fined, and imprisoned. On the 21st of November, 1586, Mr. Markham, then member for Grantham, informed the House, on the part of the inhabitants of that borough, that Mr. Arthur Hall, at one time their member, had brought a writ for his wages (amongst other times) for his attendance at the late session of Parliament, holden at Westminster in the twenty-seventh year of the Queen, during which time he did not serve in the House. A committee appointed by the House desired him to remit the said wages, which he did * freely and frankly.”—atsell’s “ Precedents, &c.”

SAFETY AND QUIETUDE FOR MEMBERS.—A Parliament was summoned by Edward III. to meet at Westminster, March 12th, 1332, reciting in the summons the King’s reasons for calling them. Where—that we may see (says Joshua Barnes) what prudent care was then taken by these august

BY

HTISTORICAL ILLUSTRATIONS. 9 assemblies that their debates should not be awed by fear or disgurbed by tumults—it was first by the King’s order proflaimed, “That no man, upon pain of forfeiting all his substance, should presume to use or wear any coat of metal, or other weapon, offensive or defensive, in London, Westminster, or the suburbs of the same. And also that during the time of this sessijqn no games or other plays of men, women, or children, should be used in Westminster, to the disturbance of the Parliament.” A Parliament met at York in the following year. “On the first day of their sitting commandment was given to the Mayor of York, in presence of the King and all his Parliament, to see the King’s peace kept in the said city, and suburbs thereof, and to arrest all that offended against it. Also, proclamation to be made against weapons and plays, by the steward and marschal, before the house where the Parliament sat, and by the mayor and bailiffs in the city.—Farliamentary History.

Tue Firsr SpEAKER.—On the 4th August, 1377, writs were issued for the calling a Parliament to meet fifteen days

_ after Michaelmas. The Commons chose Sir Peter De La

Mare, knight of the shiré for Herefordshire, as their Speaker, and the first upon record. Sir Peter on this occasion made a protestation and said, “That what he had to declare was from their whole body ; and therefore required that if he . should happen to speak anything without their consents, that it ought to be amended before his departure from the said place. He commended the feats of chivalry heretofore practised, for which this nation was so renowned ; and said that by the decay of the same, the honour of the realm did and would daily decrease.”—Jdid.

A Roya. ABSENTEE.—In the tenth year of Richard II. (1387) the Commons sent 2 message to the King, in which they stated that if the King shall wilfully estrange himself from his Parliament, and be absent from them for the space of forty days, it shall be lawful for all and every of them, ro A Book or PARLIAMENTARY ANECDOTE.

without any damage from the King, to go home and return into their own countries. “And now. you,” continue the remonstrants, “‘for a longer time have absented yourself, and have refused to come among them.”—Oldfield’s History. An Earu’'s Apotocy.—In a Parliament of Richard IL, held at Westminster, 1394, the Earl of Arundel exhibited a complaint against the Duke of Lancaster; consisting of four distinct charges. To the accusation the King himself answered and affirmed that what the Duke of Lancaster had done was all right and good. And his Majesty, with the assent of the Lords,.awarded that the said earl should ask the dike’s pardon, in full Parliament, and in the very words following, which he spoke accordingly :—~“ Sir, ‘Sith that it seemeth to the King and other lords, and eke that each here hath been so mickle grieyed and displeased by my words; it forethinketh, and I beseech you of your grace and lordship to quit me your man-tallant.”—Par/iamentary Listory.

Eatinc Humsie Piz.—In 1397 the House of Commons required of the King (Richard II.), amongst other demands, an avoidance of the extravagant expenses of the King’s household, and that bishops and ladies, who had no particular business there, should be forbidden to frequent the Court. The King, hearing of this, was highly incensed and charged the Speaker, Sir John Bussy, upon his allegiance to inform him who it was that had brought the matter into Parliament. The Commons, on being told the King’s, mind in a conference with the Lords, made a most submissive and even abject apology for their presumption; gave up the name of the person who had brought it into their House— one Thomas Haxey, clerk; and furthermore, proceeded to try poor Thomas Haxey, clerk, and condemned him to die the death of a.traitor. The King then informed the Commons that he, out of his royal benignity and gracious seigniory, freely excused them. The scape-goat also came

HitsToRicaL ILLUSTRATIONS. II in for a share in the royal clemency, his life being spared on,the petition of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Other prelates.—Zdid.

