A History of England, Period III. Constitutional MonarchyBright, J. Franck (James Franck)
History
A History of England, Period III. Constitutional Monarchy
Bright, J. Franck (James Franck)
Great Britain -- History
When the Treaty had been settled by the Commissioners, it was brought
before the Scotch Parliament, where it met with violent opposition. In
one way or another it was objectionable to many classes. The Jacobites
saw in it the final destruction of all their hopes of a change of
dynasty. The extreme Presbyterians did not believe in a Union which
would leave their Church untrammelled. The views of the Revolution had
gone further in Scotland than in England, and a considerable body of
active spirits had adopted republican views; to them the establishment
of a monarchy backed by the strength of England was distasteful, as
rendering any fulfilment of their hopes impossible. And the Edinburgh
tradesmen recognized to the full the loss they would sustain by the
removal of Parliament to London. The discussion on the various points
went on throughout the whole of the year. The final effort of the
Opposition was to be a great protest, to be produced at the debate upon
the share Scotland was to have in the national legislature. This protest
was to be presented by Hamilton, as premier Peer, and to be followed by
a secession of the minority. But Hamilton's heart failed him at the
appointed moment, the protest was not presented, and on the 16th of
January 1707 the measure was finally carried by 110 votes to 69.
Having been successfully passed through the Scotch House, the Bill had
now to be ratified by the English Parliament. So many changes had been
made that it was possible there might be much difficulty in securing the
easy passage of the Bill. But as the Whigs and the Government were
determined that at all hazards it should become law, they accepted
without question all the Scotch amendments. When the articles of the
Treaty had thus been carried through the House, there yet remained the
Act of Ratification to complete it. It was still possible for the
opponents of the Bill to reopen discussion upon each article in detail.
The skill of Sir Simon Harcourt, the Attorney-General, thwarted this
disastrous intention, by so wording the Bill that the articles
themselves were not called in question, but their ratification alone
demanded. He induced all parties, who were on the whole agreed that in
some shape or other the Bill had better pass, to accept it. With little
opposition therefore it was carried through both Houses, and became law,
and the succeeding Parliament took the name of the Parliament of Great
Britain. Party feeling was at the time very high, and accusations of
bribery were lavishly flung abroad, but a closer examination appears to
prove that these charges were unfounded.
GEORGE I.
1714-1727.
Born 1660 = Sophia of Brunswick.
____________________|_________________
| |
George II. Sophia = Frederick William.
CONTEMPORARY PRINCES.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account