From the time of Richard II. to the reign of Mary no attempt had been
made to raise duties on exports and imports without consent of
parliament. But Mary had, under a specious pretext, recommenced to a
slight extent the evil practice, and Elizabeth had gone a little further
in the same direction. In 1606 a merchant named John Bates (q.v.)
resisted the payment of an imposition--as duties levied by the sole
authority of the crown were then called. The case was argued in the
court of exchequer, and was there decided in favour of the crown.
Shortly afterwards new impositions were set to the amount of £70,000 a
year. When parliament met in 1610 the whole subject was discussed, and
it was conclusively shown that, if the barons of the exchequer had been
right in any sense, it was only in that narrow technical sense which is
of no value at all. A compromise attempted broke down, and the
difficulty was left to plague the next generation. The king was always
able to assert that the judges were on his side, and it was as yet an
acknowledged principle of the constitution that parliament could not
change the law without the express consent of the crown, even if, which
was not the case in this matter, the Lords had sided with the Commons.
James's attempt to obtain further supplies from the Commons by opening a
bargain for the surrender of some of his old feudal prerogatives, such
as wardship and marriage, which had no longer any real meaning except as
a means of obtaining money in an oppressive way, broke down, and early
in 1611 he dissolved his first parliament in anger. A second parliament,
summoned in 1614, met with the same fate after a session of a few weeks.
The dissolution of this second parliament was followed by a short
imprisonment of some of the more active members, and by a demand made
through England for a benevolence to make up the deficiency which
parliament had neglected to meet. The court represented that, as no
compulsion was used, there was nothing illegal in this proceeding. But
as the names of those who refused to pay were taken down, it cannot be
said that there was no indirect pressure.
Attempted union with Scotland.
The colonization of Ulster.
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