« A Pious Sussipy.—Henry IV. called a Parliament which met October 6th, 1404. “The Chancellor,”. says Lord Campbell, in his “ Lives of the Chancellors,” “in a speech from the text, ‘Hex vocavit seniores terra, having pressed most urgently for supplies, the Commons came in a body, and, the King being on the throne, proposed that without burthening his people he might supply his occasions by seizing on the revenues of the clergy. Archbishop Arundel replied that the stripping the clergy of their estates

- would put a stop to their prayers night and day for the welfare of the State. The Speaker of the Commons, standing at the bar, smiled and said openly that he thought the prayers of the Church a very slender supply.”

Roya, REwarps To THE SPEAKER.—Of the Parliament which assembled at Westminster, March rst, 1406, Sir John Tibetot was chosen Speaker. Sir John excused himself on account of his youth and other causes; nevertheless, the King confirmed his election. This youthful Speaker appears to have discharged his functions to the satisfaction of the Court at least; for at the close of the Parliament the King, to show his generosity and gratitude to Sir John, granted to him, in fee, all the lands and hereditaments of Richard ap Griffith ap Voethus, in the counties of Carmarthen and Cardigan, and elsewhere in the principality of South Wales, forfeited to the King by his being an adherent to Owen Glendower, rebel and traitor; and. also the office of keeper of the forests of Weybridge and Sapley, in ~ the county of Huntingdon, without any fee or out payments; and further, the goods and chattels of Peter Priswick, carpenter, a felon, amounting to £150. He was afterwards made Earl of Worcester.—Parliamentary History.

PETITION AGAINST A JupcGE.—In 1434 (13 Henry VI)

a petition was presented to the Commons of England against Sir William Paston, knight, a judge of the Court of Common Pleas, by William Dalling. The fact that the ‘Commons were appealed to on such a matter, at this early era.in our records, is worth notice. The petition is thus given in Sir John Fenn’s “ Paston Letters ” :—“ Please it to " the right sage and wise Commons of this present Parliament, that where(as) every justice of the King is sworn that he should not take no fees or rewards for to be of counsel with no man, but only with our sovereign lord the King, and thereto they be sworn. Please it to (¢ie) Commons of the present Parliament that William Paston, one of the justices of our sovereign lord (¢/e) King, taketh divers fees and rewards of divers persons within the shires of Norfolk and Suffolk, and is withhold with every matter in the said counties; that is to say—Of the town of Yarmouth, 1s. yearly ; of the Abbot of St. Benet’s, 26s. 8d. [several more are here instanced]; and of Katherine Shelton, ro marks (46 135. 4d), against the King, for to be of her counsel for to destroy the right of the King and of his ward—that is for to say, Ralph, son and heir of John Shelton.” In a note prefixed to this petition, it is mentioned that Sir William Paston was born in 1378, became a judge of the Common Pleas in 1430, and from the propriety of his conduct was called the “Good Judge.”

Henry VIII.’s MetuHop wITH THE Commons.—The Ministers of Henry VIII., says Oldfield, “moved in 1536 that a bill be brought in’to dissolve such monasteries as had not above £200 per annum in land. The bill remained so long in the House that the King, who was impatient to have it passed, took upon himself to expedite its progress. He sent for the members to attend him in his gallery, when, having kept them waiting for a considerable time, he told them fiercely that if the bill did not pass it would cost many of them their heads.” It is also related that while

HTIsTORICAL ILLUSTRATIONS. 13 the Opposition of the Commons to the imposition lasted, Hegry sent fora Mr. Edward Montague, who had considerable, influence in the House, and said, “Ho, man! will they not suffer my bill to pass?” and, laying his hand on Montague’s head, who was then on his knees’ before him, “Get my bill passed by to-morrow, or else to-morrow this head of yours will be off.” The pill was passed, and Mr. Montague’s head was permitted to remain in its ordinary position.

ORIENTAL ADULATION.—In 1537 an insult was put upon the House of Commons, which shows most strikingly the degraded state to which Parliament was reduced in the reign of Henry VIII. On the recommendation of the Court, Rich, whose bad character was notorious, and who was hardly free from any vice except hypocrisy, was elected Speaker. He repaid this promotion by comparing the King, on the first day of the session, for prudence to Solomon, for Strength to Samson, and for beauty to Absalom; and on the last to the sun, that warms, enlightens, and invigorates the universe.—Campbells “ Lives of the Chancellors.”

“RENDER UNTO CasaR,” &c,—Speaker Crooke told Queen Elizabeth (when he was presented to her in the House ef Lords, on the occasion of his election to the chair) that England had been defended against the Spanish Armada by her mighty arm.; to which she answered from the throne, “No; but by the mighty hand of God, Mr. Speaker.”— D Ewes Journal,

Brisinc MempBers.—Against the calling a new Parliament great sums of money were remitted by the Emperor (Charles V.) to Gardiner, to soften the leading nobility, and carry elections for commoners that would comply with the designs of the Court. The Londoners not liking the intended marriage of Mary with the Prince of Spain, the Parliament was summoned to meet at Oxford, April 2nd, 1544. Lord Chancellor Gardiner having granted pensions to many of the leading members of the House of Commons,

14 A Book oF PaRLiaMeENTARY ANECDOTE.

thereby softened them.— Gurdon’s “ History of Parliament.” .

COMMENCEMENT OF THE JOURNALS OF THE Commons. —~A Parliament was called to meet at Westminster on the 4th of November, 1547, in the first year of the reign of Edward VI. The “ Parliamentary History” says, “ We are now come to a period from which the Journals of the House of Commons: are extant. The first volume, which begins with the reign, contains little more than a diurnal succinct account of proceedings in reading bills, &c. * * * The Journals of the Lords are more explicit in the reign before us than those of the Commons.”

SECESSION OF MEMBERS FROM THE ComMons.—In the Parliament which assembled 11th November, 1554, the first of Philip and Mary, the legislative enactments of the three previous reigns against Roman Catholicism were repealed. “ A circumstance occurred of a very extraordinary nature in this Parliament” (says the “ Parliamentary History ”), “and the like of which we have not before met with in the course of this history. This was a voluntary secession of some members of the Commons, who actually left the House when they saw the majority inclined to sacrifice everything to the ministry. Lord Coke, who, in order to do honour to their memories, has preserved their names in his ‘Institutes,’ states that the Court resented this separation of the members, and ordered the Queen's Attorney-General to indict them in the Court of Queen’s Bench. Six of them were so timorous as to submit to the mercy of the Court, and paid their fines. All the rest, amongst whom was that famous lawyer Plowden, traversed; but judgment against them was prevented by the Queen’s death.”

" THE COMMONS AND THE SuRPRESSED MONASTERIES.— In 1557 it was stated that Queen Mary intended to rebuild the monasteries and restore the lands which had been e

HIISTORICAL ILLUSTRATIONS. 15 alienated, The knowledge of this intention created such warmth of debate in the Commons that several, of the mrempers laid their hands on their swords, saying, “They knew how to defend their own properties.” This put a stop to the intentions of the Court.— Oldfield’s History.

THE “ Mepptesome” Comnons. —A. Parliament met in April, 1571, when the Lord Keeper Bacon, in answer to the Speaker’s customary request for freedom of speech in the Commons, said that Queen Elizabeth, “ having experience of late of some disorder and certain offences, which, though they were not punished, yet were they offences still, and so must be accounted, they would, therefore, do well to meddle - with no matter of State: but such as should be propounded unto them, and to occupy themselves in other matters concerning the commonwealth.” A member having rather prematurely suggested the offer of a subsidy, several complaints were made of irregular and oppressive practices, and Mr. Bell said that licences granted by the Crown and other

.abuses galled the people, intimating also that the subsidy should be accompanied by a redress of grievances. This occasion of introducing the subject, though strictly constitutional, was likely to cause displeasure. The Speaker informed them, a few days after, of a message from the Queen to spend little time in motions, and make no long speeches. And Bell, it appears, having been sent for by the Council, came into the House “with such an amazed countenance, that it daunted all the rest,” who for many days durst not enter on any matter of importance. It became the common ‘ whisper that no one must speak against licences, lest the Queen and Council should be angry. And at the close of the session the Lord Keeper severely reprimanded those “audacious, arrogant, and presumptuous members” who had called her Majesty’s grants and prerogatives in question, meddling with matters neither pertaining to them nor within the capacity of their understanding. —Hallam's “ Constitutional History.” *